Major step on ADS-B approvals
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Major step on ADS-B approvals
On Friday last Week NATS, the LAA and the BMAA made separate press releases regarding ADS-B out on permit aircraft (see below). This was coordinated by FASVIG (Future Airspace Strategy VFR Implementation Group) which also had input into the press release.
NATS have provided the results of its ADS-B trial which shows that uncertified GPS sources are more accurate than certified (again see below).
The LAA and the BMAA can now issue permanent mods for ADS-B out and no longer have to use NATS R&D resources for verification – thanks to the hard work of the people at Pilot Aware. FASVIG are also working on making things simpler for C of A aircraft to use the same approach.
This is something I feel strongly about and have been pushing for since 2011. I have continued as part of the FASVIG team working on ADS-B since July last year.
Reducing the cost of ADS-B ? Future Airspace Strategy VFR Implementation Group
Rod1
NATS have provided the results of its ADS-B trial which shows that uncertified GPS sources are more accurate than certified (again see below).
The LAA and the BMAA can now issue permanent mods for ADS-B out and no longer have to use NATS R&D resources for verification – thanks to the hard work of the people at Pilot Aware. FASVIG are also working on making things simpler for C of A aircraft to use the same approach.
This is something I feel strongly about and have been pushing for since 2011. I have continued as part of the FASVIG team working on ADS-B since July last year.
Reducing the cost of ADS-B ? Future Airspace Strategy VFR Implementation Group
Rod1
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Scotland
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Great news Rod1. I look forward to picking up some light aircraft, in addition to most airliners, on my PowerFLARM. Do you have any views on the most cost-effective ADS-B out solution?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
robin - I am not working on that side but I will get an update next Sunday. I think we are close to a solution.
Forfoxake - depends on your aircraft fit. If you have a permit aircraft with an existing mode s transponder which supports ES and a GPS, than all you need is an RS232 cable to connect them, a bit of user setup and you are go. The MOD from the BMAA and LAA is free but you will still have to follow it to remain legal and safe.
Rod1
Forfoxake - depends on your aircraft fit. If you have a permit aircraft with an existing mode s transponder which supports ES and a GPS, than all you need is an RS232 cable to connect them, a bit of user setup and you are go. The MOD from the BMAA and LAA is free but you will still have to follow it to remain legal and safe.
Rod1
Rod1, Thank you, NATS and the CAA for excellent work.
I've passed this on to the ras group (mostly North American glider flyers).
It is strange to see in EASA land a much more GA friendly initiative than in the US where the FAA is mandating a gold plated ADS-B Out spec for GA in 2020.
I've passed this on to the ras group (mostly North American glider flyers).
It is strange to see in EASA land a much more GA friendly initiative than in the US where the FAA is mandating a gold plated ADS-B Out spec for GA in 2020.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: London
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
on the subject of ADS B - CAA has released new proposals for allowing EC devices New easy process to enable electronic identification of light aircraft announced | UK Civil Aviation Authority
Guest
Posts: n/a
Whilst I welcome any initiative that helps with not hitting another machine during flight, I'm not sure interoperability has been demonstrated.
Would not the ideal solution be that FLARM, PilotAware, NATS LPAT and any other EC device that follows has the ability to work with any of the other devices and vice versa?
Maybe I'm not keeping up but I thought the LPAT has only been tested against LPAT. Also, for those with Mode S txpndrs not Mode ES will they show up at all?
My worry is the risk of pilots believing they have a bit of kit that detects far less traffic than the think leading to an unsafe situation.
SGC
Would not the ideal solution be that FLARM, PilotAware, NATS LPAT and any other EC device that follows has the ability to work with any of the other devices and vice versa?
Maybe I'm not keeping up but I thought the LPAT has only been tested against LPAT. Also, for those with Mode S txpndrs not Mode ES will they show up at all?
My worry is the risk of pilots believing they have a bit of kit that detects far less traffic than the think leading to an unsafe situation.
SGC
