PowerFlarm, ADS-B, GPS again!!! (please don't flame me)

[SoaringXCellence]

I know PowerFlarm and ADS-B have been discussed all over the net, but I was thinking today about something that I haven't seen (or been able to find):

We have a PowerFlarm with a (apparently) good GPS system installed, Altitude encoder, and NMEA data stream output.

We have a bunch of ADS-B (out) capable transponders that will be going into aircraft in the next few years (at least the only one I'm willing to install is going to have that capability).

EXCEPT we don't have a FAA approved GPS data source for the ADS-B out function available without installing another (read that expensive) GPS device in our crowded panel.

SO, is there any ongoing effort to get approval for the PF GPS to be used to supply the NMEA data for the ADS-B out on the transponder?

Logic would propose that the glider community, or PF designers, or TXP companies might work together to get this important function easily implemented in the glider fleet.

Is there any such effort that anyone is aware of? Participating in? Would like to support or participate in? ETC.

MB

[Dan Daly[_2_]]

On Thursday, July 3, 2014 8:42:42 PM UTC-4, SoaringXCellence wrote:
> I know PowerFlarm and ADS-B have been discussed all over the net, but I was thinking today about something that I haven't seen (or been able to find):
>
>
>
> We have a PowerFlarm with a (apparently) good GPS system installed, Altitude encoder, and NMEA data stream output.
>
>
>
> We have a bunch of ADS-B (out) capable transponders that will be going into aircraft in the next few years (at least the only one I'm willing to install is going to have that capability).
>
>
>
> EXCEPT we don't have a FAA approved GPS data source for the ADS-B out function available without installing another (read that expensive) GPS device in our crowded panel.
>
>
>
> SO, is there any ongoing effort to get approval for the PF GPS to be used to supply the NMEA data for the ADS-B out on the transponder?
>
>
>
> Logic would propose that the glider community, or PF designers, or TXP companies might work together to get this important function easily implemented in the glider fleet.
>
>
>
> Is there any such effort that anyone is aware of? Participating in? Would like to support or participate in? ETC.
>
>
>
> MB

Nit pick - PF has no altitude encoder, it's a pressure transducer... any transponder will likely have one anyhow.

However, the ADS-B bit was discussed at several SSA conventions, and there's a good thread at https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/rec.aviation.soaring/WVBnwFZdiK4 .

Good idea, but unlikely FAA/Transport Canada etc will ever permit it.

[darrylr]

On Thursday, July 3, 2014 5:42:42 PM UTC-7, SoaringXCellence wrote:
> I know PowerFlarm and ADS-B have been discussed all over the net, but I was thinking today about something that I haven't seen (or been able to find):
>
>
>
> We have a PowerFlarm with a (apparently) good GPS system installed, Altitude encoder, and NMEA data stream output.
>
>
>
> We have a bunch of ADS-B (out) capable transponders that will be going into aircraft in the next few years (at least the only one I'm willing to install is going to have that capability).
>
>
>
> EXCEPT we don't have a FAA approved GPS data source for the ADS-B out function available without installing another (read that expensive) GPS device in our crowded panel.
>
>
>
> SO, is there any ongoing effort to get approval for the PF GPS to be used to supply the NMEA data for the ADS-B out on the transponder?
>
>
>
> Logic would propose that the glider community, or PF designers, or TXP companies might work together to get this important function easily implemented in the glider fleet.
>
>
>
> Is there any such effort that anyone is aware of? Participating in? Would like to support or participate in? ETC.
>
>
>
> MB

Nice wishful thinking, here is some sting of reality for you...

You want to equip a certified aircraft (including glider) in the USA with ADS-B data-out you need a FSDO field approval for the install, and the FAA prefers that to be based on an existing ADS-B out STC (none of which were ever developed for gliders, but hopefully you woudl base on one for GA aircraft using similar GPS source and ADS-B our device). Any install is required to meet the FAA's 2020 carriage mandate specification, even as in the case of gliders that are not otherwise required to so equip with ADS-B data-out by 2020.

For approval in a certified aircraft, including glider, the GPS position sensor driving ADS-B Out must meet one of a number of different IFR GPS TSO approvals, in practice anybody installing ADS-B Out in a certified glider today will need to use a TSO-C145a (or later) IFR/WAAS GPS receiver. Suitable products today include the Accord Technology NexNav Mini and the FreeFlight Systems 1201. Current street prices are just under $3,000 for the FreeFlight Systems 1201. That is just for the GPS receiver. You have to add a Mode S transponder capable of 1090ES Out and installation costs.

The situation for experiential aircraft, including gliders, is a bit different. You should be able to do an install with a non TSO-compliant GPS source. But contact and work with the manufacture on doing this and especially on making sure that the ADS-B out SIL and other settings correctly reflect the reduced GPS source specifications. What a non-complaint install actually mens for receiving ADS-R and TIS-B services from the FAA ADS-B ground infrastructure is unfortunately unclear, but I'd just not assume everything will just work. Please don't screw around with this unless you know what you are doing, the FAA may come knocking on your door (I understand the FAA are contacting aircraft owners now where incorrect ADS-B installations are detected).

The long term ADS-B data-out solution here will come as the price of TSO-C145 GPS sources falls and/or transponder manufacturers integrate those GPS sources into the ADS-B out transponder. Whether that will ever be low enough in price to be attractive to many glider owners will need to be seen. Folks at FLARM have much more sense than worry about trying to make a TSO-C145 certified GPS source for the tiny USA FLARM+ADS-B Data Out market. And this is not just something you "seek approval" for, the entire consumer-chipset GPS guts of the current FLARM devices would need to be replaced and to meet TSO approval the GPS data interconnect would be based on ARINC 429 not NEMA.

[darrylr]

BTW I just noticed the FAA promoting this ADS-B install information on Facebook. Worth a read for folks interested. http://www.aea.net/ads-b/pdf/FAA_ADSB_06172014.pdf

[son_of_flubber]

On Friday, July 4, 2014 2:39:39 AM UTC-4, Darryl Ramm wrote:

> The situation for experiential aircraft, including gliders, is a bit different. You should be able to do an install with a non TSO-compliant GPS source. But contact and work with the manufacture on doing this and especially on making sure that the ADS-B out SIL and other settings correctly reflect the reduced GPS source specifications.

It would be very interesting if someone with the skills/knowledge/persistence to run the gauntlet would do this in the USA with a Trig Transponder + Power Flarm in an experimental aircraft/glider.

[son_of_flubber]

On Friday, July 4, 2014 2:53:41 AM UTC-4, Darryl Ramm wrote:
>The situation for experiential aircraft, including gliders, is a bit different. You should be able to do an install with a non TSO-compliant GPS source.

It may be legal to install a non-TSO GPS source in 'experimental' but would there be ANY benefit? From what I read in the link provided by Darryl, the output of un-certified transmitters is ignored.

Darryl wrote:

> BTW I just noticed the FAA promoting this ADS-B install information on Facebook. Worth a read for folks interested. http://www.aea.net/ads-b/pdf/FAA_ADSB_06172014.pdf

Excerpt from this FAQ:

>Air traffic control does not use data from these
uncertified transmitters, which prevents controllers
from providing flight following services or
separation services to aircraft that are so equipped.
Data from uncertified transmitters are not displayed
on certified ADS-B In displays, and pilots in aircraft
with certified ADS-B equipment will not be able to
see aircraft equipped with uncertified transmitters.

[SoaringXCellence]

Just as I thought, wishful thinking. I have an experimental registered glider and I'll just wait a while to install a transponder.

[Darryl Ramm]

On Friday, July 4, 2014 7:51:13 AM UTC-7, son_of_flubber wrote:
> On Friday, July 4, 2014 2:53:41 AM UTC-4, Darryl Ramm wrote:
>
> >The situation for experiential aircraft, including gliders, is a bit different. You should be able to do an install with a non TSO-compliant GPS source.
>
>
>
> It may be legal to install a non-TSO GPS source in 'experimental' but would there be ANY benefit? From what I read in the link provided by Darryl, the output of un-certified transmitters is ignored.
>
>
>
> Darryl wrote:
>
>
>
> > BTW I just noticed the FAA promoting this ADS-B install information on Facebook. Worth a read for folks interested. http://www.aea.net/ads-b/pdf/FAA_ADSB_06172014.pdf
>
>
>
> Excerpt from this FAQ:
>
>
>
> >Air traffic control does not use data from these
>
> uncertified transmitters, which prevents controllers
>
> from providing flight following services or
>
> separation services to aircraft that are so equipped.
>
> Data from uncertified transmitters are not displayed
>
> on certified ADS-B In displays, and pilots in aircraft
>
> with certified ADS-B equipment will not be able to
>
> see aircraft equipped with uncertified transmitters.

A useful stern warning, but non-approved 1090ES output will likely be visible on lots of displays via ADS-B direct, including on PowerFLARM. So still possibly of some benefit for folks with experiential gliders who are careful and who work with manufacturers to play with non-certified ADS-B out, say for for the increased PowerFLARM detection range that ADS-B out can provide. But that still is in the "geek who wants to play" category, not stuff most pilots should want to mess with. And understanding what enabling non-complaint/uncertified ADS-B out is goign to provide is important.

The FAA's bias here is clearly to encourage compliant ADS-B output, and that is understandable from their NextGen NAS viewpoint (and an overall good thing). ADS-B is unfortunately the proverbial kitchen sink, if you were just designing a GA market collision avoidance system you would do it a lot different than the complex dual-link ADS-B mess the FAA inflicted on pilots in the USA.

I just cannot emphasize enough that the huge benefit or Mode S or C transponders for gliders in in busy airspace, especially around airliners and fast jets. Transponders provide visibility to existing SSR/ATC and TCAS (and TCAD and PCAS) systems. Modern Mode S transponders (like the Trig TT series) are also capable of supporting ADS-B 1090ES Out, that is something that may be nice to have for the future, not something to stress about today. You just don't need that ADS-B complexity to get all the transponder/SSR/TCAS etc. collision avoidance goodness from a transponder today.

[Andy[_1_]]

On Friday, July 4, 2014 8:17:03 AM UTC-7, SoaringXCellence wrote:
> Just as I thought, wishful thinking. I have an experimental registered glider and I'll just wait a while to install a transponder.

It's very unfortunate that FAA has strayed so far from the original vision of ADS-B Out so small and inexpensive that portable units would be carried by skydivers and hang glider pilots. The system integrity requirements for ADS-B Out are ridiculous when compared with the current system integrity requirements for mode C. Any approved glider logger with integral baro sensor is capable of producing position and altitude data with integrity at least as good as the altitude data of a mode C transponder with separate encoder.

Another good idea killed by excessive regulation.

Andy (GY)

[Darryl Ramm]

On Sunday, July 6, 2014 7:29:59 AM UTC-7, Andy wrote:
> On Friday, July 4, 2014 8:17:03 AM UTC-7, SoaringXCellence wrote:
>
> > Just as I thought, wishful thinking. I have an experimental registered glider and I'll just wait a while to install a transponder.
>
>
>
> It's very unfortunate that FAA has strayed so far from the original vision of ADS-B Out so small and inexpensive that portable units would be carried by skydivers and hang glider pilots. The system integrity requirements for ADS-B Out are ridiculous when compared with the current system integrity requirements for mode C. Any approved glider logger with integral baro sensor is capable of producing position and altitude data with integrity at least as good as the altitude data of a mode C transponder with separate encoder.
>
>
>
> Another good idea killed by excessive regulation.
>
>
>
> Andy (GY)

Small portable units is not where the vision of ADS-B started, and was clearly really never a significant FAA goal for ADS-B, its being driven as technology that enables NextGen, and that's been obvious for a long time. It was probably wishful thinking of some folks who kept promoting it as something else. Especially when those goals would conflict with other needs like NextGen.

Another idea that came from an extremely highly regulated/complex area and was really a pipe dream to hope it could be repurposed for low-cost uses.

[Andy[_1_]]

On Sunday, July 6, 2014 2:08:11 PM UTC-7, Darryl Ramm wrote:
>
> Small portable units is not where the vision of ADS-B started,

I don't say it was where it started but it was part of the vision expressed at an FAA conference in the 1995/6 timeframe. Unfortunately I can't find the exact dates of the conference or locate any minutes but I was in attendance as a member of the NASA HSR XVS team. Since we were working on developing an aircraft with no forward facing windows we had a keen interest in detecting anything large enough to be collision hazard.

Maybe you can track down some record of the conference. All I remember is 1995/6 and location Arlington.

Andy (GY)

[RuudH]

Op vrijdag 4 juli 2014 02:42:42 UTC+2 schreef SoaringXCellence:

>
> We have a bunch of ADS-B (out) capable transponders that will be going into aircraft in the next few years (at least the only one I'm willing to install is going to have that capability).
>
> EXCEPT we don't have a FAA approved GPS data source for the ADS-B out function available without installing another (read that expensive) GPS device in our crowded panel.
>
In Europe you can use any GPS source for ADS-B out.
In my glider I'm using the GNSS-FR as a gps source to supply the NMEA RMC to my mode-s transponder.
This works very nice.
Occasionally there are a few spurious fixes, but I have also seen this with professional installations (airlines, etc)

[Darryl Ramm]

On Monday, July 7, 2014 6:05:17 AM UTC-7, RuudH wrote:
> Op vrijdag 4 juli 2014 02:42:42 UTC+2 schreef SoaringXCellence:
>
>
>
> >
>
> > We have a bunch of ADS-B (out) capable transponders that will be going into aircraft in the next few years (at least the only one I'm willing to install is going to have that capability).
>
> >
>
> > EXCEPT we don't have a FAA approved GPS data source for the ADS-B out function available without installing another (read that expensive) GPS device in our crowded panel.
>
> >
>
> In Europe you can use any GPS source for ADS-B out.
>
> In my glider I'm using the GNSS-FR as a gps source to supply the NMEA RMC to my mode-s transponder.
>
> This works very nice.
>
> Occasionally there are a few spurious fixes, but I have also seen this with professional installations (airlines, etc)

I'd post a sarcastic reply about usual European vs. USA aviation regulation and bureaucracy, but I can't find the right forms I need to do this.