Decommissioning of TIS stations

[Doug Vetter]

Well folks, I think the outsourcing of flight service was only the first
of many short-sighted and irresponsible actions to hit General Aviation
that are a direct result of the FAA's inability to manage its costs.

If what I've read is true, the FAA will soon begin decommissioning TIS
transmitter sites (22 to be exact) -- the very sites that those of us
with the GTX330 Mode-S transponder depend on to receive traffic
information at reasonable cost.

If I didn't know better, I'd say that L3 has some low friends in high
places, since they're pretty much the only people that will benefit from
the decommissioning of TIS in the foreseeable future.

For your reference:

http://www.avionicswest.com/archive/330MFD.htm

We had to buy a new transponder last year, and we didn't feel it prudent
to invest $17K in a Skywatch for a little 172, so the GTX330 seemed like
the best choice to get traffic data into the cockpit at the time. I
believe we spent about $2500 extra for the GTX330 and the wiring to our
GNS430, and I'll tell ya -- without TIS, I view this as $2500 down the
crapper. And I can't be the only one who feels this way.

I'd long known about ADS-B and the FAA's plans to replace TIS with TIS-B
(accessible via an ADS-B UAT), but I thought they'd only reduce the
planned number of TIS sites and maintain those until the ADS-B systems
provided an equivalent coverage area.

On the contrary, ADS-B is still a pipe dream with only a couple states
covered, and the deployment map on the ADS-B site
(http://www.flyadsb.com/) hasn't changed in ages. At this rate, I'll be
collecting social security by the time they fully deploy ADS-B --
assuming they don't change their minds, whine like a bunch of spoiled
brats, and claim they don't have enough money to finish deployment.
Needless to say, I'm ****ed and I want someone's head on a platter. Of
course, in this world of "no consequences management", I'm a practical
guy, so a check for $2500 will also suffice.

So why am I bitching here? Because we need to mobilize GTX330 owners
and get them to bitch to Blakely, Garmin, and anyone else who will
listen to common sense. I'm not expecting TIS to live forever, but if
we allow them to decommission TIS prematurely, we set a dangerous
precedent for the future handling of the Air Traffic Control
infrastructure, the costs of which the average GA pilot and owner will
increasingly bear.

-Doug

--
--------------------
Doug Vetter, CFIMEIA

http://www.dvcfi.com
--------------------

[Peter R.]

Doug Vetter > wrote:

> If what I've read is true, the FAA will soon begin decommissioning
> TIS transmitter sites (22 to be exact) --

What and/or who do you suppose is the reference for the article you posted?

> So why am I bitching here? Because we need to mobilize GTX330 owners
> and get them to bitch to Blakely, Garmin, and anyone else who will
> listen to common sense.

Shouldn't AOPA be stepping into this, too?

--
Peter


















----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Doug Vetter]

Peter R. wrote:
> What and/or who do you suppose is the reference for the article you posted?

Tom is usually pretty accurate about the "dirt" he finds in the
industry, so while he doesn't name names, I'd accept that it's coming
from the FAA via Garmin (otherwise, why would Garmin be asking owners
whether they have their GTX330 connected to a MFD?). The FAA shouldn't
care, unless they were trying to gauge how bad the backlash will be so
they can start their damage control efforts.

> Shouldn't AOPA be stepping into this, too?

I copied Phil on my post. He's replied to my emails on the weekend in
the past (a tireless worker, no doubt), but I haven't heard back from
him on this subject yet.

-Doug

--
--------------------
Doug Vetter, CFIMEIA

http://www.dvcfi.com
--------------------

[Chuck]

I called my Garmin dealer and he didn't know anything about it. In
fact, he was putting in a 330 to read out on a 530.
I called Garmin and the man answering didn't know about it and would
"pass it up the line".
I called AOPA and they knew and said it was true. They are on it and
have no further info re how many or which ones. The will post info on
epilot.
I am writing AOPA, Garmin, and FAA. We have to stop this as it is one
of the best things for GA in a while. If you have seen and flown with
it, you will get it.

Chuck Mealey
Archer 2185B

[Doug Vetter]

Chuck wrote:
> I called my Garmin dealer and he didn't know anything about it. In
> fact, he was putting in a 330 to read out on a 530.
> I called Garmin and the man answering didn't know about it and would
> "pass it up the line".
> I called AOPA and they knew and said it was true. They are on it and
> have no further info re how many or which ones. The will post info on
> epilot.
> I am writing AOPA, Garmin, and FAA. We have to stop this as it is one
> of the best things for GA in a while. If you have seen and flown with
> it, you will get it.
>
> Chuck Mealey
> Archer 2185B

Thanks for checking up on this Chuck. TIS is indeed a great advantage
for GA.

In fact, it saved our ass just the other day. On departure, we got TIS
reception at about 800 feet AGL and it imediately gave us a traffic
alert for an aircraft at 12 o'clock, well less than a mile. I initially
thought it was a phantom (TIS has one flaw...it will sometimes show
one's own aircraft as a target), but I ruled that out because the
phantoms always show "+00" (same altitude), yet this target was shown as
200 feet below altitude, and climbing. We quickly turned 45 degrees and
my copilot saw the aircraft pass just under us on his side. I never saw it.

TIS-B / ADS-B will be MUCH better, but we have to protect TIS until
those systems are fully operational with equivalent coverage. Heck, if
I can get another 5 years of service on our new 330 transponder before
we're forced to buy a UAT, I'll consider the extra $2500 spent on the
330 worth it.

-Doug

--
--------------------
Doug Vetter, CFIMEIA

http://www.dvcfi.com
--------------------

[Dave Butler]

Doug Vetter wrote:

>
> TIS-B / ADS-B will be MUCH better, but we have to protect TIS until
> those systems are fully operational with equivalent coverage.

Isn't the source of the traffic information the same for both TIS (mode-S) and
TIS-B (the traffic part of ADS-B)?

What is it that's being decommissioned? Is it the mode-S (which TIS-B doesn't
use) transmitters? ...or is the data being cut off at the source?

Thanks. Dave

[Gerry Caron]

"Dave Butler" > wrote in message
news:1119360496.186398@sj-nntpcache-3...

> Isn't the source of the traffic information the same for both TIS (mode-S)
> and TIS-B (the traffic part of ADS-B)?

Yes and no.

TIS is entirely Mode S based. It uses Mode S as a source to identify the
traffic near you and Mode S datalink service to uplink the data to your
aircraft.

TIS-B uses both Mode S and UAT. Source data may be either ADS-B data or
Mode S surveillance data. The Mode S data is converted to ADS-B format
(lat, lon, alt, ID) by the ground system. Since very few people are ADS-B
equipped, most of the TIS-B data being broadcast is converted Mode S
surveillance.

> What is it that's being decommissioned? Is it the mode-S (which TIS-B
> doesn't use) transmitters? ...or is the data being cut off at the source?
>

I'm assuming that the 'decommissioning' of TIS is being driven by bean
counters with the maintenance budget. Either that or it's a case of a 'this
program is just too cheap, it can't be any good' mentality at the FAA.
After all, it cost less than $2.5M to put in the system nationwide. It's
not much more than a $10K workstation with a pretty much autonomous
software application plugged into the Mode S ground station.

Gerry

[Doug Vetter]

Dave Butler wrote:
<snip>
> What is it that's being decommissioned? Is it the mode-S (which TIS-B
> doesn't use) transmitters? ...or is the data being cut off at the source?

Details are sketchy, but apparently it's just the TIS transmitters.

I imagine the backend gear that generates the data from the radar
equipment will likely remain and serve as the feed for TIS-B, but don't
quote me on that.

-Doug

--
--------------------
Doug Vetter, CFIMEIA

http://www.dvcfi.com
--------------------

[Thomas Borchert]

Gerry,

> TIS is entirely Mode S based. It uses Mode S as a source to identify the
> traffic near you and Mode S datalink service to uplink the data to your
> aircraft.
>

Uhm, not quite, AFAIK. It does use Mode S datalink for the uplink, but all
traffic information is derived from center radar data. Mode C and A targets
are reported just as Mode S targets are.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Newps]

Thomas Borchert wrote:
> Gerry,
>
>
>>TIS is entirely Mode S based. It uses Mode S as a source to identify the
>>traffic near you and Mode S datalink service to uplink the data to your
>>aircraft.
>>
>
>
> Uhm, not quite, AFAIK. It does use Mode S datalink for the uplink, but all
> traffic information is derived from center radar data.

None of the info is derived from the Center. Center doesn't have mode S
equipment. Only approach controls have mode S. A center may use an
approach controls mode S radar, that happens with Salt Lake and our
radar here at Billings.

[Tailwind]

You're both wrong. There are about 100 "terminal" Mode S radars used by
TRACON's and 25 "enroute" Mode S radars used by the centers. TIS is a
software modification to the terminal Mode S radars only to allow them
to uplink traffic over the Mode S datalink that the radars have. They
only use the surveillance within the individual sensor - no inputs from
other radars.

The enroute radars were not modified due to the low scan rate - only
every 12 seconds vs 4.7 seconds for the terminal radars.

And the shutting down of some Mode S sites has to do with replacement by
the new ASR-11 radar. It's a digital monopulse radar from Raytheon, but
not equipped with Mode S. These radars are required for the new STARS
automation (controller display) system going into some TRACONs.

Newps wrote:
>
>
> Thomas Borchert wrote:
>
>> Gerry,
>>
>>
>>> TIS is entirely Mode S based. It uses Mode S as a source to identify
>>> the traffic near you and Mode S datalink service to uplink the data
>>> to your aircraft.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Uhm, not quite, AFAIK. It does use Mode S datalink for the uplink, but
>> all traffic information is derived from center radar data.
>
>
> None of the info is derived from the Center. Center doesn't have mode S
> equipment. Only approach controls have mode S. A center may use an
> approach controls mode S radar, that happens with Salt Lake and our
> radar here at Billings.

[Newps]

Tailwind wrote:

>
> And the shutting down of some Mode S sites has to do with replacement by
> the new ASR-11 radar. It's a digital monopulse radar from Raytheon, but
> not equipped with Mode S. These radars are required for the new STARS
> automation (controller display) system going into some TRACONs.

We have an ASR-11 and our mode S and TIS is fully functioning.

[Bob Noel]

In article <hGlue.2105$HU.168@trnddc03>, Tailwind >
wrote:

> And the shutting down of some Mode S sites has to do with replacement by
> the new ASR-11 radar. It's a digital monopulse radar from Raytheon, but
> not equipped with Mode S. These radars are required for the new STARS
> automation (controller display) system going into some TRACONs.

one correction: STARS does not require an ASR-11.

--
Bob Noel
no one likes an educated mule

[Peter R.]

Tailwind wrote:

>> And the shutting down of some Mode S sites has to do with replacement by
>> the new ASR-11 radar. It's a digital monopulse radar from Raytheon, but
>> not equipped with Mode S. These radars are required for the new STARS
>> automation (controller display) system going into some TRACONs.

(sorry Newps, hopping off your post to reply to this one, as his post is
missing from my news server.)

Tailwind, I fly out of Syracuse, NY, a class C airport that was one of the
first STARS installations. TIS is fully functional here.

--
Peter
























----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Peter R.]

Bob Noel > wrote:

> Tailwind >
> wrote:
>
>> And the shutting down of some Mode S sites has to do with replacement by
>> the new ASR-11 radar. It's a digital monopulse radar from Raytheon, but
>> not equipped with Mode S. These radars are required for the new STARS
>> automation (controller display) system going into some TRACONs.
>
> one correction: STARS does not require an ASR-11.

As confirmed by the approach facility at Syracuse, NY, a class C airport
that was one of the first STARs installations that also has a fully
operating TIS.

--
Peter
























----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Doug Vetter]

Newps wrote:
> We have an ASR-11 and our mode S and TIS is fully functioning.

Interesting. According to my avionics rep, who spoke today with his
Garmin rep:

= I just had a long talk with my Garmin rep. Here is what they have
= been told. The FAA is upgrading some of the ATC facility terminal
= radar from ARTS8 to ARTS11 systems (model numbers may be wrong,
= I think that is what he said). In any event, when the older ARTS8
= were being speced, the FAA wrote into the spec the ARTS8 must be
= TIS compliant. The contactor building the ARTS8 designed TIS into
= the system, and all was right with the world....

= When the new ARTS11 spec was written the FAA either forgot to add
= the TIS requirement, or thought no one was using it and omitted
= it intentionally. So you had the ARTS11 system designed without
= the TIS feature. So.... As the older systems were replaced by
= the newer systems, TIS got lost.

= My Garmin rep said the majority (of the 22 lost TIS sites) were
= the North West USA, one in Minnesota (or Michigan), one in Maine.
= He did not remember any in our area [Ed Note: NY/NJ/PA]. I asked
= him if this was the impending death of TIS, and he did not know.
= He did say the FAA was working off some bad data that was showing
= almost no one was using TIS. Garmin did compile data and sent
= to them on 330 sales (about 10k 330's to date). So we will see...

So, there you have it. If you say you have an ARTS11 system and TIS is
functioning, someone is lying about the reason behind the
decomissioning. I call for a hanging. All in favor?

-Doug

--
--------------------
Doug Vetter, CFIMEIA

http://www.dvcfi.com
--------------------

[Matt Barrow]

"Doug Vetter" > wrote in message
...
> Newps wrote:
> > We have an ASR-11 and our mode S and TIS is fully functioning.
>
> Interesting. According to my avionics rep, who spoke today with his
> Garmin rep:
>
> = My Garmin rep said the majority (of the 22 lost TIS sites) were
> = the North West USA, one in Minnesota (or Michigan), one in Maine.
> = He did not remember any in our area [Ed Note: NY/NJ/PA]. I asked
> = him if this was the impending death of TIS, and he did not know.
> = He did say the FAA was working off some bad data that was showing
> = almost no one was using TIS. Garmin did compile data and sent
> = to them on 330 sales (about 10k 330's to date). So we will see...
>
> So, there you have it. If you say you have an ARTS11 system and TIS is
> functioning, someone is lying about the reason behind the
> decomissioning. I call for a hanging. All in favor?

Normally I'd be in favor (use piano wire), but because the Billings site is
operational doesn't mean others were not decommissioned.

[Doug Vetter]

Bob Noel wrote:
> one correction: STARS does not require an ASR-11.

This is actually correct, based on some new information I receieved from
my avionics rep today, who spent the better part of the morning calling
around the FAA to figure out what is going on with TIS.

Here's the story:

The FAA has ASR7, 8, and 9 systems deployed. Philadelphia, for example,
which was the site of the first fully-operational STARS system utilizes
mode-s via an ASR9.

Right now there are 125 TIS sites, of which 22 are based on older ASR7
and 8. Those sites are slated to be upgraded to ASR11, but here's the
kicker -- while the ASR11 was designed and tested to support mode-s and
TIS, the 22 site upgrades will be deployed withOUT either feature.

The FAA planned to implement what they called the "Leapfrog Program", in
which they expected to relocate a number of the older (though mode-s
capable) ASR7 and 8 sites to other sites that presently lack mode-s
support. This would have decreased the net loss of sites. Ironically,
the closest radar site to the FAA Technical Center where all this
technology is engineered and evaluated (Atlantic City) is presently
running a non mode-s site and would have benefitted from the Leapfrog
Program (so much for being close to home base, right?). Unfortunately,
the group responsible for funding the mode-s deployment in OK City
killed the budget for the Leapfrog Program, thus the older sites will be
mothballed instead.

So, dare we ask, why is the FAA deploying ASR11 without mode-s? Two
reasons: someone in the FAA budget office had bad data that indicated
no one was using mode-s or TIS, and lacking user support, they decided
to buy the radars without the mode-s option to save money. If there is
any saving grace to this, however, it's that the ASR11's being installed
can be upgraded with mode-s and TIS at a later date. Assuming we are
successful at communicating to the FAA that TIS is presently in use by
more than 10000 aircraft, the question of when the sites will be
upgraded is likely to be decided in the budget office.

A guy at the tech center commented that TIS was a simple and inexpensive
program. It's essentially a software adjunct to the radar site, picking
off data from the radar, processing it to account for the radar sweep
delay, and sending it via datalink to the airborne component. The
technical guys loved the idea of TIS, because it would give
pilots/owners an incentive to throw out their (paraphrased) "junk 1970's
ARTS transponders", which apparently cause all radars -- including the
latest ASR11, lots of problems with ghosting, reply timing, etc. Of
course, we all knew about the motivation for TIS, but it was nice to
hear from the horse's mouth, so to speak.

A bit of trivia: While we've all been told that "TIS won't work with
center radars", that's not entirely accurate. In fact, center radars
were tested at the Tech Center and found capable of providing TIS data,
but the FAA made a call NOT to support them due to the 12 second radar
sweep delay. They thought that 12 seconds was too long and traffic data
that old would be more of a liability than an an asset to the pilot. In
comparison, approach radars which presently provide TIS revolve once
every four seconds.

Some of the sites on the east coast that will be upgraded to ASR11
without mode-s support, and will thus lose TIS support, are as follows:

Bangor, ME
Roanoke, VA
Wilmington, NC
Tallahassee, FL
Pensacola, FL

So, what can we do? Encourage your avionics shop to send sales data for
both the Garmin GTX330 and the King KT73 mode-s transponders to the
office responsible for Mode-S budgeting in OK City. I actually have a
name and telephone number of the guy responsible as well as the tech rep
at the Tech Center, but I promised NOT to release that info, so you'll
have to ask your avionics shop to track down the appropriate points of
contact on their own.

Also, if you're a member of AOPA (and if you're actively flying, I hope
for your sake you are a member), you can call or write them and let them
know you want the FAA to continue deployment of mode-s radars and to at
least maintain the modest investment we have in TIS.

-Doug

--
--------------------
Doug Vetter, CFIMEIA

http://www.dvcfi.com
--------------------

[Ron Natalie]

Doug Vetter wrote:

>
> So, dare we ask, why is the FAA deploying ASR11 without mode-s? Two
> reasons: someone in the FAA budget office had bad data that indicated
> no one was using mode-s or TIS, and lacking user support, they decided
> to buy the radars without the mode-s option to save money.

This is after the twisted peoples arms to get Mode S or reamed them to
fix their old Mode A/C transponder so that it would work properly in
the presence of a Mode S interrogation (due to their own stupidity
in not designing the Mode S protocol properly). Now that the FAA
actually has given real incentive for people to want mode S they're
pulling the plug. Typical FAA bull****.

[Peter Clark]

On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 20:45:19 -0400, Doug Vetter >
wrote:

>So, what can we do? Encourage your avionics shop to send sales data for
>both the Garmin GTX330 and the King KT73 mode-s transponders to the
>office responsible for Mode-S budgeting in OK City. I actually have a
>name and telephone number of the guy responsible as well as the tech rep
>at the Tech Center, but I promised NOT to release that info, so you'll
>have to ask your avionics shop to track down the appropriate points of
>contact on their own.

Anyone with contacts who could have Cessna and Diamond send unit sales
data for the G1000 aircraft while they're at it? I think it unlikely
the shops will do anything directly, lead times just to get things
fixed can be quite high - let alone extracurricular activities like
tracking down someone in the mode S budgeting room at FAA HQ.

Might be easier to just compile the data yourself (wholesale numbers -
get numbers from Garmin and King) - "How many Mode S compatible
transponders have you sold?"