![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Friday, August 5, 2016 at 4:20:22 PM UTC-7, Dan Marotta wrote:
Thanks Darryl, I'll keep asking questions of Trig and I'll also ask around among our local mechanics. Further, I'm friends with the local FSDO and I'll ask him what it might take to get this job done locally. Dan On 8/5/2016 11:05 AM, Darryl Ramm wrote: Dan First I'll start with a possible downer. I just realized Mike mentioned this is the TN72 GPS. Complete brain fart on my part, I wish I had spotted that before. That has actually been talked about once or twice by Trig before but as a TSO-C199 (ie. TABS) Class B (i.e. GPS part of TABS) device. There are no install and use regulations that allow use of a TSO-C199 GPS to drive ADS-B Out in any certified aircraft in the USA. The next step us is Trig might also claim that it "meets performance requirement of TSO-C145c".... which would allow/encourage it to be installed in experimental aircraft, but they would need to actually have a TSO-C145c approved device to allow you to install it in your type certified Stemme. And again saying a GPS is "WAAS" says nothing about it's actual TSO approval it has or meets performance requirements of. That's the real question to ask Trig: Is this actually a TSO-C199 Class B? TSO-C145c or a "meets performance requirement of...(which of either TSO)" device? Mike -- did they give any clarity on that when you spoke to them? ----- For now lets be optimistic and assume they have an actual TSO-C145c GPS source coming at lower cost. If so, you do not necessarily need an STC for a ADS-B Out install specific to your Stemme. Originally ADS-B Out installs did required a specific STC, since they were usually AML (Approved Model List) STCs they usually covering quite a few aircraft in one STC. But I'm not aware of any vendor or third party with a glider on one of these STC. And that would have been a waste of their money given gliders have ADS-B out exemption and most glider owners were not interested in spending $10k type numbers or ADS-B Out installs back when STCs were the thing. Originally the FAA required STC based installs of ADS-B Out equipment. This was relaxed a few year ago, you can look at AC 20-165B, or start here http://www.faa.gov/nextgen/equipadsb/installing. The main point for a current field approval is the FAA wants to see the GPS source and ADS-B out transmitter used together in a current STC, and that documentation followed for the install, even if the aircraft is not in the AML STC. That is for good reason, there are just too many interconnect things that can go wrong, too many config settings to make, etc. I am sure if it's better to try to find an A&P/avionics shop who has done an ADS-B installs before with that same components or find a glider A&P who is willing to put the time in, work carefully with their FSDO on a first time ADS-B Out install,.. I guess it all depends on who you like to work with and the choices available. Questions for Trig, in addition to the big one above, may be when will you be able to get their new GPS-source in your hands, what size and power consumption will it have, and when will there be an STC (not specific to a Stemme) for a TT-22 combination that your shop can base a field approval/337 install off of. Your Stemme is certified, owners of experimental category gliders don't need to do a field approval to install, but should be using STCs and/or other documentation/advice from manufactures to install a system. And there they still at a minimum need a "complaint" aka "meets performance requirements of TSO-C145c" type GPS source for things like TIS-B to provide traffic services to their aircraft (but just not necessarily actually TSO-C145c as say would be required in a certified glider). On Friday, August 5, 2016 at 8:04:12 AM UTC-7, Dan Marotta wrote: Thanks Darryl, I've been looking at the Trig solution since I have a TT22 in my Stemme. Their website refers to a free STC for anyone buying their product but I don't see the Stemme on their list of STCs. I will be contacting Trig for help in getting this thing going and will report here when I have the answers. Dan On 8/4/2016 7:41 PM, Darryl Ramm wrote: On Thursday, August 4, 2016 at 4:38:13 PM UTC-7, wrote: Darryl- What is your take on this other product from Uavionix? My sources say a price in the $1,300 range. http://www.uavionix.com/products/echo-atu-20/ Hi Mark I'll try to cover a lot here, if unclear ask specifics. Remember this is not actually shipping yet. So if you could install that in a glider today, it's a dual-link receiver for UAT and 1090ES ADS-B In. It's a UAT-Out only transmitter. No transponder/1090E-Out. So no compatibility with TCAS (you need a separate Mode C or S transponder) , and no visibility of your aircraft to PowerFLARM. And since it is not TSO approved as a UAT transmitter and does not have a TSO-C145c or similar GPS source you can't install in a certified glider. And you likely cannot install in a experimental glider without much more assurance of the actual performance level of the device. The lack of compatibility with PowerFLARM and TCAS alone makes it likely uninteresting for many glider applications, even if it could be installed. If you did want to use just the receiver parts (and the transmitter could be disabled which I expect it can) then you still have the issue you need a third party traffic awareness app and hardware to run it on, and many of those don't work well in a glider environment/cockpit as already mentioned in this thread. If you really wanted a dual-link ADS-B receiver you are likely just better off buying the already very popular and lower costing Status 2 or Garmin GDL-39 receivers. And remember without an approved/fully compatible ADS-B Out and GPS source none of these ADS-B receivers will receive the FAA TIS-B traffic services. These kind of things are hard to read around because the folks making them are not seriously/have not seriously been targeting the fully regulated avionics/GA market--and the product is not actually shipping yet. So for now at least we are largely left trying to decode their marketing claims. e.g. The specs say "designed to meet the performance requirement of TSO-C154c" the "designed to" is ell reasonable since it's not actually shipping yet, but on the other hand that could be a bit of a cop-out. What we need them to actually say is "will meet" or when the product ships "meet the performance requirements of TSO-C154c". Without that I doubt anybody would have a basis for installing this in an experimental category aircraft. And even if the manufacture claimed it was full TSO-C154c complaint that still does not cover the GPS source part of the requirements... for that you also typically want to see TSO-C145c or "meets performance requirements of..." for that (notice the 4 and 5 digit transpositions, totally different specs). No claim here that the GPS source is even "designed to meet performance requirements of TSO-C145c", and... Claiming a WAAS GPS has SBAS is kind of redundant, WAAS is an implementation SBAS. Claiming a GPS has RAIM does not mean it is TSO-C145c or even meets TSO-C145c, although RAIM capability is part of that. Saying "WAAS" does not mean TSO-C145c, although WAAS is a citical part of that, and we'll often mean TSO-C145c or similar specs when we say "WAAS GPS" when talkign about certified aviation GPS. For gliding related use, the 1090ES Output devices would likely be more intersting/useful to many pilots than this UAT-out devices. And I already raised questions on that device earlier. It's hard to tell with these folks how much of this is sloppy marketing/inexperience/just scrambling to ship product. I do wonder how much of this is more just them feeling out if there is a GA market they can address. It is quite a leap from the unregulated UAV type uses to GA. Without regulations covering drones and ADS-B I wonder if they will get much traction there at all and if they are trying to see where else they can apply their efforts. Again, great to see folks trying stuff but I'd like to see actual products delivered, including actual equipment installed and flying in manned aircraft and clear documentation from them on how to do that/what exact standards are actually met/or meet performance requirements of etc. We had relatively well proven GPS vendors talk for a long time about new products that are still are not available to end-users/installers so I'm even more pessimistic with a brand-new startup that has never delivered anything to the manned aircraft/avionics market claim stuff. I'd love them to prove my pessimism wrong. :-) --- Back the the original post from Mike. The news that Trig is hopefully shipping a more affordable ADS-B source by the end of the year is the best thing I've heard in ages about ADS-B for the glider market. A full Trig Mode S transponder and GPS source for ~$3k (plus install) would be a lot better than were that cost has been. So much is still up in the air until what is happening with carriage mandate exemptions and TABS equipment and carriage regulations. Newer type devices from innovative vendors might well be usable under TABS regulations (but a TABS device needs 1090ES Out with transponder functionality, TABS does not apply to UAT-Out devices, and you can't do 1090ES Out only, it has to have transponder features for TCAS compatibility... the TABS folks knew what they were doing... responding to the NTSB Minden mid-air concerns :-) And that's a good thing.). -- Dan, 5J -- Dan, 5J How about this, complete with AHRS? http://levil-aviation-powered-by-tuc...nt=22245128513 Jim |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Insurance Options? | Jonathan St. Cloud | Soaring | 2 | October 22nd 15 01:25 AM |
What Options? | gpick | Piloting | 12 | September 3rd 10 01:57 AM |
LED options | Ken Gage | Home Built | 2 | November 8th 07 12:01 AM |
A Preliminary Assessment of the Potential Cost and Cost-Effectiveness of Space-Based Weapons. | Mike[_7_] | Naval Aviation | 0 | November 2nd 07 03:18 PM |
Options | [email protected] | Soaring | 32 | March 14th 05 05:33 PM |