TIS (traffic information service)

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
ups.com...

John Galban wrote:
wrote:

The reason that GTX330 sales are in the dumper is that the FAA
announced (last year) that they would not implement TIS in future radar
upgrades, as a cost saving measure. This indicates to a lot of buyers
that the FAA is not interesting in supporting the technology long term.

I can't say I'm surprised. I've flown some TIS equipped aircraft
and I think it's one of the best traffic avoidance technologies I've
seen since TCAS. It figures that the FAA would choose to implement
"cost savings" by deleting something that actually works and works
well.

ADS-B makes TIS obsolete. No reason for the FAA to invest in two
different technologies. ADS-B holds a better future.

-Robert


The problem is that TIS is much easier and less expensive to put in an
aircraft. I can spend about 6 AMUs and have TIS along with a really nice
X-ponder, GPS, XM WX and all the other goodies provided by a Garmin 496.
There isn't room in my aircraft for any current ADS-B ability.

On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 15:23:17 -0700, Robert M. Gary wrote:

No reason for the FAA to invest in two different
technologies.

From my reading, it appears that ADS-B is itself three different
technologies (ie. there are three different models of transceivers). If
so, the claimed peer-peer capability of ADS-B will be limited.

- Andrew

"Ron Natalie" wrote in message
m...
Mike Schumann wrote:
The FAA should be deploying ADS-B more agressively, so that people don't
continue to waste there money on transponders that are going to be
obsolete in 10 years.

The mode S transponders still have things to recommend them other than
TIS,

Such as?

though TIS was a major driving factor in my selecting one.

Is it worth the doubling of the price for a transponder?

Robert M. Gary wrote:
I assume you are saying that your TIS goes into "coast mode" and stops
updating for a period of time.

No. The box recognizes that it's being interrogated by the radar and
it responds with altitude data. It's programmed to display when the
mode S data does not contain TIS. That's the issue. TIS information
has been unavailable for as long as months at a time in Seattle. It
has been my experience that it is "rarely" available currently. I
would be interested to know if this is isolated to the NW or if the
entire country experiences this?

I would love to have ADS-B (the current name appears to be TIS-2). It
cost us $1000 to put TIS in the plane since we had the 430 and were
going to purchase a new transponder anyway. The Feds are still
thrashing around with the specs for the new TIS but currently politics
seem to be pushing to use the current spectrum which is too congested
to handle all the data. Sad but true.

A flight in the Seattle area will routinely put you in conflict with
dozens of other aircraft. We have congested airspace and mountains
that put a lot of VFR traffic in a small space. If TIS was only useful
for a year or two I'd consider it worthwhile. The Feds have indicated
that deployment of ADS-B in our area is a decade away.

Thanks,
Dave

wrote:

If TIS was only useful
for a year or two I'd consider it worthwhile. The Feds have indicated
that deployment of ADS-B in our area is a decade away.

I routinely fly across NY state and all the class C airports from western
to central and onto eastern NY offer TIS. Two years ago I installed the
Garmin GTX330 transponder that displays TIS traffic on an MX20 and GNS430.
It is definitely worthwhile in these areas.

--
Peter

Here's a good TIS map that includes the ones scheduled to be shut down.

http://www.garmin.com/aviation/tis.jsp

Gig 601XL Builder wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net wrote:

Here's a good TIS map that includes the ones scheduled to be shut down.

http://www.garmin.com/aviation/tis.jsp

Yep, a lot of my flying is in that big blue blob over the northeast US so
TIS serves my well.

--
Peter

On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 10:45:03 -0400, Peter R. wrote:

Yep, a lot of my flying is in that big blue blob over the northeast US so
TIS serves my well.

But the question facing me (and my fellow partners): would you buy TIS
*today* given the FAA's emphasis on ADS-B and TIS-B?

Note that they just brought online more of PA:

http://www.flttechonline.com/Current...o%20Expand.htm
http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsite...0817ads-b.html

- Andrew
http://flyingclub.org/

Andrew Gideon wrote:
On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 10:45:03 -0400, Peter R. wrote:

Yep, a lot of my flying is in that big blue blob over the northeast US so
TIS serves my well.

But the question facing me (and my fellow partners): would you buy TIS
*today* given the FAA's emphasis on ADS-B and TIS-B?
snip

The question isn't whether you should buy TIS. It's whether you should
buy a Mode-S transponder, because that's the primary difference between
the 327 and 330. TIS is just a perk of moving to Mode-S, and it was
specifically designed that way to encourage pilots to move to Mode-S
when it became clear they would not otherwise willingly adopt the new,
more costly, technology.

The FAA is continuing to invest in Mode-S radars (the ASR-11 is
replacing the ASR 7, 8, and 9 units that currently support TIS), so an
investment in the airborne component is still a wise move and will be
for MANY years.

Oh, and don't believe the hype out of Blakley's mouth for a second.
ADS-B is not being deployed so they can "decommission radar". That will
not happen in our lifetime due to security concerns. I fear that the
*real* reason the FAA is pushing ADS-B is for billing purposes. With
the kind of reliable and accurate position data facilitiated by ADS-B,
they could charge us by the mile.

-Doug

--------------------
Doug Vetter, ATP/CFI

http://www.dvatp.com
--------------------

On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 23:34:27 -0400, Doug Vetter
wrote in :

Oh, and don't believe the hype out of Blakley's mouth for a second.
ADS-B is not being deployed so they can "decommission radar". That will
not happen in our lifetime due to security concerns.

I'm happy to hear, that someone thought about that. It would be a
simple matter to spoof the positional data I would think.

I fear that the *real* reason the FAA is pushing ADS-B is for billing purposes.

I would guess the reason has as much to do with compatibility with the
ATC system products of Boeing and LockMart.

With the kind of reliable and accurate position data facilitiated by ADS-B,
they could charge us by the mile.

Not if we don't let Congress out of oversight responsibilities for FAA
funding.