Just two days left to try to stop an expensive and worthless FAA mandate on ADS-B

Larry Dighera wrote:
On Tue, 4 Mar 2008 12:34:43 -0800 (PST), K l e i n
wrote in
:

I think the cost estimates are totally bogus for the GA market. After
all, it's only a GPS and a transmitter.
I'd be surprised if a complete GA market ADS-B Out/In system couldn't
be done for a couple thou.

Garmin sells hand-held GPSs for more than a couple of thousand
dollars, and they don't require any installation labor.

And a Mr Coffee goes for $9.99 at Walmart, neither of which will meet
the requirements of ADS-B as proposed.

What it SHOULD cost, if the proposal were sensible and allowed for
non-TSO handheld equipment, and what it WILL cost given the current
proposal requirements are two different things.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

On Mar 4, 4:25*pm, wrote:
Larry Dighera wrote:
On Tue, 4 Mar 2008 12:34:43 -0800 (PST), K l e i n
wrote in
:
I think the cost estimates are totally bogus for the GA market. *After
all, it's only a GPS and a transmitter.
I'd be surprised if a complete GA market ADS-B Out/In system couldn't
be done for a couple thou.
Garmin sells hand-held GPSs for more than a couple of thousand
dollars, and they don't require any installation labor.

And a Mr Coffee goes for $9.99 at Walmart, neither of which will meet
the requirements of ADS-B as proposed.

What it SHOULD cost, if the proposal were sensible and allowed for
non-TSO handheld equipment, and what it WILL cost given the current
proposal requirements are two different things.

I read the requirements a little more carefully, and it is true that
ADS-B Out, as currently specified must be WAAS, etc. My bad.
However, eventually the FAA will figure out that it is in everybody's
best interest for low-cost units to become available, especially, for
the sport/antique/glider/etc community that has no way to install a
fully compliant unit. The FLARM being sold into European glider
community does all the "important" functions of ADS-B Out/In for
enabling collision avoidance at the $1000 cost level. Works about the
same too, except for lower power Out transmission. People buying
Cirrus and above aircraft will have no problem with the $10,000 cost
level. Garmin will be happy to serve them. FLARM and ZAON, etc will
be happy to serve the kilobuck market.

K l e i n

On Tue, 04 Mar 2008 23:25:04 GMT, wrote in
:

Larry Dighera wrote:
On Tue, 4 Mar 2008 12:34:43 -0800 (PST), K l e i n
wrote in
:

I think the cost estimates are totally bogus for the GA market. After
all, it's only a GPS and a transmitter.
I'd be surprised if a complete GA market ADS-B Out/In system couldn't
be done for a couple thou.

Garmin sells hand-held GPSs for more than a couple of thousand
dollars, and they don't require any installation labor.

And a Mr Coffee goes for $9.99 at Walmart, neither of which will meet
the requirements of ADS-B as proposed.


My point was, that Mr. Klein's assertion was inconsistent with the
pricing of far less capable, non-certified equipment.

What it SHOULD cost, if the proposal were sensible and allowed for
non-TSO handheld equipment, and what it WILL cost given the current
proposal requirements are two different things.

Because the DoD sees this NPRM as a means of surveiling aircraft
operations, and seems to be dictating the wording to FAA, it's unclear
if the equipment you suggest will be considered.

In article ,
Larry Dighera wrote:

Because the DoD sees this NPRM as a means of surveiling aircraft
operations, and seems to be dictating the wording to FAA, ...

eh? That's the first I've heard of that. Why do you think that the
DOD is pushing any aspect of ADS-B? (I hope you have more
than the Alaska demo with ADS-B)

--
Bob Noel
(goodness, please trim replies!!!)

I read the requirements a little more carefully, and it is true that
ADS-B Out, as currently specified must be WAAS, etc. My bad.
However, eventually the FAA will figure out that it is in everybody's
best interest for low-cost units to become available, especially, for
the sport/antique/glider/etc community that has no way to install a
fully compliant unit. The FLARM being sold into European glider
community does all the "important" functions of ADS-B Out/In for
enabling collision avoidance at the $1000 cost level. Works about the
same too, except for lower power Out transmission. People buying
Cirrus and above aircraft will have no problem with the $10,000 cost
level. Garmin will be happy to serve them. FLARM and ZAON, etc will
be happy to serve the kilobuck market.

K l e i n

You have more faith in the FAA than I do. Have you read the NPRM?
You may be right about Cirrus buyers but what if the cost to a Cessna
owner is over $20,000 USD? This NPRM apparently was not vetted with
the stakeholders prior to release.

After learning more about it I am not sure that UAT is even
needed....and the weather and traffic elements from this system may
also be unneeded system drivers.

My current guess is that retaining Mode-C for GA (perhaps expanding
the equipage if a worthwhile mid-air risk reduction can be proven) is
adequate.

Find a way to reduce the cost of XM weather. Ga folks who want
enhanced traffic detection can use flight following/traffic advisory
services from ATC and/or get a system such as offered by Zaon or
Monroy.

If the airlines, air taxi folks, cargo, etc want ADS-B...go for it.
They are assuming capacity improvements when the NPRM does not
guarantee that separation standards will happen.

Ron Lee

K l e i n wrote:

However, eventually the FAA will figure out that it is in everybody's
best interest for low-cost units to become available, especially, for
the sport/antique/glider/etc community that has no way to install a
fully compliant unit.

Good God! What makes you think that is the case? When has the FAA EVER
reduced the certification requirements of a piece of installed
equipment? I doubt anyone would argue that a pilot with 496 with WX is
in a better position to fly cross country IFR than the same pilot with
nothing other than an old VOR receiver and CDI. But only one of those is
legal for IFR flight.

On Wed, 05 Mar 2008 04:21:38 -0500, Bob Noel
wrote in
:

Why do you think that the DOD is pushing any aspect of ADS-B?

Because of the tone of their NPRM comment to the FAA. Have you read
it?
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspubli...ontentType=pdf

On Tue, 04 Mar 2008 22:37:12 +0000, Ron Lee wrote:

Would that portable ADS-B equipment meet the NPRM requirements?

I doubt it since the NPRM only discusses ADS-B Out.

And the Zaon solution, as I understand, is only -In. So this doesn't
address the mandate. But what it does do is lower the bar for those that
want to get the benefit made available by the mandate.

[...]

Andrew, if your club folks want weather, buy a 396/496 with XM weather.

That's where we're heading. We actually tried to do this concurrent with
our first WAAS upgrades, but a combination of a busy shop and the first
aircraft being a "problem" (where to put the portable GPS with a full
panel and an emergency gear extension lever on the floor {8^) has pushed
this back a bit.

Rent it out when people need it.

We did discuss this, but it has a number of logistic issues. First,
we're spread over two airports. Second, we have no "facility" (ie. a
club house) where to store the units. So the consensus right now is to
simply perform semi-permanent installs in the fleet.

Any suggestions for alternatives are very welcome, however.

Get a Zaon for traffic. All that they
want is available right now. ADS-B is not the answer.

The problem with current traffic solutions, from my perspective, is the
very limited space in which they can be trusted to operate. One of our
airports, for example, is largely shadowed by local geography from the
nearest RADAR. So too close to the airport - a place where traffic would
be quite nice grin! - means no transponder-based traffic.

However, the price of the Zaon units is low enough that we may invest
today even knowing that we'll probably want to replace these with ADS-B
based units at some point in the (not too nearby) future.

- Andrew

Andrew Gideon wrote:

On Tue, 04 Mar 2008 22:37:12 +0000, Ron Lee wrote:

Would that portable ADS-B equipment meet the NPRM requirements?

I doubt it since the NPRM only discusses ADS-B Out.

And the Zaon solution, as I understand, is only -In. So this doesn't
address the mandate. But what it does do is lower the bar for those that
want to get the benefit made available by the mandate.

What it does is allow improved traffic detection based upon what GA
aircraft already have in their aircraft (Mode-C). ADS-B Out adds
nada.

Get a Zaon for traffic. All that they
want is available right now. ADS-B is not the answer.

The problem with current traffic solutions, from my perspective, is the
very limited space in which they can be trusted to operate. One of our
airports, for example, is largely shadowed by local geography from the
nearest RADAR. So too close to the airport - a place where traffic would
be quite nice grin! - means no transponder-based traffic.

However, the price of the Zaon units is low enough that we may invest
today even knowing that we'll probably want to replace these with ADS-B
based units at some point in the (not too nearby) future.

A Zaon, or Monroy type system supplements see and avoid should you
elect to get such a system. There is NO evidence that the ADS-B
solution will provide close to 100% coverage at GA pattern altitudes
although I have asked the FAA to provide that information.

Plus...if you read and understand the NPRM and read my comments, ADS-B
Out only has the potential to improve traffic issues IF....big
IF...people equip with ADS-B In or talk to ATC.

I suspect that the high cost of ADS-B equipage will keep its
implementation rate in GA aircraft at well under 10% which is far less
than Mode C (about 85% I think).

Read the NPRM (and comments.) It is bad.

I don't suggest that you not buy ADS-B. Buy whatever you want. But
for most GA pilots it is too costly and provides no benefits as far as
this NPRM goes.

The whole ideal behind GA benefits from ADS-B In appears at this time
to be pointless given Zaon/Monroy systems and XM (or equivalent)
weather.

Ron Lee