FAA Eases ADS-B STC Requirement

On Thursday, May 19, 2016 at 3:19:44 AM UTC-7, Darryl Ramm wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2016 at 2:50:00 AM UTC-7, wrote:
"The installer does have to obtain permission from the original STC holder."

Does anyone else see that as a possible problem?

Unlikely, the FAA document provided is very clear.

Obtaining the original STC costs money so I wouldn't be surprised if the holder might be reticent about letting people use it for free.

Not likely an issue. In practice most of these ADS-B AML STCs were funded by the ADS-B manufactures and available free of charge for many GA type installs. Those vendors care about selling ADS-B hardware to a broader market not STC paperwork.

In practice an install shop would either use an STC or setup parameters published by the ADS-B hardware vendor for a ADS-B/GPS pairing. And vendors can now provide setup instructions that don't require AML STC paperwork.

As I understand it you need an STC for installing the unit in the aircraft and another STC to connect the ADS-B unit to the selected GPS source.

No. Any single ADS-B installation STC has always covered all that. The very core of any ADS-B AML STC is that it is the installation of ADS-B hardware with a paired specific GPS source.

The ADS-B in function of the PowerFlarm has already paid for itself in my glider though and I fly in Canada where ADS-B isn't even on track to become mandatory.

Not sure why you are worried about FAA approval issues then.

Thanks for the reply. So the cost of the STC work is "baked in" to the price of the equipment and freely available - good to know and it really should have occurred to me but I was incorrectly thinking along the lines of things like autogas STC's where you can't make use of the info for free.

I'm not personally worried about FAA approval because I won't be flying in the U.S. this year but I have flown there before, intend to in the future and have several flying friends who are trying to keep up with what's happening with the ADS-B mandate because they either fly Canadian registered gliders in the U.S. or live in the U.S. and fly U.S. registered gliders. One of my friends who flies in the U.S. a lot made the effort to install the higher powered Trig transponder just so the glider could meet the ADS-B mandate when it comes up. Presumably even with a Canadian registered glider if she was going to fly in the areas which will require ADS-B the ship would need that plus the appropriate GPS as I believe that the GPS output from the FLARM wouldn't meet the standards?

The last part of my post was really just to point out that although I'm currently flying in an area where ADS-B has relatively limited utility I still have found it to be worth having even if it's just the ADS-B in capability of the FLARM unit.

PowerFLARM GPS will not ever meet the 2020 ADS-B Out requirement in the USA.. It also is unlikely to ever meet TSO-C199/TABS Class B (i.e. the GPS part of TABS) requirements either, should TABS be adopted.

With current exemptions at least most gliders will not have any regulatory need to equip with ADS-B out. A Trig TT-22 is a very good choice for people purchasing a transponder today, including for future possible use for 1090ES Out. But as already mentioned in this thread, an approved (e.g. TSO-C145c and specifically documented by the transponder vendor to work with their transponder) GPS source is the big issue. What ADS-B out configurations an experimental vs. certified glider owner can install and what different levels of installation will/will not enable for example with ground base ADS-B services (none of which are actually receivable by PowerFLARM) has been flogged to death on r.a.s., and that information easily searchable.

Techcnial folk who want to play at the bleeding edge and are willing to pay now to be there likely understand this stuff already. For most glider owners it's unlikely to be worth worrying about now (from a pure technology viewpoint focus on getting a transponder and/or PowerFLARM depending on your risk profile). The real question for the broader glider community is what is happening with transponder and ADS-B out glider exemptions and TABS regulations.

On Friday, May 27, 2016 at 12:23:59 AM UTC-7, wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2016 at 3:19:44 AM UTC-7, Darryl Ramm wrote:
On Thursday, May 19, 2016 at 2:50:00 AM UTC-7, wrote:
"The installer does have to obtain permission from the original STC holder."

Does anyone else see that as a possible problem?

Unlikely, the FAA document provided is very clear.

Obtaining the original STC costs money so I wouldn't be surprised if the holder might be reticent about letting people use it for free.

Not likely an issue. In practice most of these ADS-B AML STCs were funded by the ADS-B manufactures and available free of charge for many GA type installs. Those vendors care about selling ADS-B hardware to a broader market not STC paperwork.

In practice an install shop would either use an STC or setup parameters published by the ADS-B hardware vendor for a ADS-B/GPS pairing. And vendors can now provide setup instructions that don't require AML STC paperwork.

As I understand it you need an STC for installing the unit in the aircraft and another STC to connect the ADS-B unit to the selected GPS source.

No. Any single ADS-B installation STC has always covered all that. The very core of any ADS-B AML STC is that it is the installation of ADS-B hardware with a paired specific GPS source.

The ADS-B in function of the PowerFlarm has already paid for itself in my glider though and I fly in Canada where ADS-B isn't even on track to become mandatory.

Not sure why you are worried about FAA approval issues then.

Thanks for the reply. So the cost of the STC work is "baked in" to the price of the equipment and freely available - good to know and it really should have occurred to me but I was incorrectly thinking along the lines of things like autogas STC's where you can't make use of the info for free.

I'm not personally worried about FAA approval because I won't be flying in the U.S. this year but I have flown there before, intend to in the future and have several flying friends who are trying to keep up with what's happening with the ADS-B mandate because they either fly Canadian registered gliders in the U.S. or live in the U.S. and fly U.S. registered gliders. One of my friends who flies in the U.S. a lot made the effort to install the higher powered Trig transponder just so the glider could meet the ADS-B mandate when it comes up. Presumably even with a Canadian registered glider if she was going to fly in the areas which will require ADS-B the ship would need that plus the appropriate GPS as I believe that the GPS output from the FLARM wouldn't meet the standards?

The last part of my post was really just to point out that although I'm currently flying in an area where ADS-B has relatively limited utility I still have found it to be worth having even if it's just the ADS-B in capability of the FLARM unit.

Saw an interesting article in AOPA magazine this month and found it online as well. Some snippets quoted below:

Once ADS-B Out equipment is installed, it must be operational and broadcast the required information at all times.

The AOPA Legal Services Plan is aware of several cases in which aircraft owners have received a “Letter of Finding� from the FAA’s Avionics Branch in Washington, DC, notifying the owner of the date of the flight in question and the nature of the ADS-B Out equipment’s deficiency. The letter also provides a point of contact to call within 30 days to discuss a plan of corrective action. As with any potential FAR violation, aircraft owners and pilots are advised to contact an attorney prior to discussing the matter with anyone.

On Saturday, May 28, 2016 at 6:30:42 PM UTC-7, wrote:
Saw an interesting article in AOPA magazine this month and found it online as well. Some snippets quoted below:

Once ADS-B Out equipment is installed, it must be operational and broadcast the required information at all times.

The AOPA Legal Services Plan is aware of several cases in which aircraft owners have received a “Letter of Finding� from the FAA’s Avionics Branch in Washington, DC, notifying the owner of the date of the flight in question and the nature of the ADS-B Out equipment’s deficiency. The letter also provides a point of contact to call within 30 days to discuss a plan of corrective action. As with any potential FAR violation, aircraft owners and pilots are advised to contact an attorney prior to discussing the matter with anyone.

And I believe similar, but more advisory, notices going out to say experimental aircraft owners who have systems installed that will not meet 2020 carriage mandate requirements (which yes gliders are currently exempt from). I'm curious if any experimental glider owners with "non-compliant" ADS-B Out systems have received such letters from the FAA.

2G wrote on 5/19/2016 9:07 PM:
On Thursday, May 19, 2016 at 8:57:10 PM UTC-7, Ramy wrote:
Thanks Dan I also agree with most of it, which basically says we
should make our won decision what is acceptable risk. Totally agree
with this part. But after thousands of cross country hours I
concluded that no matter how hard we try, we can't trust our eyes
to detect a collision risk on time when cruising, especially not
gliders who are practically invisible. Sure we see all kind of
traffic, but not the ones on collision curse especially if not on
our 12 and not maneuvering. And it's not just me, it's everyone
with human eyes. There are many eye opening tests that confirm
this. While see and avoid certainly works while thermaling,
formation flying and in traffic pattern, it does not work when
cruising. The reason why we don't have more midairs are not thanks
to see and avoid but thanks to the big sky theory. I read somewhere
that if we all flew blind folded, the collision rate would have not
increased by much. I believe this is true. That's why we need as
much help as we can get in this department, and if it is going to
be mandated, I don't see a problem with that, as long as it is
effordable.

Ramy

Well, it has to be more than just affordable, it must be practicable
as well. The current genre of certified WAAS GPS is just too large
for most gliders (and they cost $3k+ as well). The FAA is coming to
grips with the trade off of highest integrity vs broadest acceptance,
hopefully BEFORE 1/1/2020.

The GPS required to bring a Dynon Skyview system (with transponder) into
2020 compliance is $600, so the situation may not be as grim as it
originally seemed.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to
email me)
- "A Guide to Self-Launching Sailplane Operation"

https://sites.google.com/site/motorg...ad-the-guide-1
- "Transponders in Sailplanes - Dec 2014a" also ADS-B, PCAS, Flarm

http://soaringsafety.org/prevention/...anes-2014A.pdf

Eric. The Dynon for $800 only works with Dynon Skyview system and cannot work alone. It is Trig22 modified frequency setup. Freeflight also uses Tirg22 for the Ranger Model and it is pure trig22 relabeled.