A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Portable TABS coming to the USA?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old November 20th 19, 04:25 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Bruce
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 27
Default Portable TABS coming to the USA?

On Tuesday, November 19, 2019 at 9:20:43 PM UTC-7, Darryl Ramm wrote:
On Tuesday, November 19, 2019 at 6:22:28 PM UTC-8, Darryl Ramm wrote:
On Tuesday, November 19, 2019 at 4:48:42 PM UTC-8, son_of_flubber wrote:
Let me rephrase my question.

Is there anything on the horizon for portable TABS in the USA?


Let me give you a Dave style reply...

No. Unlikely not. Not that I know.

---

Unfortunately I'll also give you a Darryl style reply later. :-)


Darryl style reply...

TABS/TSO-C199 was the largely the response by the FAA to pressure from the NTSB over the Minden Hawker 800/ASG-29 mid-air collision. Besides the development of the TSO specifications and TRIG shipping the TN72 nothing else really happened that affects gliders in the USA . The FAA folks who worked on this seemed to quickly move onto other stuff, they did not stick around on the project, lots of other folks in the FAA seem to have no clue what it is about, and seem to struggle to find who to contact. There are no 14 CFR regulations that affect anything to do with TABS, it's this weird stand-alone TSO-spec. Lots of FSDO folks get confused and assume 14 CFR 91.227 type regulations apply,... they don't. And likewise TABS gives no 14 CFR 91.225 privileges. I was hoping there might have been soem FAA promotion/marketing around this. Nope just tossed it out and ran away (but I sure appreciate the TSO was developed).

So what is the possibility of anything new coming along for the USA glider market. Pretty damn slim I expect. No sane company is going to invest money in developing stuff specific for the USA glider market. What is important for much larger USA GA market is 2020 compliance and that is where vendors have been and will keep focusing. Trig was actually smart and able to develop a TABS and "meets 14 CFR 91.227 requirements" so the TN72 GPS could be used do TABS or be used for for 2020 compliance in experimental aircraft).

Enigma Aviation in Australia was playing with an TABS device, I think they have ceased to be, have shuffled off this perch, and are no more

I don't see any reason to want a *portable* TABS device. Pragmatically you would need to deal with plumbing it into aircraft static lines etc. (accurate pressure attitude is especially critical for TCAS). TSO-C199 specifies using a static line connection. And I'd want that 70W RF antenna external and facign down for the ADS-B Ground towers. I worry the idea of "portable TABS" is a throwback to the portable UAT for glider vaporware we were hearing over a decade ago, confused technology hype that had no chance of ever getting to market. But what did happen was that interest did come together, with inspiration and advice from companies including Mitre, FLARM and Trig who worked with the FAA that resulted in the TSO-C199 spec.

TABS derived in part from the earlier LPSE (low power surveillance equipment, aka low power Mode-S) spec ideas, largely from the UK. And it seemed at one point that the UK might adopt literal TABS/TSO-C199, but they did not, instead you get a slightly different take with this UK CAP 1391 stuff.

But if somebody was developing a developing portable TABS box, I would not be so arrogant to assume I would necessarily know about it...

---

What do I expect to change in the USA?...

I expect PowerFLARM to get ADS-R and TIS-B Support. I *hope* something like mid-2020 as a software upgrade for current PowerFLARMs. I and others in the USA have been helping FLARM out with some of that, e.g. we've had a prototype PowerFLARM running sniffing ADS-B data in the SF Bay Area and I just helped install a TT21/TN72 TABS systems in 9B's ASW27 so we can test ADS-R and TIS-B in that.

I would have loved to say I was excited about the LXNav FlarmMouse, but I'm not. LXNav Decided to do their own thing with ADS-B support and uses no FLARM code for that part of the device. That creates a concerting fork in features, behavior and code base. I believe the current LXNav ADS-B In code will plot 1090ES traffic on a FLARM compatible display but will not create FLARM style warnings for that traffic. And (like PowerFLARM today) it does not implement ADS-R or TIS-B. It's also a bit more to deal with the 1090ES firmware now being separate from the FLARM firmware so you have to use a separate update process than the single step you would in a PowerFLARM, and some folks are already having problems getting updates to work. And I'm concerned by the LXNav FlarmMouse documentation not being clear about any of this. All in all a move I cannot understand for a company that otherwise makes fantastic impressive products. And they went to all the effort to FCC certify that box. Arrrgggg.

LXNavigation Eagle looks nice, uses FLARM chips and firmware for both FLARM and 1090ES In. Will have ADS-R and TIS-B support coming as well. But unfortunately the Eagle is not FCC approved. I have no idea if LX Navigation has plans to do that.

I have no expectation Trig is going to change anything in the short term, and nether would they tell me/want me to say here :-) My interest there is encouraging people to get ADS-B out installs (2020 Compliant or TABS if they can't get 2020 Compliance) using the TN72. My most hopeful request of Trig at the moment is to change the TN72 Packaging to also include some male crimp connectors for the transponder end of the cable... just to make it easy for installers doing upgrades.... basically they have a great solution that works today. The TA70 antenna install in type certified gliders is still a PITA if you are stuck with a type certified glider and want 2020 ADS-B Out compliance.

And largely ah just forget hoping for TABS futureware ... Not when none of the other transponder vendors that make compact transponders suitable for use in gliders have done anything to get compatibility with 2020 Complaint ADS-B Out or TABS. Not even upgrading their device firmware to DO-260B/TSO-C166b/aka ADS-B v2 when they already have DO-260A/TSO-C166a/ADS-B v1 today and the code changes are not huge. And none of those vendors have funded the development of an STC (like the TRIG TT22/TN70 one) that would allow 2020 Compliant ADS-B Out installs in type certified aircraft (including gliders). Those vendors like Becker and Air Avionics left it so late they have missed so much of the GA migration to ADS-B Out in the USA that I assume they never will do this work. I can't quite fathom why they did not try, but assume they know the costs and decided it's just not worth it.


_______________________
Thanks Daryl

I was going to write you today for an update, and you provided all the answers in this message. Keep up the great work of keeping us educated.

Bruce
Ads
  #12  
Old November 20th 19, 06:12 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Darryl Ramm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,403
Default Portable TABS coming to the USA?

On Tuesday, November 19, 2019 at 8:20:43 PM UTC-8, Darryl Ramm wrote:
On Tuesday, November 19, 2019 at 6:22:28 PM UTC-8, Darryl Ramm wrote:
On Tuesday, November 19, 2019 at 4:48:42 PM UTC-8, son_of_flubber wrote:
Let me rephrase my question.

Is there anything on the horizon for portable TABS in the USA?


Let me give you a Dave style reply...

No. Unlikely not. Not that I know.

---

Unfortunately I'll also give you a Darryl style reply later. :-)


Darryl style reply...

TABS/TSO-C199 was the largely the response by the FAA to pressure from the NTSB over the Minden Hawker 800/ASG-29 mid-air collision. Besides the development of the TSO specifications and TRIG shipping the TN72 nothing else really happened that affects gliders in the USA . The FAA folks who worked on this seemed to quickly move onto other stuff, they did not stick around on the project, lots of other folks in the FAA seem to have no clue what it is about, and seem to struggle to find who to contact. There are no 14 CFR regulations that affect anything to do with TABS, it's this weird stand-alone TSO-spec. Lots of FSDO folks get confused and assume 14 CFR 91.227 type regulations apply,... they don't. And likewise TABS gives no 14 CFR 91.225 privileges. I was hoping there might have been soem FAA promotion/marketing around this. Nope just tossed it out and ran away (but I sure appreciate the TSO was developed).

So what is the possibility of anything new coming along for the USA glider market. Pretty damn slim I expect. No sane company is going to invest money in developing stuff specific for the USA glider market. What is important for much larger USA GA market is 2020 compliance and that is where vendors have been and will keep focusing. Trig was actually smart and able to develop a TABS and "meets 14 CFR 91.227 requirements" so the TN72 GPS could be used do TABS or be used for for 2020 compliance in experimental aircraft).

Enigma Aviation in Australia was playing with an TABS device, I think they have ceased to be, have shuffled off this perch, and are no more

I don't see any reason to want a *portable* TABS device. Pragmatically you would need to deal with plumbing it into aircraft static lines etc. (accurate pressure attitude is especially critical for TCAS). TSO-C199 specifies using a static line connection. And I'd want that 70W RF antenna external and facign down for the ADS-B Ground towers. I worry the idea of "portable TABS" is a throwback to the portable UAT for glider vaporware we were hearing over a decade ago, confused technology hype that had no chance of ever getting to market. But what did happen was that interest did come together, with inspiration and advice from companies including Mitre, FLARM and Trig who worked with the FAA that resulted in the TSO-C199 spec.

TABS derived in part from the earlier LPSE (low power surveillance equipment, aka low power Mode-S) spec ideas, largely from the UK. And it seemed at one point that the UK might adopt literal TABS/TSO-C199, but they did not, instead you get a slightly different take with this UK CAP 1391 stuff.

But if somebody was developing a developing portable TABS box, I would not be so arrogant to assume I would necessarily know about it...

---

What do I expect to change in the USA?...

I expect PowerFLARM to get ADS-R and TIS-B Support. I *hope* something like mid-2020 as a software upgrade for current PowerFLARMs. I and others in the USA have been helping FLARM out with some of that, e.g. we've had a prototype PowerFLARM running sniffing ADS-B data in the SF Bay Area and I just helped install a TT21/TN72 TABS systems in 9B's ASW27 so we can test ADS-R and TIS-B in that.

I would have loved to say I was excited about the LXNav FlarmMouse, but I'm not. LXNav Decided to do their own thing with ADS-B support and uses no FLARM code for that part of the device. That creates a concerting fork in features, behavior and code base. I believe the current LXNav ADS-B In code will plot 1090ES traffic on a FLARM compatible display but will not create FLARM style warnings for that traffic. And (like PowerFLARM today) it does not implement ADS-R or TIS-B. It's also a bit more to deal with the 1090ES firmware now being separate from the FLARM firmware so you have to use a separate update process than the single step you would in a PowerFLARM, and some folks are already having problems getting updates to work. And I'm concerned by the LXNav FlarmMouse documentation not being clear about any of this. All in all a move I cannot understand for a company that otherwise makes fantastic impressive products. And they went to all the effort to FCC certify that box. Arrrgggg.

LXNavigation Eagle looks nice, uses FLARM chips and firmware for both FLARM and 1090ES In. Will have ADS-R and TIS-B support coming as well. But unfortunately the Eagle is not FCC approved. I have no idea if LX Navigation has plans to do that.

I have no expectation Trig is going to change anything in the short term, and nether would they tell me/want me to say here :-) My interest there is encouraging people to get ADS-B out installs (2020 Compliant or TABS if they can't get 2020 Compliance) using the TN72. My most hopeful request of Trig at the moment is to change the TN72 Packaging to also include some male crimp connectors for the transponder end of the cable... just to make it easy for installers doing upgrades.... basically they have a great solution that works today. The TA70 antenna install in type certified gliders is still a PITA if you are stuck with a type certified glider and want 2020 ADS-B Out compliance.

And largely ah just forget hoping for TABS futureware ... Not when none of the other transponder vendors that make compact transponders suitable for use in gliders have done anything to get compatibility with 2020 Complaint ADS-B Out or TABS. Not even upgrading their device firmware to DO-260B/TSO-C166b/aka ADS-B v2 when they already have DO-260A/TSO-C166a/ADS-B v1 today and the code changes are not huge. And none of those vendors have funded the development of an STC (like the TRIG TT22/TN70 one) that would allow 2020 Compliant ADS-B Out installs in type certified aircraft (including gliders). Those vendors like Becker and Air Avionics left it so late they have missed so much of the GA migration to ADS-B Out in the USA that I assume they never will do this work. I can't quite fathom why they did not try, but assume they know the costs and decided it's just not worth it.


Oh dear God I went and read CAA CAP 1391, that UK standard this uAvionix box implements. Now I want to stick a sharpened spoon up my nose and remove any memory of this insanity from my brain.

Yep none of the FAA TSO-C199/TABS TCAS-compatibility features seem to be in that spec. (remember TSO-C199 was largely driven by that Minden midair... where getting compatibility with TCAS II in the Hawker 800 was a likely requirement). So an airliner with TCAS II... looks like it'll fly right into a GA aircraft fitted with a CAP 1391 device with no TCAS RA. How does the UK CAA expect this to work? That ATC alone will keep traffic separated? In the UK where they mix up jet airliners flying into regional airports? This all seems a bad technology choice to me (spend more money and do TSO-C199/TABS and get TCAS compatibility, allow volume worldwide to lower prices--instead now we have very different fractured standards).

And as intended by DO-260B (1090ES standard) these CAP 1391 devices transmit "1090ES Out" but transmit it as DF=18 (downlink format) messages (not that standard DF=17 messages) intended to be used by devices which are not Mode-S transponders... DF=17 is used in the USA by ADS-R and TIS-B messages (those ground towers doing the ADS-R and TIS-B transmitting are not transponders). Now I'm curious if PowerFLARM in the UK will see those DF-18 targets from these devices...



  #13  
Old November 21st 19, 02:55 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
b4soaring
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7
Default Portable TABS coming to the USA?

On Wednesday, 20 November 2019 17:12:46 UTC, Darryl Ramm wrote:

Oh dear God I went and read CAA CAP 1391, that UK standard this uAvionix box implements. Now I want to stick a sharpened spoon up my nose and remove any memory of this insanity from my brain.

Yep none of the FAA TSO-C199/TABS TCAS-compatibility features seem to be in that spec. (remember TSO-C199 was largely driven by that Minden midair.... where getting compatibility with TCAS II in the Hawker 800 was a likely requirement). So an airliner with TCAS II... looks like it'll fly right into a GA aircraft fitted with a CAP 1391 device with no TCAS RA. How does the UK CAA expect this to work? That ATC alone will keep traffic separated? In the UK where they mix up jet airliners flying into regional airports? This all seems a bad technology choice to me (spend more money and do TSO-C199/TABS and get TCAS compatibility, allow volume worldwide to lower prices--instead now we have very different fractured standards).

And as intended by DO-260B (1090ES standard) these CAP 1391 devices transmit "1090ES Out" but transmit it as DF=18 (downlink format) messages (not that standard DF=17 messages) intended to be used by devices which are not Mode-S transponders... DF=17 is used in the USA by ADS-R and TIS-B messages (those ground towers doing the ADS-R and TIS-B transmitting are not transponders). Now I'm curious if PowerFLARM in the UK will see those DF-18 targets from these devices...


You are mistaken. The vast majority of UK jet traffic is in Class D or A, most VFR GA is in Class G. Any GA in Class D will almost certainly be transponder equipped.

CAP 1391 is designed to encourage cheap ADS-B in & out (with SIL 1) for VFR GA in Class G. Most glider pilots use Flarm. SkyEcho is popular with power pilots as a GPS & traffic awareness source for navigation software.
  #14  
Old November 21st 19, 07:57 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Darryl Ramm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,403
Default Portable TABS coming to the USA?

On Thursday, November 21, 2019 at 5:55:45 AM UTC-8, b4soaring wrote:
On Wednesday, 20 November 2019 17:12:46 UTC, Darryl Ramm wrote:

Oh dear God I went and read CAA CAP 1391, that UK standard this uAvionix box implements. Now I want to stick a sharpened spoon up my nose and remove any memory of this insanity from my brain.

Yep none of the FAA TSO-C199/TABS TCAS-compatibility features seem to be in that spec. (remember TSO-C199 was largely driven by that Minden midair.... where getting compatibility with TCAS II in the Hawker 800 was a likely requirement). So an airliner with TCAS II... looks like it'll fly right into a GA aircraft fitted with a CAP 1391 device with no TCAS RA. How does the UK CAA expect this to work? That ATC alone will keep traffic separated? In the UK where they mix up jet airliners flying into regional airports? This all seems a bad technology choice to me (spend more money and do TSO-C199/TABS and get TCAS compatibility, allow volume worldwide to lower prices--instead now we have very different fractured standards).

And as intended by DO-260B (1090ES standard) these CAP 1391 devices transmit "1090ES Out" but transmit it as DF=18 (downlink format) messages (not that standard DF=17 messages) intended to be used by devices which are not Mode-S transponders... DF=17 is used in the USA by ADS-R and TIS-B messages (those ground towers doing the ADS-R and TIS-B transmitting are not transponders). Now I'm curious if PowerFLARM in the UK will see those DF-18 targets from these devices...


You are mistaken. The vast majority of UK jet traffic is in Class D or A, most VFR GA is in Class G. Any GA in Class D will almost certainly be transponder equipped.


Ah damn I was almost finished up with the spoon thing.

I am mistaken about what? The UK does have airliners flying in class G airspace. It's hopefully infrequent but it happens. There has certainly been concern about that in the past in the UK aviation community. And you have Class G airspace abutting Class D airspace. What happens when an airliner accidentally wanders into Class G or a GA aircraft wanders into Class D? (yes SIL=1 visibility to ATC is a help, if there is ATC ADS-B coverage there, incompatibility with TCAS is just scary).

Few airliners are likely to have 1090ES In (if you have the right gear look at which are broadcasting 1090ES In capability code, it appears depressingly low in the USA). The skyEcho won't show up at all on a pure (non-1090ES In equipped) TCAS, TCAS certainly won't issue a TA against the skyEcho even if it has 1090ES In. The great benefit of TCAS is it's a last resort collision avoidance tool when all else goes wrong, and this CAP 1391 approach removes that last link. Unfortunately uAvionix marketing says that the skyVector is compatible with TCAS. It's not. I've asked them to remove that claim, and hopefully they will soon.

And whats the highest risk type of mid-air in UK class G? It's not GA with an airliner, but that is a high-consequence, low-probability scenario and near busy airliner traffic sure seems worth worrying about. And I'll add in fast business jets (hopefully TCAS equipped, but many still wont' have 1090ES In.. and won't see these devices) and military traffic... (both tactical with IFF or non-tactical (potentially with TCAS)) is unlikely to see these systems--but hopefully folks can check compatibility if near busy military traffic areas.

In an effort to reduce price these systems end up with significant limitations. It's one thing if the users understand those limitations, it's another if they don't, and especially if the vendor is not correctly stating them.

[I expect you understand the limitations but I'll state some here for folks playing along at home]

We've already seen confusion in this thread about the FLARM support in the skyVector. It's FLARM In only, hopefully that's well understood by folks operating skyVecor near FLARM equipped gliders and visa versa. And can those gliders if equipped with a FARM compatible device with ADS-B In see the skyEcho? I would check that actually works.

And if the GA aircraft have a transponder even without 1090ES Out you have to disable the 1090ES Out part of a skyVector... so then other skyVectors don't see it at all (and PowerFLARM with ADS-B option would only see the target via PCAS).

All a somewhat strange beast, with limitations that I hope users understand.. The potential for confusion with the dual-link system in the USA was likely worse than this, so the UK probably does not win the "most stupid" prize here. The European approach to end of life of Mode-S and sticking with 1090ES sure seemed a better/simpler long term approach to me. But now the UK has throw out some of that clean elegant interoperability and complicated things with CAP 1391. And unfortunately it looks like the EU will not mandate a conspicuity device standard so there will be lots of them in existence across the EU. Sigh, the great thing about standards is there is enough of them for everybody to have their own.

It's great that this device includes FLARM In, FLARM bidirectional would have been better, but OK yes raised prices. And one great thing the UK does with SIL=1 sources like this that the USA does not, at least currently, is display that traffic for ATC (if you are within NATS ADS-B In coverage--I've lost track of where that deployment is at)

The lack of TABS/TSO-C199 like transponder interoperability in CAP 1391 comes from building down to a low price. Now with the direction looking like there will be multiple standards worldwide reduces the ability to drive down costs by standardization and improved competition. I really wish there had been standardization around something more like TSO-C199, maybe that was just impossible with the FAA trying to get the TSO spec done fast under pressure... not enough time for international involvement. Who knows.

CAP 1391 is designed to encourage cheap ADS-B in & out (with SIL 1) for VFR GA in Class G. Most glider pilots use Flarm. SkyEcho is popular with power pilots as a GPS & traffic awareness source for navigation software.


Popular? Do you have sales numbers info for these units? Know how many are just used for their GPS and ADS-B In capabilities? (my guess is it might be a lot as they are a nice receiver for folks with GA aircraft, many of which may have transponders already).

---

Anyhow since r.a.s. is largely a USA focused forum, the bottom line answer to the question originally asked is these devices are very unlikely to appear in the USA.



  #15  
Old November 21st 19, 08:47 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Darryl Ramm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,403
Default Portable TABS coming to the USA?

Gggr "TCAS certainly won't issue a TA against the skyEcho" I meant Resolution Advisory (RA) not Traffic Advisory (TA), should have said" TCAS certainly won't issue a RA against the skyEcho"
  #16  
Old November 23rd 19, 02:56 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
b4soaring
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7
Default Portable TABS coming to the USA?

There are only 2 airports in the UK that have passenger carrying jet traffic in Class G; they are both very quiet, end of the country, coastal airports and one of them is trying to get a Class D CTR. Every other airport with commercial jet traffic already has a CTR and most have easy access to Class A. There are a few airports that have exec. jet traffic in Class G but, as a much smaller country there is much less exec. jet use. Generally speaking, jet traffic and VFR GA are segregated. We simply don't have vast areas of Class E with the wide mixture of traffic that you do. The biggest mid-air risk is GA-GA. If you read (and believe) the airprox reports, the biggest risk to airliners is rogue drone operators.

Most of the GA in UK Class G will not be using a radar service so a transponder is effectively pointless as a collision avoidance instrument. SkyEcho transmit can be used together with Mode C, it's only with Mode S that SkyEcho transmit has to be turned off. There has already been a trial of simultaneous Mode S and SkyEcho transmit involving about a dozen different aircraft. As I recall, only one aircraft with a particular transponder fit had a problem with SkyEcho transmissions interfering with Mode S returns.

I don't see CAP 1391 as ever being a worldwide standard, I see it as an experiment in standalone ADS-B in and out for GA. As another approach, a recent EASA rule change allows GA aircraft to use non-certified GPS as an ADS-B position source, but only with SIL=0.

I have no idea how many SkyEchos have been sold.



  #17  
Old November 24th 19, 04:04 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Soartech
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 268
Default Portable TABS coming to the USA?

This seems all way too complicated to me... and I'm an electrical engineer! Can I just go fly please? I know where the jets hang out and I stay away.
Darryl - Have you posted a detailed explanation of this mess (for beginners) somewhere where we can review it this winter? Is it possible we could build our own equipment (for xperimental only)? Think I head of someone doing it with a Ras PI micro.
  #18  
Old November 24th 19, 09:04 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Darryl Ramm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,403
Default Portable TABS coming to the USA?

On Saturday, November 23, 2019 at 7:04:12 PM UTC-8, Soartech wrote:
This seems all way too complicated to me... and I'm an electrical engineer! Can I just go fly please? I know where the jets hang out and I stay away..
Darryl - Have you posted a detailed explanation of this mess (for beginners) somewhere where we can review it this winter? Is it possible we could build our own equipment (for xperimental only)? Think I head of someone doing it with a Ras PI micro.


Stuff is coming. ~weeks.

You know where the jets *usually* hang out. Grab a traffic history plot from your local FAA folks and see how much of that traffic is not sticking to STAR or SID routes. Maybe even better host your own FlightAware receiver (see below).

Build your own equipment for exactly what? Remembering much of this thread is about stuff not directly relevant to the USA.

For folks flying in GA aircraft Stratux ADS-B receivers are popular DIY receivers, but I think most folks are much better off with a commercial ADS-B In receiver like the uAvionix Sentry.

For folks flying gliders the PowerFLARM is likely your best ADS-B In choice.. Watch out for an expected ADS-B and TIS-B upgrades coming for PowerFLARM.... but to work properly that requires your glider has TABS or 2020 Compliant ADS-B Out. If you fly GA say with a ForeFlight and Sentry receiver and want that also in your glider that's doable, but talk to me about this if you also have a PowerFLARM ADS-B receiver and traffic display.

Building your own transmitting equipment is not practical, certainly not possible for TABS or 2020 Compliant systems.

I suspect more technical folks who want to play with this stuff would be better off spending time installing an OGN FLARM ground receiver or installing a free FlightAware ADS-B receiver near their gliderports or flying areas. That will let you know a lot more about glider and general traffic and potentially useful for other things, like in a SAR situation, or with OGN for checking glider FLARM antenna performance. (something great to help less technical folks with).

I have a whole pile of more detail/possible suggestions for things to do over winter about all this stuff. Will post more later or give a link.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Trig TT21 + TN72 TABS ADS-B Out Install working great.... Darryl Ramm Soaring 38 April 1st 18 11:17 PM
First TSO-C199 "TABS" device Sarah[_2_] Soaring 45 January 8th 17 08:28 AM
TABS Peter von Tresckow Soaring 1 March 11th 16 09:31 PM
Does FLARM meet TABS requirement? Mark Palmer Soaring 20 August 9th 15 08:16 AM
Guitar Chords/Tabs for "Ridge Runner" [email protected] Soaring 3 November 20th 08 06:00 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:12 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2021 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.