Why are people ignoring the ADS-B Out NPRM?

Robert M. Gary wrote:
On Dec 11, 9:59 am, "Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net
wrote:

Which is kind of strange because the ADS-B requirements are going to
effect a lot pilots than the trans-national reporting requirements.

But the ADS-B requirement is achievable, it is possible to put this
type of equipment on your aircraft (I would even look forward to it),
but the border crossing requirements aren't possible to meet (unless
Mexico all of the sudden becomes a 1st world nation with telephone
systems).

-Robert


Achievable? You think? Hell it would be cheaper for US pilots to pay for
satellite internet links at all the small and medium size airports near the
US/Mex border than to add the equipment required for ADS-B in every US
aircraft.

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 11:27:17 -0700, Newps wrote:


More likely a much smaller cost.

That's the second time you suggested that ADS-B equipage will be less
than stated, but failed to provide any credible argument to support
your polyandrist prediction.

WHY do you think it will be cheaper? Is there anything tangible that
leads you to that conclusion, or are you prescient, or what?

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 10:59:56 -0800 (PST), "Robert M. Gary"
wrote:

But the ADS-B requirement is achievable,

Complete (In and OUT) implementation of ADS-B is achievable too, and
it would be significantly more useful than what is currently proposed.
But, that isn't the issue. It's a matter of cost verses performance.
What significant benefits does the current FAA proposal provide to
light GA operations that might conceivably justify such a significant
investment. Consider it might cost as much as 50% of the value to
equip a C-150 with ADS-B, and significantly impact it's already
marginal useful load number.

it is possible to put this
type of equipment on your aircraft (I would even look forward to it),

I would look forward to it also if it were the full ADS-B
implementation. Then the pilot would received useful information.
There's even a chance that the position of military training flights
might even be depicted then. But the FAA's proposal is for solely
your aircraft to transmit its GPS coordinates and transponder S code
to ATC at a cost to ALL aircraft owners of around $10,000.00. There
is no data up-link to the cockpit, no WX, nor traffic depiction at
all.

On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 11:04:33 -0600, in rec.aviation.piloting you
wrote:


"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
.. .

Presumably due to the dearth of comments that have been submitted.


Why do you presume to speak for others?


Because, I have visited the comment web site, and found a total of 58
comments submitted in response to this NPRM. It's just a guess.



Have you visited the docket comment web site?


No.


Oh well...

Guys-
I think you might want to check out www.aveoengineering.com
They are releasing this as a standard feature in a DFD Skyway and
TrafficCom/TransCom units, and the cost of these units is very low
compared to Garmin. They don't have to pay for all of Garmin's
marketing... they sell through word of mouth in the aviation
community.

The reason your previous estimates were around $10k was that you were
looking at a Garmin solution. Garmin isn't the only game in town.
Actually, sometimes other companies can come in with a new technology
that is leaps over the competition. I believe that might be the case
here with their Digital Flight Deck (DFD). It has XM Weather, XM
Radio, Traffic depiction, WAAS GPS, etc. etc. Plus, the Aveo menus
are simple to operate... not a click here, twist this, then this, then
click here, then confirm, etc. like on the Garmins.

Give them a look. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised at how low
cost and highly functional they are. And remember, they build
military grade solutions at Aveo! If it can work in a jet fighter...
it can work in a C150 :-)

Cheers,
MrBizi

On Dec 11, 7:10 pm, Larry Dighera wrote:
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 10:59:56 -0800 (PST), "Robert M. Gary"

wrote:
But the ADS-B requirement is achievable,

Complete (In and OUT) implementation of ADS-B is achievable too, and
it would be significantly more useful than what is currently proposed.
But, that isn't the issue. It's a matter of cost verses performance.
What significant benefits does the current FAA proposal provide to
light GA operations that might conceivably justify such a significant
investment. Consider it might cost as much as 50% of the value to
equip a C-150 with ADS-B, and significantly impact it's already
marginal useful load number.

it is possible to put this
type of equipment on your aircraft (I would even look forward to it),

I would look forward to it also if it were the full ADS-B
implementation. Then the pilot would received useful information.
There's even a chance that the position of military training flights
might even be depicted then. But the FAA's proposal is for solely
your aircraft to transmit its GPS coordinates and transponder S code
to ATC at a cost to ALL aircraft owners of around $10,000.00. There
is no data up-link to the cockpit, no WX, nor traffic depiction at
all.

wrote:
Guys-
I think you might want to check out www.aveoengineering.com

I did and a search of the phrase "ADS-B" on their website gets the reply
below. So what does this have to do with the topic?
Sorry, no matches were found.
Please try again using different search words.

wrote:

Guys-
I think you might want to check out www.aveoengineering.com

Show me where they have ADS-B Out functionality to meet the
requirements of the appropriate TSO.

I don't see it.

You have not shown a lower cost solution and bear in mind that I have
no desire to pay even $1000 for a piece of equipment that offers
NOTHING to improve safety or anything else that matters to me.

It may help the airlines and the FAA but does nothing for me.

The aircraft owners better wake up and read this stuff or they will be
socked with an expensive mandate very soon.

Ron Lee

"Ron Lee" wrote in message
...

The aircraft owners better wake up and read this stuff or they will be
socked with an expensive mandate very soon.


I expect to be priced out of flying long before this happens.

Airport closings
Fuel Tax
Sales Tax
Excise Tax
Landing Fees
Fuel Transfer Fees
Parking Fees
Security Fees
Passenger Fees

Skyrocketing insurance
Unobtainable parts (carb floats)

Did I miss anything?

How do you know people are ignoring it?
Presumably due to the dearth of comments that have been submitted.
Have you visited the docket comment web site?

Maybe people just don't believe protesting will make any difference.
What ever happened to the thing on the DC FRZ and ADIZ? Last I saw
we're still saddled with it (albeit in a cosmetically altered form)
despite thousands of comments.

Jose
--
You can choose whom to befriend, but you cannot choose whom to love.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Ron Lee wrote:


The current Garmin unit is in the $8000-9000 range installed and may
or may not meet the requirements of the NPRM. The FAA projected cost
is around $17,000.


When transponders were first mandated the ones then on the market were
over $10,000, which is like $25-30K today.