Round dial panels demise is official

ADS-B Equipment Required in Next Decade
Notice Number: NOTC2314


New Automatic Dependent Surveillance ? Broadcast (ADS-B) Rule

On May 27, 2010, the FAA published new rules (contained in 14 CFR ?92.225 and ?91.227) mandating airspace and avionics performance requirements after January 1, 2020. The avionics perform a function that is generally known as ?ADS-B Out? which transmits precise location and other information about the aircraft to ground stations and other ADS-B equipped aircraft.

The ADS-B rule mandates ADS-B Out avionics performance when operating within the designated airspace, giving aircraft owners approximately 10 years to equip.

The ADS-B rule, like current transponder operating requirements, requires operators to have ADS-B Out avionics installed and operating in order to fly their aircraft in the busiest airspace, as described below:

Class A, B, and C airspace.
All airspace at and above 10,000 feet MSL (mean sea level) over the 48 contiguous United States and the District of Columbia.
Within 30 nautical miles of airports listed in 14 CFR ?91.225, from the surface up to 10,000 feet MSL.
Class E airspace over the Gulf of Mexico from the coastline of the United States out to 12 nautical miles, at and above 3,000 feet MSL.
FAA Technical Service Orders (TSOs) describe the equipment approved for ADS-B operations. The ADS-B rule states that avionics must meet the standards of either TSO-C166b (for 1090ES link equipment) or TSO-C154c (for UAT link equipment). TSO-C166b is required in Class A airspace and either link can be used in all other airspace.

For more information about the FAA?s ADS-B program, visit www.adsb.gov.

Questions?
Contact the FAA Flight Standards ADS-B Office at: [email protected].
Contact the FAA Aircraft Certification ADS-B Office at: [email protected].


This notice is being sent to you because you selected "General Information" in your preferences on FAASafety.gov. If you wish to adjust your selections, log into https://www.faasafety.gov/Users/pub/preferences.aspx where you can update your preferences.

The new WINGS?Pilot Proficiency Program is great! Check it out now!

Direct link to the entire doc: http://www.federalregister.gov/OFRUpload/OFRData/2010-12645_PI.pdf

All fine and good BUT...

I would put Navworks in TODAY (and I might still ) if I didn't already spend MORE on a &^#%!!! transponder!

Since the ADS-B out provides the data needed to ATC to perform what is done now with transponders, one would ASSUME that transponders will become a thing of the past. I have not heard one peep about when THAT date is to occur. I imagine I will be dead and buried before we don't have to carry both on the panel.

I actually couldn't care less about ADS-B "out". ADS-B "in" is what will help me in the cockpit.

requirements after January 1, 2020.

Click to expand...

In January 2020 I will once again be wearing diapers and eating baby food.

rzbill said:

I actually couldn't care less about ADS-B "out". ADS-B "in" is what will help me in the cockpit.

Click to expand...

I agree, NavWorx agrees ....however...... the problem seems to be that some passive aggressive type in the FAA has the ADS-B "out" feature shut off to people with ADS-B "in" unless the ground station first detects an ADS-B "out" signal. If there is a plane in the area that has ADS-B "out" then the "in" signal can be received by everyone in the area where the "out" signal is detected. But the "in" only receiver will only get a "in" signal to use if there is an "out" guy in the area.
There are people with some common safety sense, that are fighting this but for the time being both are needed for reliable reception.

This may be a mute point, for the most part, in areas where there are commercial guys in the air.

Even so: Pretty sad!

This has ZERO tie to round/steam gauges. I am adamantly opposed to this mandate since it buys me NADA....except an expense. Maybe you get an APRS like trail...if you fly where there is coverage.

The myth of ADS-B "out" providing only current mode C transponder data is false. ADS-B's current and planned CNS capabilities are far more extensive. Round dial electromechanical instruments do not have ARNIC 429/729 capabilities and will not be able to provide the data parameters needed.

CNS is communications/navigation/surveillance

ADS-B Out provides GPS/WAAS generated position/aircraft ID data to appropriate receiver systems on the ground and in the air.

Whether I have steam gauges is irrelevant. You do not need a glass panel from my understanding. If I am wrong then that ups the cost a lot.

Back to CNS. ADS-B Out is a one way system. It sends position data. It receives nada from the ground. It does not provide the pilot nav info. Thus in my opinion it is only a surveillance type system.

The benefit is to the FAA...not the GA pilot. See my detailed view here

http://stopads-b.org/ADS.htm

Ron Lee said:

CNS is communications/navigation/surveillance

ADS-B Out provides GPS/WAAS generated position/aircraft ID data to appropriate receiver systems on the ground and in the air.

Whether I have steam gauges is irrelevant. You do not need a glass panel from my understanding. If I am wrong then that ups the cost a lot.

Back to CNS. ADS-B Out is a one way system. It sends position data. It receives nada from the ground. It does not provide the pilot nav info. Thus in my opinion it is only a surveillance type system.

The benefit is to the FAA...not the GA pilot. See my detailed view here

http://stopads-b.org/ADS.htm

Click to expand...

The PFD is the heart of an ADS-B cockpit. ADS-B technology is not another transponder "box" we currently use. The PFD will be the processor which relays all AIRNC 429 bus data out to the 1090 Mhz squinter piggy backed on the Mode S transponder signal.

ADS-B "out" information is not only going to transmit the current position of the equipped aircraft but also its "intentions." The "intentions" will be connected via the AIRNC 429/729 bus. The DEAL BREAKING INFO required is not the position of the aircraft but its intentions in the form of the flight plan loaded into the GPS or the current mode control panel settings of the lateral mode and vertical mode.

The old concept called "Free Flight?" has matured into Autonomous Flight Rules (AFR). AFR embodies the benefits of ADS-B.

AFR is where this is all headed. ADS-B "out" is required for AFR operations to be allowed to operate "autonomously" while maintaining their surveillance and ensuring their separation in the system.

This is GREAT NEWS for those of us that are interested in flight safety. ...and ADS-B without an equipment mandate would hold little value. If you can't see everyone what's the point?

I can only imagine what Garmin's going to charge to upgrade the 900X. That will be fun.

- Peter

"flight safety?"

Give me a break. If you want to reduce fatalities figure out a way to stop the pilot errors that kill many every year. Mid-airs are not the problem. And without IN functionality...or talking to ATC which many folks don't, ADS-B Out gives you zero protection.

Now if benamyava can point out where in the 140+ page notice that it required a non-steam gauge panel, I would appreciate it. All this talk of fancy flying terms is worthless to me.

I doubt that a 396/496 (non-TSO) GPS will satisfy requirements for input to a ADS-B Out transmitting device. Big bucks for minimal/zero benefit to GA folks.

Plus...I already know how the law of unintended consequences will play out on this.....at least one anyway.

No school like the "old school" eh Ron?

Giddy Up!!!

- Peter

Timing

Van's will have a flying saucer kit out when that becomes fully operational. Meanwhile, I'll stick with my trusty Garmin 330S with traffic to my 430. Saved me more than once. Build for now and into the next 6 years, 2020 is optimistic at best. After all, it IS the FAA.

N200PF said:

I can only imagine what Garmin's going to charge to upgrade the 900X.- Peter

Click to expand...

An Extended Squitter (ADS-B out) function can be added to the GTX 330 for $1200 by any avionics shop. (Avionics shops have to send things into Garmin).

Not outrageous (for an airplane).

I wonder if in 10 years the 330 will be relevant? I have one so I hope so...

I do not have a GTX 330. As the OP asserted, there is far more to this. I last read the NPRM 2.5 years ago. Did something change that I missed? I never read anything that suggested that your flight plan/intentions were transmitted.

IF that is true, it is significant...and possibly costly. Now they are saying that you have to have a flight plan transmitted in transponder regions. Until it is shown where that is true, I don't believe it.

As far as safety, I covered that in my response to the NPRM

http://stopads-b.org/ADS.htm

I suspect that most people do not have a clue about this and the few that have heard about ADS-B assume that you get the benefits of "ADS-B In" when you don't.

I will be doing whatever possible to get this changed as it impacts GA. If the airlines want it...go for it. If the FAA wants to save money on radars, pay for our equipment that allows them to save money.

I am still waiting for proof that steam gauges are no longer viable with this FAA cost saving mandate.

I was going to write something about the Feds not giving a **** about the declining pilot population and how it's directly tied into the cost and expense of flying and airplane owning and they'd really rather we just went away but figured I'd be preaching to the choir.
Now I know why that Lee Bottom (website and airport) guy gets all spun up.

"In 2020 I'll be wearing diapers and eating baby food again." I almost spewed Gerber all over the keyboard.

Cost concerns are valid. But cost will only rise according to the level of service the aircraft needs to fly. Low and slow will always be the cheapest solution. I fully understand the costs associated as I am building an RV8 myself. And yes I have already put my money where my mouth is to participate.

Enhancing ADS-B?
"Our research may help determine design requirements for ADS-B infrastructure," says Wing. "For example, the transponder might have to deliver more information in terms of aircraft intent." This would mean not just transmitting traffic positioning data, but also flight plan data from the FMS.



http://www.aviationtoday.com/av/categories/military/1127.html

I have been a participant pilot evaluating AFR at Nasa Langley. I have used the future and it has real value. It is sad to see AOPA missing the point of what is really occurring. The concepts have depth and surface articles do not communicate the overall picture. Eventually the value will be communicated.

Changes are scary, but technology is what aviation is all about and continually moves forward. GAs only requirements will be to be visible to the system. If GA wants to participate it will have to be able to coordinate its activities with the other users. Expect rapid change, followed by long periods of stagnation. And rest assured the FAA always misses its targets and takes twice as long to implement than planned. Everyone can also relax knowing the implementation of the system is done in three phases with target dates of 2013, 2020, and 2025.

Thanks for looking up all those acronyms. I knew if someone was interested they would look into it and if not forgetaboutit as they say in Brooklyn.