WSJ article on ADS-B rollout - AOPA asleep at wheel

[NoHeat]

There's an article in the WSJ that's about Transportation Dept. Inspector General's report about ADS-B.

Some of the points:
- Costs will exceed benefits by $588 million
- FAA isn't up to speed on training controllers to use NexGen
- Airlines aren't equipping for ADS-B yet because they don't see a benefit until controllers can use it.
- The project to build 634 towers is done. Except that after building them, they discovered coverage gaps that require 200 more towers.
- Here's the part that upset me: "the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association, the trade group for general aviation, declined to comment."

WTF! AOPA is supposed to be an advocacy group. If the biggest national newspaper calls to interview about something that's big for all its members, AOPA should absolutely be ready to speak for us. Instead, they were asleep. No comment - bah!

 

[Jim Logajan]

It is not compliant and is invisible to certified receivers.

So what? The aircraft's mode C transponder continues to be visible to ground radar which in turn is supposed to make your aircraft visible to those certified receivers. Also, is there something in the technical requirements that prevents a receiver manufacturer from having a configuration setting that would allow depiction of data coming from direct transmissions tagged as being non-certified?

A portable may never meet the current regulations, the regulations themselves would need to be amended and that is not going to happen.

The ~$1500 I paid for a Skyguard has an amortized cost of $300/year if I lose use of it in 2020. I pay more than that per year for rental insurance - and unlike insurance, which might pay for my medical expenses (assuming I survive at all) only after-the-fact collision, the Skyguard is an actual aid to preventing the collision.

Furthermore, it isn't clear that I lose use of the Skyguard after 2020. I presume its FCC license would still be valid, so I could still use it in the C-152 rental that I suspect my FBO is never likely to install ADS-B out. The Skyguard transmitter should still trigger transmissions from the nearby towers of nearby traffic. After all, the need to respond to non-certified transmissions shouldn't vanish after the mandate begins because the tower system will forever need to be available for in situ testing of new transmitter models.

 

[Jim Logajan]

It will be invisible. I mean that on my certified ADSB In, it will not be displayed as traffic at all. It will be treated as an ADSB equipped aircraft by the GBT and therefore not broadcast as a Mode C target. Unless it is turned off, I won't see it any way.

What regulation requires any of us use Certified ADSB In? What rules are violated when I build my own receiver and and integrate it with my tablet computer?

It will never be able to be used by you in your C152 rental after 2020 without you or the aircraft owner receiving a letter from the FAA indicating it is not compliant. If you fly into one of the airspaces that require it after 2020, you might not be able to gain entry to the airspace.

It is in clear violation of current FAA policy as it transmits as RTCA DO-282B compliant, when in fact it is not. However, I don't think the FAA is going to do anything about it for the time being.

Only the FCC has authority over the radio spectrum and radio equipment. The FAA would need to go to the FCC and point out the FCC regulation that is being violated.

A little education is in order. A certified ADS-B In device is required by the TSO C195A RTCA DO-317A to not display any ADS-B data received from a unit that has a SIL or SDA of zero (A GDL88 for example is TSO C195A RTCA DO-317A). All non certified devices are required to broadcast these values as zero. Claiming any other SIL or SDA indicates the unit has been certified to a specific standard by the FAA, but a portable unit has no FAA certification. If one was not accurate and coded it as being compliant with a standard, but factually it was not, then I would think the FAA could take legal action against the manufacturer.

See above about appropriate agency authority. At this point I'm trying to figure out the point of certified ADS-B In since no one flying Part 91 is even required to use it anyway. Why would you install or want to use such a thing?

The GBT treats any ADSB out device as a client, regardless if it is compliant or not. The GBT will therefore not consider the portable as a simple mode A/C transponder unit and will not generate a TISB report for it as it does not generate TISB reports for any aircraft identified as a client, just for non clients.

Well correct me if I'm missing something, but as I see it: The airplane has a standard Mode-C transponder that remains active. I'm not clear how my use of a portable ADS-B unit on that same plane inactivates the existing Mode-C transponder, thus making my airplane invisible.

I'm a little confused by what you're claiming in general - will there or will there not be provisions for in situ pre-certfication testing of ADS-B Out equipment?