the sUAS NPRM and ADSB

[Mike M]

OK. Just sat through a buncha forums at Sun n Fun about the new "drone" NPRM and about why I should spend 1/3 the price of my 25yr old aircraft, about the cost of an engine overhaul, to put in ADS-B out. Left the event early to let my brain cool off. And my temper.

Presenter after presenter on the ADS-B systems emphasized that they would allow us to see traffic threats and the more we spend, the more threats they'll show us. Aircraft lacking ADS-B will be excluded from A, B, and C and the 30-mile veil because that's where the traffic is concentrated. BS. Those systems don't and won't see all the threats because they weren't designed to. They present the BOXES not the body. Thousands of aircraft won't have boxes under the rule, thus will not show up any better than the 10 to 20 thousand birds which are struck and reported each year. ADS-B is, as one presenter said when questioned about pricing and alternatives, "an expensive system because it has to be totally reliable on a dark and stormy night." Yup, but most of us want an affordable system for a bright and sunny morning. This ain't that.

Couple that info with the sUAS NPRM forums. sUAS will be allowed to fly in B, C, and veil airspace without ADS-B out! Why? Because it's too expensive, too heavy, too complicated, and wouldn't be reliable. I'm not making that up, that's what presenters said about why the rule allows it.

So. Think sun angle, aspect ratio, size, etc. The most likely aircraft to be involved in a midair is the one that isn't looking and that the other pilot can't see and avoid. Which describes the aircraft which WON'T be required to carry the ONLY piece of gear designed to self-announce position to other participating aircraft without reliance on ATC voice transmissions! Oh, and the guy who DOES have the mandated ADS-B out? Might not have paid enough for his unit to have ADS-B in, so even if the sUAS had ADS-B out, it wouldn't make a difference.

As to the "concentrated traffic" argument. Read the Sun n Fun or the AirVenture NOTAMs. When traffic gets heavy, we are required to turn our transponders off because the system can't handle them all. Is that why sUAS won't have ADS-B? Naw, couldn't be, nope. The new system will be bug-free!

The emperor isn't just nekkid, he's nuts.

EAA has lost the bubble on these, too. In their (our) nprm submission which Sean Elliot signed they discriminated between private and public airports and claim "an operating ceiling of 400 feet AGL would create 100 foot safety buffer for both manned aircraft and sUAS."

(http://www.eaa.org/~/media/files/new...20comments.pdf)

First, aircraft at private airports can't collide with sUAS so ignore those aircraft? Second; EMS helicopters, law enforcement aircraft, aerial applicators, powerline and pipeline patrol, etc etc routinely operate below 500' AGL, often WELL below 500'.

I thought EAA would support safety for ALL manned aircraft and the people underneath them without discriminating. Lest we forget, "First they came for..." by Martin Niemöller.

Oh, well. The NPRM is a basic and timely compromise. We're probably ready to start using it so the lawyers can get a supply of blood and guts and litigate the problems out of it. Oh, yeah, remember - LOOK OUT THE WINDOW.

[Mike M]

P.S. almost half of the comments on the FAA NPRM website are from AMA modelers who didn't even fill out the form letter submission.

"I am writing in response to the FAA's proposal to regulate small unmanned aircraft systems, including model aircraft. [Insert personal introduction details such as: I am a [job/profession], "

wow. Well, at least they responded.

[miemsed]

I believe with a certified ADSB in and out solution, in addition to aircraft with ADSB, you also see the aircraft that the controller sees on radar screen with the standard radar as that is transmitted up to the ADSB aircraft. Now I just had a Garmin GDL 88 with a Garmin flight stream installed so am still learning but I see the traffic on my Garmin GTN650 and the flightstream sends it to my iPad as well. I am seeing traffic with ADSB and all that information. I am also seeing traffic that does not have the ADSB info and markers and according to my reading of the manual, these are targets that are not ADSB equipped. So with a certified ADSB in and out solution I believe you do see non ADSB traffic that is picked up by standard radar. I have only had about 3 flights since the install so I am sure someone with more experience will correct me if I am wrong, still learning the system.

I know those who do not want to equip will always disagree but this install was one of the best upgrades I have made to the plane. There are other benefits to the ADSB and flightstream combo as well. In addition to having traffic and weather on the GTN and Larger iPad screen, when I plan a flight on Garmin Pilot on the iPad and get in the plane, it is wirelessly transferred to the panel mount GTN650. I find ADSB to be a great aid when flying IFR. I installed this in a 1973 piper because I wanted the benefits of it. With the auto pilot and GTN install then the ADSB it did cost a substantial portion of what the plane is worth. No I will not recover all that cost if I sell but I plan on flying this plane until I can no longer fly. If you want the benefits of ADSB and are going to keep your plane and can afford it then get ADSB. If you do not want it don't. In my opinion the argument that it cost a certain portion of the value of a plane is irrelevant.

the thing is if you fly VFR and you stay outside certain airspace, you may not need ADSB so just don't get it. For some of us, the benefits are worth the cost. For others they may not be so it is good there is a choice. The main point is, I think you do see the aircraft without ADSB boxes as the information the controller sees from standard radar is transmitted to the ADSB stations. Someone with more experience will hopefully clarify. Of course sUAS are a different matter.

[cub builder]

I believe with a certified ADSB in and out solution, in addition to aircraft with ADSB, you also see the aircraft that the controller sees on radar screen with the standard radar as that is transmitted up to the ADSB aircraft.

That would be just great if the retransmission of traffic data from Radar to the ADS-B transmitter to me actually worked. In many places in the flat lands, it does. Here in the mountain west, it's pretty poor. Center has to see traffic on Radar (that range is limited by the terrain), then the data gets transferred to the ADS-B transmitter, then it gets transmitted to me as a return reply to my ADS-B out broadcast (which is also limited by terrain). There are a lot of places for that data to fall off the rails, and that's exactly what it does. If you are any distance from the ADS-B transmitter, you get constant ADS-B tower lost notifications, especially if you are at a lower altitude, like in the pattern for an airport that's not right next to an ADS-B transmitter.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy having ADS-B on board, but it has some pretty substantial limitations. It would work so much better if everyone else was equipped, which isn't going to be a reality in my flying lifetime. The radar rebroadcast of data is highly unreliable, which severely limits the utility of ADS-B in most locations not sitting next to an ADS-B transmitter AND a radar site.

One note of interest on this subject is that Google sees getting aircraft equipped with ADS-B as a means to get their UAS systems into the air. To that end, Google is proposing to get involved in manufacturing and selling inexpensive ADS-B systems for certificated and E-AB aircraft with a target of something in the $500 price range. For more on what Google had to say, read Paul Berterelli's Article in AvWeb from April 9.

-Cub Builder

[Mike M]

Google is proposing to get involved in manufacturing and selling inexpensive ADS-B systems for certificated and E-AB aircraft with a target of something in the $500 price range. For more on what Google had to say, read Paul Berterelli's Article in AvWeb from April 9.

-Cub Builder

And THAT is what I'm talking about. Installing that "inexpensive" ADS-B OUT set on all the sUAS will go a long way toward slowing the rate at which they'll end up as "hood ornaments." And yes, I'll gladly buy one at that price for my plane IF it does the entire ADS-B OUT job with no add-ons and replaces the transponder requirement. Thank you very much, Google, and I'm holding my breath starting.......NOW.

P.S. update as of 28 april:

http://southernhelicam.com/ads-bin-f...-pilots-for-3/
https://ucflight.com/products/mode-c...ith-ads-b-out/
http://www.arcturus-uav.com/articles.html
http://www.nextgenuastransponders.com
http://www.sagetechcorp.com/unmanned.../#.VT--dVC0vV8

The stuff you find out if looking outside the box. Mebbe we should lobby to use stuff like those that don't require current transponder&encoders at all? Again, sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

[Frank Giger]

For the life of me I can't understand why it can't be done.

What does one need for ADS-B out, when it comes right down to it?

Transmitter on a fixed frequency, say 5-10 megawatts of power (airplanes are in the air when the information is needed)
What is the aircraft (ID)?
What is the altitude of the aircraft above sea level?
What is the ground speed of the aircraft?
What is its heading, based on track?

Hmmm, that's a GPS, a computer chip, a small transmitter, and an antenna. The whole thing could be the size of a handheld radio, and everything on the list are common things being sold for very little cost.

[Mike M]

...say 5-10 megawatts of power....

I'm cixelsyd, and mix up decimal points, too. Isn't 5 megawatts a lot of transmit power? My comm radio is only 4 watts max on transmit, and it reaches out well over 50 miles. I haven't found specs on all those UAS units, but 200 watts for a short burst was mentioned for one of them. Thats a long ways from even one megawatt, which is a million watts (yup, i had to look it up)

if UAS community has or are getting tiny, cheap, light, reliable, low-power-draw ADS-B OUT which will stand alone (no xpdr required), don't we all want that, too?

[TedK]

Let's assume for a moment that there might be better uses for the limited power on a drone for stuff like bright strobes.

But that doesn't mean that a drone shouldn't transmit ADS-B Out. There is no reason at all that the Control Station can't transmit the ADS-B Out for the drone.

Problem solved.

All UAVs should be required to have ADS-B Out, transmitted either from the drone or its control station.

[Frank Giger]

Whoops, watts. We don't need to be radio stations providing the hits of the '70's to the masses.

[cub builder]

Let's assume for a moment that there might be better uses for the limited power on a drone for stuff like bright strobes.

But that doesn't mean that a drone shouldn't transmit ADS-B Out. There is no reason at all that the Control Station can't transmit the ADS-B Out for the drone.

Problem solved.

All UAVs should be required to have ADS-B Out, transmitted either from the drone or its control station.

That might work for today while UAVs are required to be within eye sight, but don't think for a minute the UAS world is going to be happy flying them "eyes on". These units are designed for over the horizon operations operating on an Autopilot. Having the ground station transmit the ADS-B out data isn't helpful even if the data is correct as the transmit range from the ground station may be limited by terrain and they may not be transmitting from anywhere near the traffic that might be flying near their drone.

Due to their size, weight and payload is everything and becomes even more important to them than it is to us. Using the Arcuraus as an example; With an 80# gross weight, every gram added to the aircraft is a huge penalty. The weight penalty of hauling around transmitters, receivers and or strobe packages would be more detrimental than the power penalty. These systems typically have an on board dynamo type alternator and voltage regulator, so their run time is limited by fuel capacity. However, the charging system is also limited due to weight restrictions. They are already powering the autopilot and a radio link to connect with the base station, as well as control servos and probably the payload. Requiring more power for lighting and additional transmitters/receivers would also be a big weight penalty for them. Drag from the addition of external lighting could also be a bit penalty.

The best way to limit UAS systems is for the FAA to approve their operations, then micromanage (mandate) by regulation the addition of lighting, strobe packages, beacons, transponders, ADS-B transmitters and receivers, and self powered emergency locators with huge battery packs. (is any of this sounding familiar?) Once equipped, they will be incapable of flight due to the weight of the same government bureaucracy that seems determined to ground us (or price us out of aviation).

-Cub Builder