ADS-B

This forum has been developed to discuss aviation related topics.

Moderators: ahramin, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog

charrois
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 56
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 11:15 pm

ADS-B

Post by charrois » Mon Nov 04, 2019 12:38 am

Apologies if this comes of as some kind of rant... but the lead story on CTV News today (https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/air-tra ... -1.4668608) makes me just have to comment.

Apparently, the 2020 mandate for ADS-B Out in the US, as well as a similar mandate in Europe has the Canadian Forces saying it isn't cost effective for them to add the associated avionics to two of their four Challenger jets used for executive transport, saying instead that replacing them might make more sense.

They are complaining about the cost of becoming ADS-B compliant in the US being too high... yet Nav Canada just recently announced an even more stringent requirement for aircraft in Canada to not only have ADS-B out, but with antenna diversity - a substantially even higher cost, though they claimed the cost of compliance to be not a significant factor. They originally set deadlines for compliance starting as early as February 2021, though that initial deadline has since been postponed when industry said it couldn't meet compliance by then.

In the US, they gave 10 years for aircraft to be compliant, and offered several benefits to pilots to encourage adoption (free transmission of weather information, re-transmission of all radar targets, etc., as well as possible operation on a separate frequency to allow for less expensive hardware). In Canada, we were given 2 years for the first round of compliance (though fortunately currently postponed), no direct benefits to pilots (the main benefit is to Nav Canada in allowing them to save money by decommissioning radar facilities), and with only one frequency option... not to mention also requiring antenna diversity, which limits hardware choice (and drives prices for both the equipment and installation) even further.

There's no question the upcoming ADS-B mandate in Canada with the diversity requirement is going to cost pilots a lot more than our US counterparts. Nav Canada says this cost is going to be relatively insignificant. Yet the Canadian Forces are saying that the cost of upgrading their fleet to the even more basic US requirements in 2020 is cost prohibitive?

Obviously, the two departments should get together and talk things out. Don't get me wrong - I see the benefits of ADS-B in general, and have ADS-B out in my aircraft.. but not the antenna diversity that will be required in Canada. When I got my transponder with ADS-B out a few years ago, diversity wasn't even really a thing for small aircraft, and I'm not sure that any general aviation transponders had that as an option - there still isn't much to choose from. Has there even been a study that shows that bottom-mounted antenna are shielded by small aircraft for space-based ADS-B to warrant another on the roof?
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
AirFrame
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1992
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 10:27 pm
Location: Sidney, BC
Contact:

Re: ADS-B

Post by AirFrame » Mon Nov 04, 2019 7:30 am

While ADS-B-out may be *part* of the reason upgrading the jets is "too expensive," I would bet a lot of money that it's not the only reason. Other upgrades were likely cooking already, and ADS-B may just have been the straw that broke the camel's back. Diversity compliant systems aren't *that* expensive, compared to selling one jet and buying another.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Heliian
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1546
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:14 pm

Re: ADS-B

Post by Heliian » Mon Nov 04, 2019 8:21 am

Unless they plan on literally scrapping the airframes then they need to upgrade to ads-b. Simple
---------- ADS -----------
  

Helno
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 35
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2019 6:49 am

Re: ADS-B

Post by Helno » Mon Nov 04, 2019 8:45 am

Larger aircraft like that would already have diversity transponders for TCAS.

I wonder what suite of avionics they have otherwise? Might be pretty limited as far as IFR nav goes and that might be a bigger issue than ADS-B compliance.
---------- ADS -----------
  

ahramin
Rank Moderator
Rank Moderator
Posts: 5832
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 5:21 pm
Location: Vancouver

Re: ADS-B

Post by ahramin » Mon Nov 04, 2019 9:59 am

We don't know what the requirements will be for ADS-B in Canada. Nor do we know when the requirements will take effect once they decide what they will be. The unofficial advice from Transport Canada is "don't equip yet", and that was given to me by someone physically standing in the US so basically they have no clue.

As for the article above, they had a decade to decide what to do about those jets, so why are we talking about it 2 months before the deadline?
---------- ADS -----------
  

whipline
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 579
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 9:40 am

Re: ADS-B

Post by whipline » Mon Nov 04, 2019 10:53 am

I’m waiting for this. I was going to buy a garmin unit but was told to wait. No clear word on diversity.

https://uavionix.com/testing-sbx/
---------- ADS -----------
  

Helno
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 35
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2019 6:49 am

Re: ADS-B

Post by Helno » Mon Nov 04, 2019 11:25 am

I have a GTX-335. I guess if I really have to I can upgrade to a 335d but it will be a real kick in the teeth. I installed it before all this talk of diversity.

What I really wonder is what will happen to all the US aircraft coming north.
---------- ADS -----------
  

charrois
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 56
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 11:15 pm

Re: ADS-B

Post by charrois » Mon Nov 04, 2019 3:40 pm

At least at the moment, Nav Canada has made it pretty clear what their ADS-B requirements are going to be, and they've been very inflexible on their requirement for antenna diversity, despite pressure from COPA and other organizations:

https://www.navcanada.ca/EN/products-an ... ate-EN.pdf

However, the timeline they propose in that document (starting as early as 2021) has been delayed since numerous "industry operators" have said they won't be ready in time:

https://copanational.org/en/2019/10/24/ ... n-delayed/

Of course, it's not a good idea to go out and upgrade avionics at the moment until the dust finally settles.. but it's looking like a diversity antenna system is going to end up likely being a requirement eventually. And this is what I have the biggest problem with. I think space-based ADS-B is a great idea in theory... to a degree.... but that's contingent on the whole world adopting that convention and associated avionics, not just Canada. And though ATC can track aircraft anywhere in the world with space-based ADS-B, there is still the issue of communicating with those aircraft. As they reduce their ground footprint of radar in favour of space-based surveillance, are they going to start thinking that maintaining their communication network is getting too expensive too and require everyone to "upgrade" to HF radios to increase their range?

For aircraft flying in the flight levels over relatively remote areas, I think satellite-based ADS-B is an appropriate system. But mandating the same equipment for the GA fleet operating at lower altitudes in less remote areas to me is expensive overkill (and to me, "lower altitudes" includes the Class B from 12,500-18,000 - a lot of GA aircraft flies in that altitude range now - particularly in Western Canada over the Rockies).

I wonder if by the time it's mandated in Canada, someone might make some kind of ADS-B repeater for a top antenna installation that would just retransmit the signal from the bottom antenna... might make an upgrade path a lot more feasible for people who already have a bottom-mounted ADS-B transponder...
---------- ADS -----------
  

boeingboy
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1093
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 2:57 pm
Location: West coast

Re: ADS-B

Post by boeingboy » Mon Nov 04, 2019 6:15 pm

Nav Canada is not wavering from antenna diversity because Aerion itself has run tests and has said it cannot guarantee proper coverage required for IFR flight. Therefore it will be required period. Now whether they require GA aircraft to have it - I think eventually everyone will have to have it.
---------- ADS -----------
  

whipline
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 579
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 9:40 am

Re: ADS-B

Post by whipline » Mon Nov 04, 2019 8:02 pm

Did you read my link? Navcanada is teaming up with uvionics to make a one antenna system on the wing tip. Covers reception from space and the ground. I also think their tail position light would work as well.

Whip
---------- ADS -----------
  

charrois
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 56
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 11:15 pm

Re: ADS-B

Post by charrois » Mon Nov 04, 2019 8:59 pm

The skyBeacon X sounds like a good possible solution for retrofits. I can see it as a remote transponder option.. though I wonder what they'll be using as a control head for people without glass cockpits it can integrate with.

I wonder if Aireon did any testing for signal blockage on a belly-mounted antenna on smaller GA (2-4 seat) aircraft, or if their tests were all done on larger aircraft where I could see blockage of the signal by the hull would be a real possible problem.

I love ADS-B as an enhancement to our existing infrastructure, but do worry a bit about transitioning to depend on it completely. After all, it's entirely dependent itself on GPS, the reliability of which is completely outside of our country's control.
---------- ADS -----------
  

AuxBatOn
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3080
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 6:13 pm
Location: North America, sometimes

Re: ADS-B

Post by AuxBatOn » Mon Nov 04, 2019 10:14 pm

Having flight tested ADS-B on different types, including smaller types, body blanking is a real issue even for small aircraft.
---------- ADS -----------
  
Going for the deck at corner

User avatar
complexintentions
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2060
Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2004 3:49 pm
Location: of my pants is unknown.

Re: ADS-B

Post by complexintentions » Tue Nov 05, 2019 4:48 am

I too have to wonder how the military only "realized" this could be an issue two months before the deadline to implement it. The satellites for space-based ADS-B were being launched in 2017 and it's a no-brainer that it was coming, particularly for trans-oceanic flights.

More likely just the excuse to update the VIP fleet.
---------- ADS -----------
  
I’m still waiting for my white male privilege membership card. Must have gotten lost in the mail.

AuxBatOn
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3080
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 6:13 pm
Location: North America, sometimes

Re: ADS-B

Post by AuxBatOn » Tue Nov 05, 2019 6:30 am

complexintentions wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 4:48 am
I too have to wonder how the military only "realized" this could be an issue two months before the deadline to implement it. The satellites for space-based ADS-B were being launched in 2017 and it's a no-brainer that it was coming, particularly for trans-oceanic flights.

More likely just the excuse to update the VIP fleet.
Nope. It has been talked about for years already. The “bang for buck” for the upgrades required (not just ADS-B) is not there considering the life left in them.
---------- ADS -----------
  
Going for the deck at corner

User avatar
AirFrame
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1992
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 10:27 pm
Location: Sidney, BC
Contact:

Re: ADS-B

Post by AirFrame » Tue Nov 05, 2019 7:28 am

charrois wrote:
Mon Nov 04, 2019 3:40 pm
...I think space-based ADS-B is a great idea in theory... to a degree.... but that's contingent on the whole world adopting that convention and associated avionics, not just Canada.
Um... It's only the US that *isn't* adopting it. Most of the ROW *is* going with space-based ADS-B.
---------- ADS -----------
  

blue thunder
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 53
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2011 9:07 am

Re: ADS-B

Post by blue thunder » Tue Nov 05, 2019 3:30 pm

Interesting news clip whereby two Government jets need to be replaced because they are not compliant to fly in the USA under the new rules. What a bunch of BS, and the news media is spewing this out. I was quoted 5500US dollars this morning to make my aircraft compliant. Garmin GTX 435. Even if that transponder wasn't sophisticated enough for a Challenger Jet, how much could it cost to be compliant?


https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/air-tra ... -1.4668608
---------- ADS -----------
  

AuxBatOn
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3080
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 6:13 pm
Location: North America, sometimes

Re: ADS-B

Post by AuxBatOn » Tue Nov 05, 2019 5:50 pm

It is not just the transponder, a lot of other systems need to be added/modified to make them compliant.
---------- ADS -----------
  
Going for the deck at corner

who me ?
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 135
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2005 8:42 am

Re: ADS-B

Post by who me ? » Tue Nov 05, 2019 6:12 pm

blue thunder wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 3:30 pm
Interesting news clip whereby two Government jets need to be replaced because they are not compliant to fly in the USA under the new rules. What a bunch of BS, and the news media is spewing this out. I was quoted 5500US dollars this morning to make my aircraft compliant. Garmin GTX 435. Even if that transponder wasn't sophisticated enough for a Challenger Jet, how much could it cost to be compliant?


https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/air-tra ... -1.4668608
It is not just the ADS-B , it is an ADS-B system that with interface with the TCAS II , ver 7.1
That is what really drives up the costs.
Plus 2 Transponders which will work with the TCAS and the requirement for WAAS GPS .
Just putting WAAS GPS into a Transport Category aircraft can cost a couple hundred thousand
US dollars and most aircraft have 2 FMs . Add all that up , then put in the Government way of doing things !!!
---------- ADS -----------
  

Big Pistons Forever
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5086
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: West Coast

Re: ADS-B

Post by Big Pistons Forever » Tue Nov 05, 2019 6:58 pm

I would guess it is more than just ADS-B. The jets probably need LPV, Radious to Fix, FANs 2, Controller Datalink etc etc

I could see easily spending more than 500K just to get the basics needed to operate anywhere, anytime.

It would make way more sense to replace them with 2 used 605's, but this is the government where there is never time and money to do things right but there is always time and money to do them over :roll:
---------- ADS -----------
  

Helno
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 35
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2019 6:49 am

Re: ADS-B

Post by Helno » Wed Nov 06, 2019 7:55 am

charrois wrote:
Mon Nov 04, 2019 3:40 pm
I wonder if by the time it's mandated in Canada, someone might make some kind of ADS-B repeater for a top antenna installation that would just retransmit the signal from the bottom antenna... might make an upgrade path a lot more feasible for people who already have a bottom-mounted ADS-B transponder...
They could just update the DO standard to allow for roof mounted transponders.

The only reason single antenna solutions currently use the belly is because we have ground based radar infrastructure.

True diversity in transponders is only needed on large aircraft. Small GA aircraft with a single belly mount antennas have good enough visibility for TCAS to see them so what the problem with just moving the antenna to the roof?
---------- ADS -----------
  

Cessna 180
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 263
Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2015 8:28 pm
Location: YKF

Re: ADS-B

Post by Cessna 180 » Wed Nov 06, 2019 11:27 pm

Helno wrote:
Wed Nov 06, 2019 7:55 am
charrois wrote:
Mon Nov 04, 2019 3:40 pm
I wonder if by the time it's mandated in Canada, someone might make some kind of ADS-B repeater for a top antenna installation that would just retransmit the signal from the bottom antenna... might make an upgrade path a lot more feasible for people who already have a bottom-mounted ADS-B transponder...
They could just update the DO standard to allow for roof mounted transponders.

The only reason single antenna solutions currently use the belly is because we have ground based radar infrastructure.

True diversity in transponders is only needed on large aircraft. Small GA aircraft with a single belly mount antennas have good enough visibility for TCAS to see them so what the problem with just moving the antenna to the roof?
because that's not FAA/ICAO/EASA compliant.
---------- ADS -----------
  

bobcaygeon
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 550
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 8:03 am

Re: ADS-B

Post by bobcaygeon » Thu Nov 07, 2019 6:49 am

They are just looking for an excise tp buy a new aircraft. They have been for a while pushing for a couple of used 604's.

We've made similar aircraft ADS-B compliant recently and it's not that expensive. WAAS, etc is another upgrade but again some of this is likely required on 604's as many have been around quite awhile and don't have it or it may be retro'd already.

Depending on the utilization rates it may or may not be worth it but using ADS-B alone as an excuse is weak......
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
complexintentions
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2060
Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2004 3:49 pm
Location: of my pants is unknown.

Re: ADS-B

Post by complexintentions » Thu Nov 07, 2019 4:35 pm

AuxBatOn wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 6:30 am
complexintentions wrote:
Tue Nov 05, 2019 4:48 am
I too have to wonder how the military only "realized" this could be an issue two months before the deadline to implement it. The satellites for space-based ADS-B were being launched in 2017 and it's a no-brainer that it was coming, particularly for trans-oceanic flights.

More likely just the excuse to update the VIP fleet.
Nope. It has been talked about for years already. The “bang for buck” for the upgrades required (not just ADS-B) is not there considering the life left in them.
"Talked about for years already", yet what has been done? SFA, as per usual. Which was my point.

The Germans have 4 Globals but somehow we can't afford to upgrade even to newer used machines - not even with the justification that upgrading the current fleet to a basic minimum standard isn't cost-effective.

I have serving friends so I feel for them, but it's not hard to see why people make fun of the Canadian military all the time.
---------- ADS -----------
  
I’m still waiting for my white male privilege membership card. Must have gotten lost in the mail.

corethatthermal
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 294
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 7:27 pm

Re: ADS-B

Post by corethatthermal » Thu Nov 07, 2019 6:54 pm

The Germans have 4 Globals but somehow we can't afford to upgrade even to newer used machines - not even with the justification that upgrading the current fleet to a basic minimum standard isn't cost-effective.
There is no money for veterans etc etc when Mr. Dress-up is giving it all away !!!
---------- ADS -----------
  

Galaxy
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 118
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 1:35 am

Re: ADS-B

Post by Galaxy » Fri Nov 15, 2019 7:15 am

https://www.navcanada.ca/EN/products-an ... ate-EN.pdf


NOTICE OF CHANGE UPDATE

CANADIAN ADS-B OUT PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS MANDATE

In 2018, NAV CANADA conducted an Aeronautical Study to specify minimum performance
requirements for all ADS-B Out equipped aircraft to operate in certain designated airspace to
enhance safety and efficiency.

A phased implementation was recommended, to begin in 2021 with DO260B Standard (or
equivalent) and antenna diversity. The changes were to be made in the Canadian Designated
Airspace Handbook (DAH).

NAV CANADA and Transport Canada are responding to stakeholder feedback and valued
industry input that indicates more time is required to prepare for the ADS-B Out Performance
Requirements Mandate. As a result, initial space-based ADS-B system implementation will no
longer require a performance requirements mandate and will be used on a priority basis for
suitably equipped aircraft starting in 2021. Space-based ADS-B will be used for surveillance in
Class A and B airspace according to the original dates identified in the Canadian space-based
ADS-B Performance Requirements Mandate Aeronautical Study recommendations.

• Class A: 25 February 2021
• Class B: 27 January 2022

Non ADS-B Out equipped aircraft will be accommodated within the airspace until a performance
requirements mandate can be implemented.

NAV CANADA will work closely with Transport Canada to develop a path towards a mandate.
The postponement of the performance requirements mandate will provide time to develop the
regulatory framework with Transport Canada to support an effective mandate.

This will also provide additional time for the equipment certification process associated with
antennae diversity requirements to progress considering potential future use cases in other
airspace classifications.

For further information, please contact:

NAV CANADA
Customer Service
77 Metcalfe Street
Ottawa, ON K1P 5L6
Tel.: 800-876-4693
Fax: 877-663-6656
E-mail: service@navcanada.ca
---------- ADS -----------
  

Post Reply

Return to “General Comments”