Looks like we are going to have to get the expensive 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

Post Reply
pelmet
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4120
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:48 pm

Looks like we are going to have to get the expensive ADS-B

Post by pelmet » Mon Feb 11, 2019 3:34 am

Maybe there should be some pressure put onto NavCanada to set up 978 antennas like the US so we can not be forced to spend thousands extra unnecessarily for ADS-B.

As far as I can tell, it will be the 1090 system only. What a surprise.
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
5x5
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1454
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 7:30 pm

Re: Looks like we are going to have to get the expensive ADS-B

Post by 5x5 » Mon Feb 11, 2019 8:22 am

Canada's all about diversity.......

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all ... 0131epilot ....and for those who don't like clicking links, here's the text.

NAV CANADA SEEKS ADS-B ANTENNA DIVERSITY
JANUARY SATELLITE LAUNCH COMPLETES SPACE-BASED NETWORK
January 30, 2019 By Mike Collins
A recent launch from California completed a space-based aircraft surveillance network, the future use of which has implications for general aviation equipment requirements in Canada.


The final 10 Iridium NEXT communication satellites, each carrying the Aireon ADS-B payload, were launched Jan. 11. This completes the Iridium NEXT constellation of 66 operational satellites and nine orbiting spares. Image courtesy of Iridium.
On the morning of Jan. 11, a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base, California, delivered the final 10 Iridium NEXT satellites to low earth orbit. That launch completed the Iridium NEXT constellation, with 75 satellites in orbit—66 operational satellites and nine spares. Each satellite carries an Aireon Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) payload.

Aireon is a joint space-based ADS-B venture between Iridium Communications, Nav Canada, the Irish Aviation Authority, Italian air navigation service provider Enav, and Naviair—which provides air navigation services in Denmark, Greenland, and the Faroe Islands. Nav Canada is the lead air navigation service provider in the Aireon joint venture.
In a webinar later that day, Nav Canada announced its proposed ADS-B Out performance requirements mandate. Phase 1, which would be implemented Jan. 1, 2021, would include Class A airspace, and Class E airspace above Flight Level 600. Phase 2, beginning Jan. 1, 2022, would affect Class B airspace. While Class A airspace in Canada is the same as in the United States—from 18,000 feet to FL600—Class B is different; Canada’s Class B extends from 12,500 feet msl up to but not including 18,000 feet msl. Phase 3 is less defined, expanding ADS-B as needed to “specific controlled airspace, en route or at an airport, starting no sooner than 2023.”

Nav Canada will require 1090-MHz extended squitter (1090ES) ADS-B compliant with RTCA DO-260B after Jan. 1, 2024, although DO-260 or DO-260A can be used until then. And here’s a kicker for light general aviation aircraft: The agency also proposes to mandate antenna diversity—that is, antennas on both the bottom and top of the aircraft—to support 5-nautical-mile aircraft separation using space-based ADS-B.

One challenge for lighter GA aircraft is that few ADS-B transponders are available that support antenna diversity. Only the Garmin GTX 33D ES and GTX 330D ES, and the L3 Commercial Aviation Lynx NGT-9000, currently support diversity. (Non-diversity GTX 33ES and GTX330 ES models can be converted at the factory to include antenna diversity; a software unlock adds the capability to non-diversity NGT-9000s.)

“The aeronautical study team consulted with domestic and international stakeholders,” Nav Canada said in the presentation. “The ADS-B Out performance requirements were determined in consideration of the advantages of space-based aircraft surveillance and after assessing the issues and concerns raised by stakeholders during consultation.

“The proposed mandate will provide our affected customers with the efficiency and safety benefits to justify the expense they will incur to upgrade their avionics to meet the performance requirements,” Nav Canada said, adding that the mandate will harmonize with U.S. and European ADS-B Out mandates. “Therefore a large percentage of our customers will already be suitably equipped with the avionics required for the Nav Canada proposed mandate. The 2021 timeline for our mandate will allow our other affected customers to properly equip.”

Rune Duke, AOPA senior director of airspace and air traffic, is quick to point out that Transport Canada has not yet approved Nav Canada’s request. “AOPA is continuing to work with COPA, the Canadian Owners and Pilots Association, to advocate for only justifiable airspace and equipage mandates.

“The diversity requirement would be significant if it was approved by Transport Canada,” Duke added. “Nav Canada's response to my question regarding diversity is that GA won’t be affected based on the fact TCAS II requires it, but this is only for a limited number of aircraft that have specialized solutions. There will be many GA and business aviation aircraft that are not voluntarily equipped with TCAS II that will be affected by additional antenna requirements not present in the U.S. ADS-B Out mandate. And as Nav Canada expands its mandate to lower airspace, around 2023, we can expect a diversity requirement to affect more U.S. and Canadian GA.”

Few small GA aircraft are equipped with a traffic alert and collision avoidance system (TCAS), he noted. No current Canadian regulations require private operators to equip with it, although International Civil Aviation Organization rules require that all turbine-powered airplanes with a maximum certificated takeoff weight of more than 33,000 pounds (15,000 kg) or authorized to carry more than 30 passengers, with an individual airworthiness certificate first issued after Jan. 1, 2007, be equipped with an airborne collision avoidance system (ACAS II).

The Canadian mandate specifics are still not final, Duke noted. “Nav Canada is still analyzing whether a low-altitude diversity requirement is warranted, and Transport Canada has yet to approve the initial phases of the rule that would govern the higher altitudes. We are following this effort closely.”

Duke said Nav Canada told him that it provided engineering data to Transport Canada supporting its position that diversity is required at higher altitudes, but did not share the study. In late 2017, with only the first 15 Iridium NEXT satellites carrying the space-based ADS-B payload in orbit, Aireon was busy evaluating preliminary satellite ADS-B data. And the company was seeing a lot more aircraft than it expected. Aireon can receive bottom-antenna-only signals, depending on the angles and position of the satellite; if the satellite is directly above, it will primarily see the top antenna. Aireon noted that the system was designed to receive signals from top-mounted transponder antennas, and that it receives 1090ES signals only—978-MHz universal access transceiver transmissions are invisible to the ADS-B payload’s receivers.

In fall 2017, Nav Canada published a Terms of Reference document that initiated an aeronautical study to define its proposed ADS-B Out mandate. Nav Canada notes that much of the country’s secondary surveillance radar coverage comes from Department of National Defence radars with feeds that are not always dependable, and that it might seek to decommission some ground-based radars in the future. Nav Canada also proposed exempting ADS-B Out-equipped aircraft from the planned 406-MHz ELT mandate, because Aireon offers an emergency location service expected to exceed an ELT’s performance.

AOPA filed comments on the Terms of Reference document, noting GA’s concerns about antenna diversity—among other issues.

COPA also responded to the Terms of Reference. “COPA does not support the proposed ADS-B Out 1090ES mandate below FL180 due to the disproportionate ratio of cost to benefits for GA,” said Bernard Gervais, COPA president and CEO. “We do not see any use or need for ADS-B for the GA community in the near to medium term, because of high costs burdening the aircraft owner and the lack of features and/or benefits enhancing the overall GA experience, efficiency, and safety unless everyone in the country is equipped. For now, this renders this proposal entirely unacceptable to GA operators in Canadian airspace.”

The FAA has mandated ADS-B Out equipage for flights after Jan. 1, 2020, in U.S. airspace where a transponder is required today. In addition to 1090ES, the FAA provides the option for ADS-B Out on the 978-MHz universal access transceiver frequency. However, 1090ES is the only international standard, and to date no other countries have embraced use of the UAT datalink.
---------- ADS -----------
  
Being stupid around airplanes is a capital offence and nature is a hanging judge!

“It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.”
Mark Twain

ogopogo
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 247
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 7:28 am

Re: Looks like we are going to have to get the expensive ADS-B

Post by ogopogo » Mon Feb 11, 2019 10:30 am

The “towers” are in Low Earth orbit now.
---------- ADS -----------
  

pelmet
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4120
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:48 pm

Re: Looks like we are going to have to get the expensive ADS-B

Post by pelmet » Mon Feb 11, 2019 3:38 pm

I think maybe we need to have COPA pressing for 978, if they are not already.
---------- ADS -----------
  

RatherBeFlying
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 606
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2005 9:27 am
Location: Toronto

How about we get rid of Class B

Post by RatherBeFlying » Mon Feb 11, 2019 6:54 pm

Do that and antenna diversity only applies above 18,000'.

For current Class B terminal areas, you can put a refrigerator size box in the tower with antennas on the roof. Seems to work for Hudson Bay and much of the Arctic. For trans Polar and Oceanic, satellites do make more sense.

How is it that Canada needs Class B when the FAA gets along just fine without it?

12,500 over the Rockies squashed below Class B, my rear gets itchy - and the turbulence can be vigorously "moderate". Yes, I'm on oxygen.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Cessna 180
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 255
Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2015 8:28 pm
Location: YKF

Re: Looks like we are going to have to get the expensive ADS-B

Post by Cessna 180 » Mon Feb 11, 2019 9:08 pm

There's no chance we're getting 978 ADS-B in Canada. The time for that is long gone.
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
AirFrame
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1952
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 10:27 pm
Location: Sidney, BC
Contact:

Re: Looks like we are going to have to get the expensive ADS-B

Post by AirFrame » Tue Feb 12, 2019 7:58 am

Cessna 180 wrote:
Mon Feb 11, 2019 9:08 pm
There's no chance we're getting 978 ADS-B in Canada. The time for that is long gone.
The time for that was bypassed quietly without consultation with the stakeholders (ie. GA). Mostly because NavCanada isn't interested in a system whereby they broadcast information for free that they could sell instead.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Cessna 180
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 255
Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2015 8:28 pm
Location: YKF

Re: Looks like we are going to have to get the expensive ADS-B

Post by Cessna 180 » Tue Feb 12, 2019 1:05 pm

AirFrame wrote:
Tue Feb 12, 2019 7:58 am
Cessna 180 wrote:
Mon Feb 11, 2019 9:08 pm
There's no chance we're getting 978 ADS-B in Canada. The time for that is long gone.
The time for that was bypassed quietly without consultation with the stakeholders (ie. GA). Mostly because NavCanada isn't interested in a system whereby they broadcast information for free that they could sell instead.
you're absolutely correct. Canada may have the second largest fleet of aircraft in the world, but we by no means have the GA community the Untied States has, so we're never going to get the level of services available, especially not with the cost cutting attitude of NavCanada.

When it comes down to it, 1090ES is the international standard and the system is designed to cater to the airlines and biz jets that are paying high user fees. ADS-B isn't to improve services to users, but it's to increase the capacity of our northern airspace where NavCanada makes a lot of cash for overflight fees. places where it's uneconomical to install SSR.
---------- ADS -----------
  

pelmet
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4120
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:48 pm

Re: Looks like we are going to have to get the expensive ADS-B

Post by pelmet » Wed Feb 13, 2019 1:40 pm

Why can’t 978 be installed now?
---------- ADS -----------
  

milotron
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 48
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2016 7:53 am

Re: Looks like we are going to have to get the expensive ADS-B

Post by milotron » Wed Feb 13, 2019 2:12 pm

Ugh, sounds about right. I have been waiting for them to provide guidance on the diversity aspect for months, but ended up with a GTX345 installed now.
Hopefully they come up with an add-on device that can multiplex the output of the single antenna unit to two antennae.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Cessna 180
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 255
Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2015 8:28 pm
Location: YKF

Re: Looks like we are going to have to get the expensive ADS-B

Post by Cessna 180 » Wed Feb 13, 2019 2:37 pm

pelmet wrote:
Wed Feb 13, 2019 1:40 pm
Why can’t 978 be installed now?
because the satellites are already in the sky, and ground stations like the US, Europe, Australia, etc, we're never in the game plan (save for Hudson's Bay, Greenland, and Iceland, which I'm sure will be decommissioned after the final roll out).
---------- ADS -----------
  

BigQ
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 89
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 3:41 pm
Location: YUL-ish

Re: Looks like we are going to have to get the expensive ADS-B

Post by BigQ » Wed Feb 13, 2019 2:48 pm

Sounds like a mandated government tracking program to me.
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
AirFrame
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1952
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 10:27 pm
Location: Sidney, BC
Contact:

Re: Looks like we are going to have to get the expensive ADS-B

Post by AirFrame » Thu Feb 14, 2019 7:33 am

pelmet wrote:
Wed Feb 13, 2019 1:40 pm
Why can’t 978 be installed now?
It can. The catch is that Canada is much more geographically diverse in comparison to the number of aircraft moving around (than the US). A ground tower only covers so much area, and you need lots of ground towers to cover everything.

There is a move afoot to crowd-source ground-based transmitters that would broadcast (initially) METAR, TAF, etc. (basically anything available through ADDS) in a manner that would be usable just like ADS-B data received over UAT. A 1W transmitter can cover quite a good range.
---------- ADS -----------
  

AuxBatOn
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3024
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 6:13 pm
Location: North America, sometimes

Re: Looks like we are going to have to get the expensive ADS-B

Post by AuxBatOn » Thu Feb 14, 2019 7:43 am

AirFrame wrote:
Thu Feb 14, 2019 7:33 am
pelmet wrote:
Wed Feb 13, 2019 1:40 pm
Why can’t 978 be installed now?
It can. The catch is that Canada is much more geographically diverse in comparison to the number of aircraft moving around (than the US). A ground tower only covers so much area, and you need lots of ground towers to cover everything.

There is a move afoot to crowd-source ground-based transmitters that would broadcast (initially) METAR, TAF, etc. (basically anything available through ADDS) in a manner that would be usable just like ADS-B data received over UAT. A 1W transmitter can cover quite a good range.
This network of crowd-sourced antennas will never be a replacement for NavCanada's ADS-B requirements.
---------- ADS -----------
  
Going for the deck at corner

pelmet
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4120
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:48 pm

Re: Looks like we are going to have to get the expensive ADS-B

Post by pelmet » Fri Feb 15, 2019 12:56 am

In the US, the only place where VFR aircraftwill require ADS-B is where Mode C transponders are required. Canda has limited areas where VFR aircraft require mode C transponders below 12500'. I really don't think it would be that expensive to install 978 antennas for these location only. If you want to go IFR, then you can get the extended squitter version. Does COPA have much to say about this?
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
AirFrame
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1952
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 10:27 pm
Location: Sidney, BC
Contact:

Re: Looks like we are going to have to get the expensive ADS-B

Post by AirFrame » Fri Feb 15, 2019 7:42 am

AuxBatOn wrote:
Thu Feb 14, 2019 7:43 am
This network of crowd-sourced antennas will never be a replacement for NavCanada's ADS-B requirements.
Absolutely not, nor is that the intent. The intent is to leverage the equipment people already have (ADS-B-in systems) to offer them functionality that NavCanada won't.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Helno
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 32
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2019 6:49 am

Re: Looks like we are going to have to get the expensive ADS-B

Post by Helno » Wed Feb 27, 2019 7:42 am

pelmet wrote:
Wed Feb 13, 2019 1:40 pm
Why can’t 978 be installed now?
978mhz is a DME frequency and is allocated to Nav Canada by Industry Canada for aviation use.
So technically a US aircraft with 978 MHz OUT should turn it off when crossing the border since they do not have permission to use that frequency here.
The satellites are not setup to listen to 978 MHz so it is not something that Nav Canada will be looking for regardless.

With the money that Nav Canada has spent on a 1090 solution I decided not to hold my breath waiting for 978 and added a GTX335 when I did my panel upgrade.
AirFrame wrote:
Thu Feb 14, 2019 7:33 am
There is a move afoot to crowd-source ground-based transmitters that would broadcast (initially) METAR, TAF, etc. (basically anything available through ADDS) in a manner that would be usable just like ADS-B data received over UAT. A 1W transmitter can cover quite a good range.
I'm one of the guys behind this network. I have had to put the test flying on hold while my prop gets overhauled.

The first test batch of 1 watt radios are in production if they test ok we should be able to get a few more test sites going and figure out a good antenna solution.

I've posted a write up in the Aviation Software & Devices subforum but it will need to be approved by a moderator.
pelmet wrote:
Fri Feb 15, 2019 12:56 am
In the US, the only place where VFR aircraftwill require ADS-B is where Mode C transponders are required. Canda has limited areas where VFR aircraft require mode C transponders below 12500'. I really don't think it would be that expensive to install 978 antennas for these location only. If you want to go IFR, then you can get the extended squitter version. Does COPA have much to say about this?
In an ideal world an ADS-B mandate would cover everything that flys but would have different performance levels depending on where you fly. For traffic awareness it is only as good as the number of aircraft equipped.

Want to fly in transponder airspace? Then you need a certified 1090ES transponder.

Want to fly your cub with no electrical system out in the boonies? A low power portable unit should be good enough. The UK is letting people do this and it is pretty cheap to make your aircraft visible via an Electronic Conspicuity device.
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
confusedalot
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 906
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 9:08 pm
Location: location, location, is what matters

Re: Looks like we are going to have to get the expensive ADS-B

Post by confusedalot » Sun Mar 17, 2019 6:41 pm

Pretty soon, with all of the costs involved, nobody is going to be capable of flying airplanes anymore.
The public service strikes again
Money is zero problem for public servants, since they live on taxes. And very well I must say. The rest of you, pay up and cough, cuz I say so.
---------- ADS -----------
  
Attempting to understand the world. I have not succeeded.

veni, vidi,...... vici non fecit.

:?

Helno
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 32
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2019 6:49 am

Re: Looks like we are going to have to get the expensive ADS-B

Post by Helno » Mon Mar 18, 2019 6:16 am

This is Nav Canada. They are a private company run on user fees.

Maintaining old radar sites and nav aids are expensive so they are moving to a system that pushes the costs onto the user.

If you do not go into transponder airspace an ADS-B mandate wont cost you a dime.
---------- ADS -----------
  

L39Guy
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 86
Joined: Mon Apr 08, 2019 10:04 pm
Location: Canada

Re: Looks like we are going to have to get the expensive ADS-B

Post by L39Guy » Wed May 29, 2019 3:33 pm

The following are a few links describing this situation from AOPA and COPA:

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all ... -diversity

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all ... -b-mandate

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all ... ves-closer

https://download.aopa.org/advocacy/2019 ... Letter.pdf

In addition to the lack of interoperability across the border and the duplicate costs for aircraft owners on both sides of the border, the NAV CANADA solution is vastly inferior - no ADS-B In of weather (TAF's, METAR's and ground-based weather radar) as well as Traffic Information System (TIS). TIS paints traffic on your display and is particularly helpful VFR or in uncontrolled airspace. And given how much of Canada is uncontrolled, this would be a big benefit in terms of safety in addition to the weather.
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
AirFrame
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1952
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 10:27 pm
Location: Sidney, BC
Contact:

Re: Looks like we are going to have to get the expensive ADS-B

Post by AirFrame » Thu May 30, 2019 6:42 am

L39Guy wrote:
Wed May 29, 2019 3:33 pm
And given how much of Canada is uncontrolled, this would be a big benefit in terms of safety in addition to the weather.
But only a benefit to you, the pilot flying in that wide open uncontrolled space. It's not a benefit to NavCanada, so they have zero interest in providing that service.
---------- ADS -----------
  

L39Guy
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 86
Joined: Mon Apr 08, 2019 10:04 pm
Location: Canada

Re: Looks like we are going to have to get the expensive ADS-B

Post by L39Guy » Thu May 30, 2019 8:26 am

AirFrame wrote:
Thu May 30, 2019 6:42 am
But only a benefit to you, the pilot flying in that wide open uncontrolled space. It's not a benefit to NavCanada, so they have zero interest in providing that service.
You’re absolutely correct. NAV CANADA is an entity designed to serve itself and its grossly overpaid executives. A terrible governance structure where they are accountable to no one but lapdog BOD members.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Post Reply

Return to “General Comments”