ADSB diversity update?

[Big Pistons Forever]

Is there an official document on what NavCanada's future (or previous) plans are?

No.

Yes, there is.

https://www.navcanada.ca/EN/products-an ... udies.aspx

Fourth one down on that page. In the document that the link opens are links to both the terms of reference and aeronautical study.

The devil is in the details. From your link

Affected Airspace, Timelines and Mandated Performance Requirements
The implementation of the mandate will be in phases. The phases were selected in collaboration with
stakeholders to ensure alignment and interoperability with domestic and international Performance-Based
Navigation (PBN) plans, ATS standards and procedures initiatives and future traffic management and flow
tools.
• Phase 1: Class A airspace and Class E airspace above FL600.
• Phase 2: Class B airspace.
• Beyond Phase 2, no sooner than January 1, 2023, Class C, D and E airspace as required and
following additional stakeholder consultation

The only firm date for the under 12.5 airspace which is the concern of almost all of GA is "not earlier than Jan 1 2023, which is now less than 2 years away. But and this is a big "BUT" is the caveat "following additional stakeholder consultation". AFAIK this consultation has yet to happen.

If you read the text literally my 2 airplanes which are based at an airport with a Class C CZ will not be able to operate without a compliant, and very expensive ADSB unit in less than 2 years. For one of the airplanes installing a GARMIN GTX345D would represent more than half of the value of the airplane.

Personally I am doing nothing because I think the chance the mandate will come into force on Jan 1 2023 is effectively zero. However it sure would be nice if Nav Canada would provide some definitive guidance......

[Histolytica]

Is there an official document on what NavCanada's future (or previous) plans are?

No.

Yes, there is.

https://www.navcanada.ca/EN/products-an ... udies.aspx

Fourth one down on that page. In the document that the link opens are links to both the terms of reference and aeronautical study.

This link is quite helpful, thanks. If you follow it through to the "Aeronautical Study" document, it is quite a comprehensive report of the proposed mandates.

It clearly states the proposed dates are class A Jan 1 2021, class B Jan 1 2022, and other class airspace is basically TBD but not before 2023.
Also it states the proposed mandatory ADSB diversity requirement.

One issue is that these dates and requirements are just proposals at the time of writing that document. As others have pointed out, it is likely that the timeline has changed due to covid and perhaps other factors. Personally, I've decided to try to limp my old transponder through a bit longer until it becomes clear that the proposals have been accepted and I'm required to buy the gtx345D (or equivalent).

Interestingly, the document significantly underestimates the expense of ADSB diversity retro-fits and over estimates the availability of acceptable avionics. I guess they were thinking more about airliners, but they are clearly clueless when it comes to privately owned small GA aircraft.

H

[ahramin]

Is there an official document on what NavCanada's future (or previous) plans are?

No.

Yes, there is.

https://www.navcanada.ca/EN/products-an ... udies.aspx

Fourth one down on that page. In the document that the link opens are links to both the terms of reference and aeronautical study.

Beyond Phase 2, no sooner than January 1, 2023, Class C, D and E airspace as required and following additional stakeholder consultations.

So a published date less than two years away and the requirement is "as required". The study linked to in that document points out that US and EU ADS-B is ground based, but makes no mention whatsoever of any plans for ground based systems in Canada other than the plan to decommission the existing system. I have been told by both NavCanada managers and TC delegates that a ground based system for major class C areas is being considered, but NavCanada refuses to publish any information despite a possible implementation date less than 2 years away.

Keeping in mind that the FAA published very specific requirements 8 years before their implementation date and the EU 5 years prior, how would you suggest we use this document to plan an avionics upgrade? Should everyone spend an extra ten to twenty thousand dollars on diversity based on the above "requirement"? Or just those that are upgrading anyway? Or nobody in their right minds?

[Big Pistons Forever]

Interestingly, the document significantly underestimates the expense of ADSB diversity retro-fits and over estimates the availability of acceptable avionics. I guess they were thinking more about airliners, but they are clearly clueless when it comes to privately owned small GA aircraft.

H

Sadly that is a pretty consistent theme with Nav Canada, but not surprising given the reality it is run by and for the major airlines. One unfortunate challenge for GA is the Mandate for ADSB in the flight levels is an easy one because 85 % of the aircraft flying in the flight levels already have diversity antennas part of their TCAS system and a 1090 ADSB system to operate in the US. The simpler 972 systems are restricted to below FL 180 in the US so not a factor.

With the airlines already pretty much taken care of the incentive for Nav Canada to sort out the GA fit for low level airspace is IMHO not high.....

[ahramin]

they do not claim that it meets all the requirements. Specifically the ON and ground test functions. There is no way to test the suppression, frequency, power, or MTL of the mode A and C functions. So you can certainly take it to the shop and spend the money, but the shop will not be able sign it off.

So how does a shop test those things on a "normal" transponder?

Old ones you just turn them on. Some new ones you have to disable the auto function. Garmin 345 you have to force into a test mode and reboot. It's all in the manuals.

TailBeaconX, not possible. Maybe someday but in the meantime if someone files a noise or low flying complaint about your aircraft and TC wants to see the last transponder and altimeter checks to corroborate your side of the story I'm not sure "I'm planning on doing it as soon as it becomes possible" will be accepted. Happened to a guy in ZBB recently and TC didn't accept "I've only owned the plane a week" as an excuse for not complying with the maintenance schedule.

[RatherBeFlying]

Just put your transponder antenna on top. Ground based radars will see it as long as you're not directly overhead. I've had my carbon fiber glider up at FL200 in the Cowley Block with the antenna through the glareshield and have heard that YEG got all excited that they saw a 1202 code.

[AirFrame]

Old ones you just turn them on. Some new ones you have to disable the auto function. Garmin 345 you have to force into a test mode and reboot. It's all in the manuals.

TailBeaconX, not possible.

How do you know it's not possible? What do you actually do to test them? TailBeaconX has Off/Stby, On, Alt, and Mode S modes settable from the control head. There is also a maintenance/setup menu that allows more. What, specifically, are you saying they have to do to be tested? What's different between "just turning an old one on" and "just turning the TailBeaconX on"?

[ahramin]

Old ones you just turn them on. Some new ones you have to disable the auto function. Garmin 345 you have to force into a test mode and reboot. It's all in the manuals.

TailBeaconX, not possible.

How do you know it's not possible? What do you actually do to test them? TailBeaconX has Off/Stby, On, Alt, and Mode S modes settable from the control head. There is also a maintenance/setup menu that allows more. What, specifically, are you saying they have to do to be tested? What's different between "just turning an old one on" and "just turning the TailBeaconX on"?

None of those options will transmit mode A or C data if the groundspeed is zero. They are all auto settings and there is no test mode allowing the auto part to be overridden. I've been through all the manuals and several phone calls with uAvionix. They suggested a few workarounds which did not work and then stopped returning calls. I'm doubtful they will bother fixing this problem anytime soon since they don't see it as a problem. NavCanada has approved them for testing and that's it. When I pointed out that NavCanada doesn't make the rules and will not be the one to issue the fines when the users get caught, they said it was all approved through NavCanada.

Appendix F is clear on what needs to be tested and when. All other manufacturers understand the rules and have modes that allow these tests. Worst case is Garmin where occasionally you have to have a specific cable and plug directly into the transponder with their software but that's up to the person working on these systems to have the correct equipment. uAvionix seems to be operating under the "CARs don't apply to homebuilts" mentality sometimes found in Canada.

[AirFrame]

None of those options will transmit mode A or C data if the groundspeed is zero. They are all auto settings and there is no test mode allowing the auto part to be overridden.

Interesting. I'll reach out to my contact at uAvionix and see what he has to say about this. Are you certain you're talking about the TailBeaconX, not just the TailBeacon?

[bidshader]

they do not claim that it meets all the requirements. Specifically the ON and ground test functions. There is no way to test the suppression, frequency, power, or MTL of the mode A and C functions. So you can certainly take it to the shop and spend the money, but the shop will not be able sign it off.

I'm wondering if there's any new information on this since the TSO version was released? I see in the April 30 2022 version (https://uavionix.com/downloads/tailbeac ... ev%20B.pdf) of the install manual the following note:

Mode S transponders must only respond to Mode S Only AllCalls when airborne. TailBeaconX can be placed in an airborne state for test purposes by entering “Ground Test Mode” using the installer application, or by using certain compatible control heads. For more details see Section 9.5.

In 9.5 they say:

To aid in performance of regulatory compliance checks, Ground Test Mode forces the tailBeaconX into an airborne state until the device is
power cycled. This ensures that the device will respond to Mode S Only All-Calls, which occurs only when airborne.

So it seems like Mode S will be testable on the ground in this unit unless I (very possible) misunderstood?

[OldInstructor]

I believe the issue is not what NavCanada plans or wants. TC will need to add the requirement to 605 to be required.