Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7

If aviation data where available via UAT in the UK, how should it be deployed and funded?

UAT data services should be free to use if I am transmitting ADS-B.
52
50%
I would be prepared to pay a subscription fee for UAT data.
17
16%
I have no interest in UAT data and would not use the service.
13
12%
If UAT data cannot be ‘free for all’ users, it should not be deployed.
23
22%
User avatar
By G-BLEW
Boss Man  Boss Man
#1566843
Hi Keith

Not been able to try the glider info myself yet, but what's the typical lag?

Thanks

Ian
User avatar
By gaznav
#1566848
Keith

If you PM me your email address I can put you in touch with the chap that put it in.

Best

Gaz
User avatar
By Keith Vinning
#1566850
Hi Ian

No lag other than the speed of radio transmission glider to antenna through the Pi and then up to the Pilotaware unit. (not as fast as the speed of light in the atmosphere). We don't use the internet in the process other than to put the aircraft on the servers for SAR applications such as 'Spot the Gliders, OGN, FR24' etc then there will be the WWW lag ( a few to quite a few seconds by the time it has come back to your computer) .

So for detection and retransmission air to ground to air VRT (Virtual real time). No lag.

The other interesting bit (someone may ask), is that we use a process which we call reverse IFF, such that if there is no PilotAware unit detected in the location we don't transmit the glider locations hence no bandwidth clutter. Once a GPS location is broadcast, lots of interesting stuff can be done and is being done.
G-BLEW liked this
User avatar
By gaznav
#1566879
What would be really neat from my perspective would be to use the 978 UAT to rebroadcast the OGN picture and also the non-ADSBout Mode A/C/S users plus possibly the PAW-only users (which are probably quite small in number as I believe most PAW users have transponders). That would be quite a challenge to correlate, but not impossible. Then we would have a system that broadcasts all air users apart from those that have nothing - but then they have a choice, a £200 PAW, a £600 SkyEcho or a £1600 transponder to be seen or a £600 SkyEcho to be seen or see everyone plus in flight weather.

Here is a picture of the system in the US. To make my suggestion happen our architecture would need to be subtly different but similar.

Image
T67M liked this
User avatar
By leemoore1966
#1566916
Hi Gaz
gaznav wrote:but then they have a choice, a £200 PAW, a £600 SkyEcho or a £1600 transponder


Just for clarity, are the costs you are quoting, inclusive or exclusive of :-
- VAT
- Duty

Thx
Lee
User avatar
By nickwilcock
#1566931
It's taken quite a while for even a low power 978MHz UAT trial to be agreed and that doesn't yet include TIS-B traffic uplink.

If 1090ES out can be observed not to be confusing the NATS system if a Mode S position is being reported from the same platform, that will be an excellent next step. Whether unlicensed 868MHz devices will be accepted by NATS as adequate position references for their picture, I very much doubt.

Low-cost Sky Echo 1090ES in/out plus 978UAT FIS-B and filtered TIS-B will probably become the preferred solution, particularly if intelligent algorithms will generate only valid threat warning, rather than nuisance alerts from traffic that, though nearby, is not a collision risk.

FLARM will probably suffice for sailplane work - and for aircraft operating in the vicinity of high intensity gliding sites. But that's about its limit, to my mind.
By low&slow
#1566938
If a low cost 1090ES in/out with collision avoidance algorithms becomes available then Flarm becomes redundant. Glider pilots will happily move to an affordable universal system provided it retains the collision avoidance warnings that make Flarm the only option for gliders.

Flarm only exists because nothing else would do the job at the time. The CAA were happily punting compulsory Mode S as the solution to everything, glider pilots saw it as £5,000 down the drain for no benefit.
User avatar
By gaznav
#1566962
leemoore1966 wrote:Hi Gaz
gaznav wrote:but then they have a choice, a £200 PAW, a £600 SkyEcho or a £1600 transponder


Just for clarity, are the costs you are quoting, inclusive or exclusive of :-
- VAT
- Duty

Thx
Lee


Roughly the cost inc VAT I think. PAW is roughly £200 inc VAT but plus a subscription, SkyEcho is £600 inc VAT on AmazonUK without any required subscription and a Trig TT21 Mode S is roughly £1600 (again without any subscription.

Do you think that’s wrong, Lee? I think it’s right unless you can tell me different.

Best

Gaz
By TheArb
#1606315
Not the first time someone has called a poll then walked when the shock of it not going their way has sunk in. Ask David Cameron about that one. Someone once said to me’ Never call for a vote unless you already know the result’. Good advice if you’ve got a delicate stomach.
User avatar
By G-BLEW
Boss Man  Boss Man
#1606319
TheArb wrote:Not the first time someone has called a poll then walked when the shock of it not going their way has sunk in. Ask David Cameron about that one. Someone once said to me’ Never call for a vote unless you already know the result’. Good advice if you’ve got a delicate stomach.


Eh?
Dave W, gaznav liked this
User avatar
By Tim Dawson
SkyDemon developer
#1606324
TheArb wrote:Not the first time someone has called a poll then walked when the shock of it not going their way has sunk in. Ask David Cameron about that one. Someone once said to me’ Never call for a vote unless you already know the result’. Good advice if you’ve got a delicate stomach.


What were you hoping to achieve with that contribution, six months after the last post?
User avatar
By Dave Phillips
#1606336
Indeed. The sort of post a mild-mannered Keef would have donked.

Anyway, back to the discussion as we are six months downstream - it would be interesting to see whether there is any more clarity where we think EC/FIS/TIS/UAT etc are going.
Iceman, gaznav liked this
User avatar
By Dave W
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1606338
Well, my reading is that the CAA/uAvionix/Skydemon trial seems to be going well, from the public information released.

The technical issues (for several of those functions, at least) seem well in hand; what's less clear are the spectrum licensing and regulatory aspects but even there I have to say it seems positive otherwise there wouldn't be approvals being granted for additional ground stations, as we see to be the case.

It would be good to get a glimpse into the strategic thinking such as what does a map to the future look like and what are the trial success criteria, but that doesn't stop me as an outside observer feeling very positive about it.

Making it even this far requires congratulations to the 3 (more?) parties involved, I think.
gaznav, kanga, ivor.phillips liked this
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7