Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
  • 1
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 19
#1828206
MattL wrote:I suspect lots of people are merrily transmitting SDA=1 from their SkyEchos without any issue


I'm sure that's true: But either CAP1391 is important, or it isn't.

The person who will be chased, if any chasing occurs, will be the owner - not the person in uAvionix who decided to silently change the default.

Given the zero tolerance seen elsewhere within the CAA, it's not an unreasonable concern.

(This is what erosion of trust does, Grant)
Stu B liked this
#1828208
Cub wrote:I was of course, referring to the ‘need’ to change the setting when transiting between Australia and the UK ....


:lol: :lol: :lol: I was just wondering how many SE2 buyers regularly fly their GA chariot between Australia and the UK...especially in the last year... :wink:

Regards, SD..
Stu B, cockney steve liked this
#1828212
Dave W wrote:
Cub wrote:... the necessity for customers in the UK to change the default value, pending a reissuing of CAP1391.

Given that CAP1391 is not yet amended to allow SDA=1 transmission, and that it is not only the UK that doesn't allow that to be transmitted (e.g. the US don't either, according to the User Guide - it would appear to be only Australia that does), wouldn't it be more sensible for the default to be set to SDA=0 so that customers do not inadvertently transmit incorrectly/illegally?

After all, it's not as though the relevance of the SDA setting is particularly highlighted or otherwise obvious in the User Manual.

It previously defaulted to SDA=0 (and I have just checked that it wasn't amended on my ~2yo device by a recent firmware update: It wasn't ).

It does seem as though it isn't the best thing for uAvionix to do to anticipate a change to CAP1391 that is not yet in force.


Dave

We described to the CAA our proposal to change the default setting and the amendments to the supporting manual and they agreed it was a pragmatic way to progress pending the re-working of CAP1391.

I am afraid you are not going to goad me into suggesting that flying in UK airspace with SDA=1 and the additional safety benefit enabled, doesn’t matter but I do feel we have taken the responsible path given the current transitionary situation.
#1828214
I'm not attempting to goad anybody.

I am pointing out that a default of SDA=1 in the UK is at variance with CAP1391 and, AIUI, potentially illegal.

I'm surprised you are comfortable with that, and even more surprised that your response is to go on the attack.
Smaragd, townleyc, Stu B and 1 others liked this
#1828219
Cub wrote:I also understand you feel that your previous investments in Mode S and 8.33 have delivered little for you and am wondering then, what you are hoping is going to be different with SkyEcho?


I don't know yet, I'll let you know as soon as our wonderfully talented, goal post moving PM allows us to go flying and enjoy ourselves :roll:

I don't recall an occasion when using an 8.33 kHz radio/Mode S transponder has allowed me to do anything that I wouldn't have done before with Mode A, Mode C or 25kHz spacing radio (It was an avionics upgrade after I bought the aeroplane). It hasn't opened up a world of extra opportunities or airspace access for my type of flying, and I guess SE2 might be the same. Visibility to others and vice versa might happen but only if everyone is doing the same thing.
#1828226
JodelDavo wrote:
Cub wrote:I also understand you feel that your previous investments in Mode S and 8.33 have delivered little for you and am wondering then, what you are hoping is going to be different with SkyEcho?


I don't know yet, I'll let you know as soon as our wonderfully talented, goal post moving PM allows us to go flying and enjoy ourselves :roll:

I don't recall an occasion when using an 8.33 kHz radio/Mode S transponder has allowed me to do anything that I wouldn't have done before with Mode A, Mode C or 25kHz spacing radio (It was an avionics upgrade after I bought the aeroplane). It hasn't opened up a world of extra opportunities or airspace access for my type of flying, and I guess SE2 might be the same. Visibility to others and vice versa might happen but only if everyone is doing the same thing.


Full circle then. I was originally celebrating that the spend so far seems to be towards enabling a unified standard ADS-B Out. I hope you find that the spend supports you well, this time.
#1828228
If we could fly normally, I'd suspect most wouldn't be transmitting anything. And as for safety, that is the best assumption.

I would like to think my little investment a few days ago would have a safety benefit but until it is legal to set SDA=1 then I regard it as a 'FR24 add-on'. I fly for fun and it's a nice toy. Nothing I've read on this forum today has come close to convincing me otherwise.
#1828232
Aeronca Alan wrote:If we could fly normally, I'd suspect most wouldn't be transmitting anything. And as for safety, that is the best assumption.

I would like to think my little investment a few days ago would have a safety benefit but until it is legal to set SDA=1 then I regard it as a 'FR24 add-on'. I fly for fun and it's a nice toy. Nothing I've read on this forum today has come close to convincing me otherwise.


Alan. Very few of the aircraft you are going to encounter outside of controlled airspace are going to fail to detect you because your device is set to SDA = 0. Having said that, I detect and share your frustration that your investment, that has been built and certified to achieve that standard, is artificially prevented from doing so, awaiting an amendment to a CAP.

Rest assured, that a rapidly increasing number of aircraft equipped with various gadgets of all flavours, will be perfectly capable of detecting and reacting to your ADS-B emission.
Last edited by Cub on Mon Feb 22, 2021 7:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.
gaznav liked this
#1828235
GAFlyer4Fun wrote:
Marvin wrote:Among the reasons I have come across: .....

How about saving up for UPRT training? .... statistically loss of control is a bigger problem than bumping into another aircraft.
It would be great if the CAA did a financial incentive for UPRT. It is mandatory training for new wannabe airline cadets.Wonder if a grant for this life saving training would be more popular than the EC grant?


VRB_20kt wrote:What’s UPRT?

Fair question: malcolmfrost correctly replied:
malcolmfrost wrote:Upset Recovery training. Low and slow, high and slow or fast, also known as unusual attitudes.

UPRT stands for UPset Recovery Training; it would really help the wider aviation community if Posters would explain acronyms that might be common parlance to them that are not common knowledge to others :thumleft:

UPRT came about slowly in the commercial world, but gained acceleration after the Colgan Buffalo crash (Wiki here and NTSB Report here)

I'm just as guilty for not explaining abbreviations and acronyms adequately, and I acknowledge that in our flying world, there are many of them!

Cub wrote: Trying not to fall foul of RobL’s subject police ;-)
Thanks for the acknowledgement, but after therapy I'm a little more relaxed about that now, Cub. I have a new bone to chew. :wink:

Rob

p.s For The Avoidance Of Doubt :wink: , (and in the spirit of the thread); through the Department for Transport scheme (it was never a CAA scheme...they just administered it), I purchased an SE2 (Sky Echo 2)
Cub liked this
#1828257
Rob L wrote:UPRT stands for UPset Recovery Training; it would really help the wider aviation community if Posters would explain acronyms that might be common parlance to them that are not common knowledge to others :thumleft:


I used the acronym as it has existed for a few years, and Flyer magazine and other magazines have done multiple page feature articles about it, notably in 2019.

https://www.flyer.co.uk/tag/uprt/
#1828264
GAFlyer4Fun wrote:I used the acronym as it has existed for a few years, and Flyer magazine and other magazines have done multiple page feature articles about it, notably in 2019.

https://www.flyer.co.uk/tag/uprt/


It appears well overdue for a refresher to educate the rest of us, then. :!:

(A bit like 6-month Simulator training for ATPLs ) :wink:

All the best,
Rob
GAFlyer4Fun liked this
#1828342
ls8pilot wrote:It may just be worth reminding ourselves that this stuff (whether it be Flarm, PAW or SE2) does work. ..2019 BGA Accident summary.. It had an interesting chart on MAC, looking Glider:Glider and Glider:Other over the last 45 years. You can see a distinct reduction in Glider;Glider since Flarm started to be introduced around 2005 after 15 years upward trend.

Hopefully adoption of more EC and better interoperability will start to reduce the "Blue" bars. ..........


slightly pertinent to above, BBC News site today gists the AAIB summary of a glider:bizjet Cat A Airprox in Suffolk in September:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-56130857

".. "Cambridge controller was busy attempting to obtain a concise position report from a glider which had reported approaching the airfield".

It added: "It was during this conversation that the Falcon pilot had an Airprox [incident] with another glider which was not working the Cambridge frequency and which did not appear to have any collision avoidance equipment.".."

Presumably, this implies that glider did not have FLARM, but even with it, it would not have helped unless either bizjet or Cambridge controller were equipped to detect it. If it means that glider did not have ADS-out eg SE2, even with it but with SDA=0 presumably neither bizjet nor Secondary Radar at Cambridge (is there ?) would have displayed it.

Without any knowledge of more than the BBC report, is this evidence for rapid CAA action to allow SDA=1 in SE2 setups ? Happy to be corrected/enlightened by the better-informed whether technically or on this incident.
ls8pilot liked this
#1828357
The original report:
https://www.airproxboard.org.uk/uploade ... 020109.pdf

No mention of FLARM indeed.

No mention of ADS-B in on the Falcon.

(Secondary Radar at Cambridge irrelevant. SSR will never show ADS-B. Doesn't matter if SDA=0 or 999)

The glider does show on the NATS PSR. But that doesn't mean it would have on Cambridge PSR if it was manned.
kanga liked this
#1828361
Out of curiosity - how many CAT and TCAS equipped GA aircraft can show ADS-B only (so not Mode-ACS) traffic? TCAS itself doesn't use ADS-B for collision avoidance, so even if the glider had been carrying a Sky Echo and broadcasting its position on ADS-B (SDA / SIL 0 or 1), would the falcon have been able to see it or be warned about it?
  • 1
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 19