Thanks @Cub for answering. I’ve been busy the past 24 hours.
@Cessna571
Gaznav has to at least admit it works.
Btw, whatever happened to ShoestringFlyer? He was much more anti PAW than Gaznav is.
I do admit it works - in fact some of it works very well indeed. I believe, as a receiver, for carry on kit, then the PAW is a great piece of kit. So, if I had a transponder based ADS-B solution (soon to be seen in the aircraft in my avatar) then PAW would be a good solution. Although, if I just wanted FLARM and ADS-B receive only, I would probably consider the $299 ForeFlight Sentry Mini as it is self powered and smaller. The ground station idea for the other great ‘bells and whistles’ of PAW is great too, but as an amateur provisioned network it does rely on continued goodwill. I don’t think that is the way to provision something that is supposed to assure our collective safety.
However, my biggest criticism of PAW has
always been around the use of 869.525MHz for its transmissions - so far only one device that meets all of the stringent testing requirements will ‘handshake’ with it, and that’s another PAW. I’ve since found out that the Euro Stratux and SoftRF is unlawful for use in the UK, which are the only other PAW capable devices I am aware of. There is a reason for that, I suspect, in that other manufacturers don’t believe there is a big enough market share in detecting and transmitting the PAW signal format as PAW have that zipped up. Further, as it is not a globally reserved frequency for aviation use, there is a risk it might not be usable around the world (I don’t know if there is or isn’t an agreement to use that frequency in every country), but also other global users may use it for other things that could cause interference or even deny its use.
If you want to see ADS-B working with 11, 927 different aircraft - all with ADS-B working - then look at the Oshkosh arrivals videos from the last few days:
https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?lat=43. ... ideButtons
Wouldn’t it be amazing if we had an integrated system like this in the UK? Everyone capable of seeing each other and detecting each other? Surely, this is where any mandate should be heading, rather than the chaotic approach we currently have in the UK? I agree with @Cessna571’s sentiment and I am sorry to hear that they have had a near miss that frightened them. It’s so unnecessary and it revolves around the inaction and leadership of our regulator and ministry. Totally unnecessary and the mid air collision risk is by no way ALARP (as low as reasonably practicable).
That is why I am passionate about this and invite the ‘pile on’ each time - if my social media discomfort helps save a life, then why wouldn’t I want to try and have that discussion on the best way forward for EC on here?
FLYER Club Member
