Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 11
#1693799
I 'think' it can be summarised as:

If you have a Transponder compatible with PAW (for ADSB Out) then this is cheapest and best way to get EC - you will see more (ADSB, PAW, Transponder to some extent) and save money at the same time! :D

If you don't have a Transponder then Sky Echo might be a good choice. Although it is more expensive you will get ADSB Out which looks likely to be the Standard in the future. However, you will not see some traffic that PAW would have seen (e.g. other PAW users and Transponder only traffic), but on the plus side most other AC will see you (Both SE and PAW users).

If you have a Transponder that is not compatible with PAW then you cant have ADSB out (not withstanding the Transponder already having ADSB Out itself through other means) :( As such Sky Echo is pointless expense since you have to disable ADSB-Out so would suggest again PAW is the better option. It is cheaper, you will see more AC (both SE and PAW equiped planes) , and at least some AC will see you (other PAW users).

Probably got something wrong here but trying to get my own head around it all too! :D
Last edited by AlanK on Thu May 16, 2019 9:50 am, edited 1 time in total.
#1693800
I think the ADSB and mode S element complicates things a bit, but if you have neither of those and want a useful aid to 'see and avoid', then it's crystal clear to many already that PAW is an uncomplicated and very effective tool. I don't really understand how this message is confusing people. Nobody would say 'No thanks, I won't wear any motorcycle leathers as I'm not sure if the new versions with built-in airbags are going to become the dominant technology..' You would just buy the leathers and be safer than with no leathers at all. It's baffling that people would choose not to spend the £140 or whatever for a PAW because they think it might not make them safer. If you're on a mega-tight budget then fair enough, or if you're allergic to injection moulded plastic boxes then I'll understand. Would these people also tell their passengers to keep quiet if they spot traffic?
#1693803
@Miscellaneous
Is there a need for locally ground based stations for some of the info?


Yes; for some of the info, basically Flarm and Mode S multilateration.

The Flarm reports from other aircraft are basically received and then re-broadcast from ground stations via the Open Glider Network (OGN)....the 'R' is the rebroadcast bit. Your PAW will receive these reports when you're near a ground station because it sees your PAW transmissions and knows you're close by. Obviously if there are no rebroadcasting sites then you won't get and Flarm targets into your PAW, even though there may be gliders etc nearby. Therefore , the more people that rig up a rebroadcasting site to the side of their house the better.

The Mode S multilateration will give the position of a Mode S transponder, instead of it just being bearingless ('cos Mode S doesn't carry position in its message). If I understand the system correctly a whole heap of 'local' stations around the country (360Radar) see a target's Mode S and basically triangulate the position. This position is fed through the 360Radar system and makes its way to your aircraft. I believe this is done in a similar way to OGNR i.e. through the PAW frequency from the same rebroadcast stations as Flarm but I will now go and see if I can check this fact.

SO, with no local stations you will always see ADS-B emitting targets, PAW emitting targets and bearingless Mode C/S. With local stations you have the ability to receive Flarm targets and positional Mode S (once it's released), in addition to the other things.

Edited to add this simple explanation, without my guesswork :D
https://pilotaware.com/modes3d/
Last edited by PaulSS on Thu May 16, 2019 9:58 am, edited 1 time in total.
Boxkite liked this
#1693804
Maxthelion wrote:In answer to Alan K's last post - thanks, that's a good summary, but it's important to note there aren't (as far as I know) any transponders that PAW isn't compatible with.


See my earlier rant about FUNKE Transponders ;)

Your comments about Leathers is another excellent analogy - I just don't get why people seem to dismiss and resist these things, whether the excuse is the potential standardisation (god knows when in the future), or the blind faith in their ability to spot every aircraft around them.

Although the PAW is a bit more expensive now than you quoted it is still less than 1/2(?) the cost of SE and equivalent £ to only a few flights if not less for most.

I do prefer PAW to SE having ran them both side by side but my lack of ADSB Out bugs me! Mode S 3d / Multilateration thingy is going to be awesome if that works out! :D
#1693813
Maxthelion wrote:it's important to note there aren't (as far as I know) any transponders that PAW isn't compatible with.


To be clear here, if the transponder supports ADS-B out (often called extended squitter), then you are almost certainly able to use PAW as a GPS source for it (certainly on permit aircraft, likely now on CofA aircraft following a revision to CS-STAN).

However, many older transponders do not support it, including some quite common models. Some of these can be upgraded (either hardware or firmware upgrades), but that is often not cheap.

Given the confusion which exists around all this I'm getting tempted to put together a little interactive site which asks you about your transponder etc and then tells you what some of your options are for in/out, making clear what you could see and who could see you in each case, to make it easier for people to decide what to do - do people think that would be useful?
#1693817
Yes and no, Unless you can be sure they actually do work it may be pronlematic to try and list them out. Eg ATR833 should work.. but only with a certain FW and HW version - and I have seen comments about them not working - would need to be sure what the issue is if your guide was to be any value.

I think it is basically - If you have a Transponder, whether it may work or not, you get a PAW and hope that it does. Meantime await a standardisation and see what falls out of that.
#1693829
Given the confusion which exists around all this I'm getting tempted to put together a little interactive site which asks you about your transponder etc and then tells you what some of your options are for in/out, making clear what you could see and who could see you in each case, to make it easier for people to decide what to do - do people think that would be useful?

Excellent idea.
A flow chart demonstrating the various options, merits, demerits etc would be great, if difficult to achieve!
#1693832
AlanK wrote:...but flying around the middle of the Cairngorms there is not much other than best efforts from Scottish and of course the infallible eyeball :cyclopsani: so....

PAW is the most cost effective way to see what else is out there at moment but need to appreciate limitations.

Certainly can't disagree with that and Katamarino's flight south the other day demonstrated the value of having Flarm alerts, with him at 5000 feet and gliders 4000 +. :thumright: Another example I can think of recently is when an overtaking aircraft passed us just north of the Forth Bridges passing very close to Portmoak. Speaking to the occupants later I got the feeling they didn't know it was there. However, from what I read here the greatest benefit is in the congested areas where the number of aircraft is much greater and they are forced closer together by controlled airspace.

@PaulSS , thanks for your post above which confirms what I believed without understanding the detail. Again it demonstrates PAW is less useful in the Highlands.
#1693842
However, from what I read here the greatest benefit is in the congested areas where the number of aircraft is much greater and they are forced closer together by controlled airspace.

Perversely I find that the time I am least likely to take any notice of constant traffic alerts is when flying in the circuit or otherwise congested areas. The traffic information can be constant and overwhelming, and I find I mentally switch off and concentrate on the single most important job in hand, whether it be setting up the aircraft for landing, simply flying the aircraft, or looking out of the window for traffic.
#1693853
flybymike wrote:
Given the confusion which exists around all this I'm getting tempted to put together a little interactive site which asks you about your transponder etc and then tells you what some of your options are for in/out, making clear what you could see and who could see you in each case, to make it easier for people to decide what to do - do people think that would be useful?

Excellent idea.
A flow chart demonstrating the various options, merits, demerits etc would be great, if difficult to achieve!

Don't forget to add options for those who fly various aircraft with unknown fitments of equipment (rented, etc)
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 11