Messages

1

Technical Support / Re: Incorrect GPS position sent to Trig TT22

« on: September 01, 2022, 05:22:48 pm »

Hmm. Still a bit confused here. I created that waypoint in SD using the text input format: N5038.9 W00111.1 and it puts it about 100m away. Is that the correct input format for SD for this co-ordinate? Really confusing these decimal degrees! Or is the ±100m a reasonable error?

Have you tried

N50.389 and W001.111

A

2

General Discussion / Re: TruTrak autopilot query

« on: March 23, 2022, 08:20:10 am »

I did have an EKP V driving a trutrack and had no problems.

Both units were connected to the same earth bus for power and so was the GND pin on TXa. As you say there is only one wire to the trutrak.

Another thing to check is that you have the correct messages out from the EKP V which you can select in the settings menu alongside the baud rate.

Another trick is to put in a route in the EKP V and activate it as from memory there were no messages if no active route in one version of the software. A GOTO would be an active route.

Hope that helps.

3

Technical Support / Re: ADSB

« on: March 11, 2021, 06:21:13 pm »

I use the get your wings app and in my experience I have had to remove the antenna from the SDR receiver or at least set it horizontal when in proximity to a full transponder on the ground to prevent receiver saturation.

It also has the effect of reducing the number of other replies from passing traffic so the one under test is easier to find.

There is also a gain control in the settings part of get your wings app that may also help.

4

Technical Support / Re: LAA refuse approval to connect Pilotaware to Funke transponder (ADSB out)

« on: January 20, 2021, 06:42:46 pm »

The LAA have indicated they are discussing direct with FUNKE.

5

Technical Support / Re: PAW not seeing Skyecho

« on: January 20, 2021, 06:41:42 pm »

Before you start sending anything back might I suggest that you either place the ADS-B antenna on PAW horizontally or remove altogether. I have done this on occasions when I suspect the receiver is just been saturated by the proximity of the transmitter which can occurs at the distances you mention in your post.

PaulSS ADS-B is used extensively to track ground vehicles moving around the airfield on the GMR especially around the taxiways and runway. Not much used made of Mode-S transponders on ground vehicles and certainly generally no link between the Flight Activations systems or stand management as generally that is done by other means.

40 years as an Air Traffic Engineer.

6

General Discussion / Re: TCAS

« on: May 03, 2018, 09:43:56 am »

So, I have a Trig Mode S transponder and ADS-B out in my aeroplane. My ADS-B out has a SIL=0 setting.

Will TCAS respond to my transponder transmissions if a flight risk is probable?
I don't think my ADS-B Out data will be processed due to the SIL flag setting.

Thanks

Tony

This is a “Wikipedia” on TCAS.

 Basically the answer is that TCAS will respond to your mode S transponder but not the ADS-B output and provide a resolution for CAT to avoid the conflict.

Unlike the general 1090 Rx in GA aircraft the CAT TCAS is an interrogator so will determine a range an bearing from them and if you have mode C a relative altitude.

7

Technical Support / Re: Testing ADSB using the pilotaware

« on: April 13, 2018, 09:53:57 am »

As the majority of these aircraft are taking their GPS feed from the spare port on the Pilotaware we have not been able to turn off the pilotaware and I ac concerned to remove the P3i antenna for fear of damaging the output stage of the Pilotaware board.

Any solutions would be appreciated.

Kind regards


john

Would temperarily changing the A/C id in the pilot aware for the aircraft under test solve the problem. That way the PAW would see two separate targets, ADS-B and PAW responses, at the same location but list them as independent targets.

8

Technical Support / Re: Pilotaware and Weather info

« on: August 16, 2017, 11:16:44 pm »

Try the recent announcement from the CAA

9

General Discussion / Re: Echo-ATT-20B

« on: January 16, 2017, 01:24:37 pm »

Now I understand thanks lee.


One other question you asked was availability of test documents.

The CAA audit the evidence supplied by manufactures and expect appropriate test a documentation and results to be available from the supplers/manufacturers verifying against published standards. In the case of cap1391 all the ref docs are in the public domain although you may need a subscription to gain access to the up to date ones. If you google them you may just get old copies.

As Cub said NATS and caa Staff are unable to offer business related answers to questions on public domain.

Hope that helps

Alan

10

General Discussion / Re: Echo-ATT-20B

« on: January 16, 2017, 09:36:30 am »

From CAP 1391

So entirely within the specification of the CAP on the device approval  and therefore an assumption that the device providing the alerts/display resolves the difference.

IMHO therefore not a flaw in the design.

I don't agree with your assumption however that it its the responsibility of the provider of the alerts/display to resolve differences between this and Baro Driven ADSB transmitters.

My reading of the CAP is that if fitting a baro, the EC system must provide a means of checking/ calibrating the barometer via the EC Unit's Status Display - e.g. in the case of the Echo, (if a baro was incorporated) via its 'Control App' Screen. I certainly don't read this as placing any responsibility to resolve height variations on 3rd party (e.g. Nav) system providers.

IMHO a somewhat wooly concept, however, for a supposed aviation safety system!!

Regards

Peter

I think I see where we differ.

I was referring to the fact that Lee was concerned that the PING Device was only transmitting GPS altitude and no Baro therefore any device comparing altitude from a Ping Device with GPs Altitude and a Device with Baro only altitude would have a significant difference when it comes to alerting especially with the differences in pressure we have been experiencing lately. The device alerting the pilot to a possible target in an relative altitude band would have to resolve and difference between Baro and GPS and therefore detect which reference the transmitting device is using.

Sounds more complicated to write than say so I hope you see what I mean.

As to a Safety System, having written many Safety Cases for my former employer, if I was to tackle the safety Case it would have the lowest, if any, risk factors as it is not the primary means of providing separation IMHO. In VFR the Mk One Eyeball is the primary means for both pilots and an electronic conspicuity is an aid. As an aid to the pilot to claim any thing higher would increase the design mitigation that would have to be applied and therefore cost.

Kind Regards

Alan

11

General Discussion / Re: Echo-ATT-20B

« on: January 15, 2017, 12:48:15 pm »

Hi Sean

I am very interested to hear your findings.
It appears there is a serious flaw regarding the altitude reporting for skyecho,
This is due to the fact it has no barometric sensor
Details here

https://forums.flyer.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=102806&hilit=Pilotaware&start=60#p1512134

This will be most prominint on days when the pressure is significantly off from 1013.25

Thx
Lee

From CAP 1391

AMC 1391-4.12: Altitude data
Refer to RTCA DO-260B/EUROCAE ED-102A §2.2.5.1.5 a. for pressure altitude or b. for GNSS HAE.
It is envisaged that a Basic/transmit-only device would report GNSS height, whereas a more elaborate Intermediate device may use a barometric altitude sensor. Suitable provision to set up an EC device incorporating a barometric altitude sensor should be  made, ie as part of a status display. Also, the operating manual should provide sufficient information for this to be practically achievable.

If capable, the EC device may provide GNSS Height Above the Ellipsoid (HAE) in accordance with RTCA DO-260B/EUROCAE ED-102A §2.2.5.1.5 b.

So entirely within the specification of the CAP on the device approval  and therefore an assumption that the device providing the alerts/display resolves the difference.

IMHO therefore not a flaw in the design.

12

General Discussion / Re: FL*RM Integration - Beta Testers

« on: August 02, 2016, 11:35:58 pm »

I chose the PowerFlarm route in the end and it works very well for me as I operate in an area with lots of glider activity.

Out of the box, fitted new batteries and works first time. Self contained with no trailing antennae cables.

I have a built in GPS in the aircraft which does not have WiFi but happily feeds the Transponder so I have ADS-B out as well. A tablet with the associated software would be additional expense for me and a device i don't need.

Bottom line is people have a choice and you pays your money.

Each to their own.

13

General Discussion / Re: Ground Based Transponders

« on: May 27, 2016, 10:32:39 pm »

Don't forget that ADS-B is also designed for use by airside ground vehicles to aid collision aviodance while taxying, or to help ensure the runway is clear just prior to take-off. Maybe there is a flag in the ADS-B messages that indicates these are ground vehicles. I have not looked.

I also recall some discussion about NATS putting an ADS-B Out device on a crane as a trial. Don't know whether that actually happened.

Steve

Steve,
You are correct but currently the vehicle transponders are Mode S with no ES enabled at this time. The only ADSB network in UK is the development one used to provide the evidence for levels of accuracy and integrity analysis required to eventually allow operational use. No idea of timescales.

The Runway incursion monitoring is not just SSR based as not all incursions conveniently carry a transponder.

An ADSB out device on a London Crane was tried, and may still be, as part of the work after the incident in London between a Helicopeter and Crane. No idea what codes they were using but it was in the NOTAMS.

The SSR code allocation table in ENR 1.6 is the best way of deciding which codes are used for what reason and then Determining if they are of interest to an ADSB in or Mode S  detection device or not.

14

General Discussion / Re: Ground Based Transponders

« on: May 27, 2016, 05:00:43 pm »

I've never seen a squawk code associated with those hex codes, despite being told that they are test codes.
I have asked ATC where else in the uk this system has been installed...I recall Cardiff & Bristol and 3/4 others but will confirm.

Regards
Pete

I think you will find that all SSR Radar Sites have an associated Ground Based Transponder which is set to a low power and usually on a Yagi, I speak as an ex NATS Radar Engineer.

As there are a number of these throughout the UK for en-route and Airport Services then you may come across them on PiWare. The ones associated with a rotating antenna usually have a directional antenna therefore unlikely you will often see them unless between it and the associated radar head.

With the introduction of Multi-lateration SSR interrogation  to replace the the rotating antenna systems there are a number of fixed Receiver Antennae in a Matrix with an associated set of fixed base Tx sites that transmit the 1030 interrogation pulses and the received 1090 signals are then processed to produce target position form the response - they are Mode A/C and S compliant and currently not enabled for ADSB. Aircraft Positions are calculated from the received signal in space to each antenna using timing, direction and a complex algorithm in a fast processing system.

Isle of Mann was one of the earlier systems together with a number of others at Airports and North Sea. They are also used around the world and in some countries ADS-B enabled where the matrix is substantially large and covering areas that conventional rotating antenna systems are difficult. An ADS-B receiver in a mountain top could be solar powered and only require a fibre link of even a low powered microwave link to get the information back to the user.

In this case the fixed transponder is using a dipole as a number of receivers need to receive the signal in order for its position to be calculated and the system verify it continues to meet the monitoring of positional accuracy requirements.

Alan

15

General Discussion / Re: Ground Based Transponders

« on: May 27, 2016, 02:17:24 pm »

From the UK AIP ENR 1.6 on SSR Code Allocation

Codes 7776 - 7777 SSR Monitors (Refer to ENR 1.6, paragraph 2.2.4)


ENR 1.6 Para 2.2.4

2.2.4 SSR Site Monitors/Far Field Monitors
2.2.4.1 SSR site monitors, sometimes referred to as Far Field Monitors (FFMs) for Mode S radars, shall use Mode A codes *7776 and *7777, along with Mode C pressure-altitude data set to either a high value (eg over 60000 ft) or an unrealistically low value (eg 2000 ft below ground).
2.2.4.2 Mode S FFMs will also require an ICAO 24-bit address to uniquely identify them. These addresses shall be allocated as part of the National IFF/SSR Committee approval process. For further details contact: nisc@caa.co.uk