FAA Announces Changes to TIS-B

[petrolero]

http://www.aopa.org/News-and-Video/All-News/2016/January/04/FAA-announces-changes-to-TIS-B

<snip>
“By making these changes, the FAA is closing a gap that has made some traffic invisible,” said Rune Duke, AOPA director of airspace and air traffic. “While this is an important step that can help improve traffic awareness, pilots need to remember that they still have a responsibility to be vigilant, look outside, and maintain separation from other aircraft.”

Currently, aircraft emitting ADS-B Out signals that do not comply with the performance requirement of any FAA standards are invisible to aircraft receiving TIS-B information through a certified ADS-B In system. That’s because certified ADS-B In systems filter from the display targets that don’t meet certain quality parameters in the ADS-B message (see the link above for details). As a result, aircraft that may have improperly installed ADS-B Out systems or those with non-certified ADS-B Out systems are invisible to aircraft with properly functioning certified ADS-B In systems.

The FAA estimates that its planned changes will make an additional 2,000 aircraft visible to aircraft with certified ADS-B In systems. This issue also highlights that a large number of aircraft have ADS-B Out but the avionics do not meet the requirements of the FAA’s 2020 rule. Pilots can determine if their ADS-B Out system meets the FAA’s standards for free by contacting the FAA which will look at previous flight data to see if the aircraft was sending the proper signals.

<snip>

Sounds like a good thing overall but minor.

 

[flyingron]

Now how about getting rid of the hockey-puck filter.

 

[ifly4fun]

I wonder if the 2000+ "non-compliant" aircraft will be 2000 new hockey pucks opening up the skies a little for those without anything. Or were they already triggering traffic?

 

[RotorDude]

I wonder if the 2000+ "non-compliant" aircraft will be 2000 new hockey pucks opening up the skies a little for those without anything. Or were they already triggering traffic?

If they weren't already triggering traffic, their OUT device would have been a paperweight.

 

[bnt83]

I thought the non-compliant out devices were just tricking the station into transmitting.

Isn't everyone with a non-compliant out device were getting phone calls from FAA warning them to turn off the transmitters?

 

[Lindberg]

I thought the non-compliant out devices were just tricking the station into transmitting.

Isn't everyone with a non-compliant out device were getting phone calls from FAA warning them to turn off the transmitters?

How would the FAA know who to call? I would assume the non-compliant out devices aren't transmitting a traceable ID because that would be stupid.

 

[MooneyDriver78]

How would the FAA know who to call? I would assume the non-compliant out devices aren't transmitting a traceable ID because that would be stupid.

Unless they fly IFR or FF, once you give them your tail no they have you (assuming they care that much).

 

[ifly4fun]

If they weren't already triggering traffic, their OUT device would have been a paperweight.

Makes sense now, I was kinda confused at what the non-compliants purpose would have been. Just figured it was legit ADS-B Out systems that had been installed, but not necessarily coupled to a Waas-GPS.

 

[JOhnH]

Unless they fly IFR or FF, once you give them your tail no they have you (assuming they care that much).

For a while after buying my plane, I was getting Flight Aware notices that I was departing and arriving at various parts of the country that were a thousand miles from me. Someone was calling FF with my tail number. I am sure it wasn't the previous owner just misspeaking because he was physically unable to fly.

 

[Indiana_Pilot]

ok, so this only means I can have a non certified ads-b out in my airplane now and it will give me in traffic and also be seen by certified ads-b in units?

I was hoping they would just make all traffic on all the time for all receivers

 

[Clark1961]

I thought the non-compliant out devices were just tricking the station into transmitting.

Isn't everyone with a non-compliant out device were getting phone calls from FAA warning them to turn off the transmitters?

Don't know if that was serious or tongue-in-cheek but I got no phone call or even a letter from the FAA when my ADS-B was non-compliant. The SIL was set incorrectly by the avionics shop (simple error on their part). It would have been simple for them to send me a letter since I'm the registered owner of the aircraft and the aircraft registration is part of the ADS-B output.

The non-compliant aspect had no real affect on the position reported but of course the ADS-B system couldn't trust the position report.

 

[John Collins]

How would the FAA know who to call? I would assume the non-compliant out devices aren't transmitting a traceable ID because that would be stupid.

The aircraft can be tracked even if the ID is fraudulent. Most would not go to the trouble, but are simply using position sources that are not capable of providing the needed data. This makes them easily self-identifiable. The FAA keeps a record in a database of all of the ADS-B data and can lookup the details of any flight they wish to examine. This is similar to radar where tracks are kept. The main difference is that the ADS-B data can be used to identify the aircraft, with the exception of UAT systems that use the anonymous mode.

 

[John Collins]

Don't know if that was serious or tongue-in-cheek but I got no phone call or even a letter from the FAA when my ADS-B was non-compliant. The SIL was set incorrectly by the avionics shop (simple error on their part). It would have been simple for them to send me a letter since I'm the registered owner of the aircraft and the aircraft registration is part of the ADS-B output.

The non-compliant aspect had no real affect on the position reported but of course the ADS-B system couldn't trust the position report.

Most likely your avionics installer selected a parameter that generated a non zero SIL, which would have been considered as OK and not one of the systems that was a non performing emitter. 3 is the correct value for 2020, but 1 or greater will get the client services from the ground stations. Only a zero is considered as being in the non performing emitter category and would have lost its client status. This is because a TSO ADS-B In system such as the GDL88/84 or FreeFlight Ranger or L3 Lynx is not permitted to display a target with a SIL or SDA of 0. Portable systems are really frowned on for ADS-B Out and are supposed to set the SDA and SIL to 0.