What is the current status of ADS-B for ultralights?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ultralight ADS-B?
  • Start date Start date
Following up on the very early messages about not being able to install ADS-B Out in an Ultralight, that may not necessarily be true.

Apparently you can install a battery operated uAvionix SkyBeacon in an Ultralight. It has to be a Permanent installation and would take a FSDO approval as the FAA looks at it as a Major Alteration. But I bet if you talked to the FSDO first and pointed out the safety gain for both you and other traffic, like the jet you mentioned, they'd probably tell you to go ahead and then sign it off at completion.

And again with the jet not being where you thought it would be.... Another prime example of why NOT to use Internet Data for Traffic. Works a lot of the times, but when there is latency in the server/systems, it can become very dangerous for all.
 
Following up on the very early messages about not being able to install ADS-B Out in an Ultralight, that may not necessarily be true.

Apparently you can install a battery operated uAvionix SkyBeacon in an Ultralight. It has to be a Permanent installation and would take a FSDO approval as the FAA looks at it as a Major Alteration. But I bet if you talked to the FSDO first and pointed out the safety gain for both you and other traffic, like the jet you mentioned, they'd probably tell you to go ahead and then sign it off at completion.

And again with the jet not being where you thought it would be.... Another prime example of why NOT to use Internet Data for Traffic. Works a lot of the times, but when there is latency in the server/systems, it can become very dangerous for all.
What the heck is a major alteration of an ultralight? Where the hell is that defined?
 
So if you are following the Part 103 regulations for an ultralight, the FAA can take enforcement action for not following the Part 91 regulations for an aircraft? I suppose then they can take enforcement action against a part 91 activity for not following the Part 121 Regulations? I give up.
One can be certain and wrong at the same time.
 
I do often wonder how visible I am to airplanes and other aircraft. Obviously my body with the motor attached is pretty small and would be hard to see, and the lines will be almost invisible. But my wing has a "wingspan" of about 30 feet and a maximum chord of about 10 feet, which is in the same range as a lot of single-engine airplanes. Plus they are typically brightly colored (not white like a lot of airplanes) - mine is bright green and blue. So am I harder to see than a Cessna 172, or easier, or about the same? has anybody seen one while flying an airplane?

I've never seen a paramotor while I'm flying an airplane, so I have no idea. I have definitely seen other paramotors while flying a paramotor, but we're usually near each other on purpose so I am already aware of them.

While flying an airplane, I've encountered a flight of two paramotors emerge from a grass strip and begin climbing a few miles ahead of me. They were a lot easier to spot than the typical GA airplane traffic, probably because they were so slow moving and brightly colored.
 
No offense bro, but you nearly killed alot of people flying an ultralight near an approach path of a jet. Fly that thing low and away from populated areas. I’m glad you are ok, but man be careful.
It makes no sense that portable ADSB isn’t available for UL’s, Cubs and the like. See and avoid sucks. And I’d never concede airspace because “you’re close to airspace you shouldn’t be in”. Thats a slippery slope.
 
What the heck is a major alteration of an ultralight? Where the hell is that defined?
No real clue. My **guess** is that they really don't know how to address alterations or adding permanent equipment in an Ultralight. So this why it takes a little more paperwork and an inspection.

You might reach out to uAvionix if you were thinking about it to see if they had any guidance.
 
No real clue. My **guess** is that they really don't know how to address alterations or adding permanent equipment in an Ultralight. So this why it takes a little more paperwork and an inspection.

You might reach out to uAvionix if you were thinking about it to see if they had any guidance.
Not correct. Part 103 has no regulations regarding the vehicle itself other than weight, amount of fuel, max speed and stall speed. No way to create paperwork and no such thing as an inspection.
 
My **guess** is that they really don't know how to address alterations or adding permanent equipment in an Ultralight.
Except Part 43 does not apply to ultralights since it has no airworthiness certification or standards requirements, and so on. The only inspection required, if needed, is to see if the vehicle meets the Part 103 limitations. So you can add whatever equipment you want provided you remain within those 103 limitations and the equipment doesnt violate any other rule.
 
Not correct. Part 103 has no regulations regarding the vehicle itself other than weight, amount of fuel, max speed and stall speed. No way to create paperwork and no such thing as an inspection.
Well, don't shoot the messenger that things are changing. :cool:

I can't find the original article, but I just found a second source... A guy who added one for his flight to OSH. He gives some basic info in this video, so it sounds like it is a thing...
 
maybe just a plain old-fashioned transponder squawking 1200
Is that possible?
I can see that you likely can't install ADS-B since you don't have an N-number.
But can't think of any reason you couldn't install a Transponder.
I run a Trig TT22 with ADS-B in my sailplane off of a Lifepo4 battery.
1758817978339.png

Something like the TT21 would likely work ok in the ultralight but still cost close to $2500.

if you have 12V power available you could probably pick up something older for a lot less.
might want to add add an altitude encoder which would use more power and add more cost.
But wouldn't have to. A Transponder would at least get them looking for you.
1758817880285.png
 
We have the ability ... but not the permission ...


 
Last edited:
Help is on the way.

uAvionix Calls on Pilots to Support Portable EC under Part 108 Rule​



Bigfork, MT – 23 September 2025 – The FAA’s proposed Part 108 rule for Beyond Visual Line of Sight (BVLOS) drone operations under 400’ AGL requires drones to carry ADS-B In and to yield to crewed aircraft that are transmitting an ADS-B Out signal.

But many aircraft fly below 400’ AGL including balloons, gliders, vintage planes, powered parachutes, ultralights, seaplanes, and ag aircraft. Many of these aircraft cannot easily accommodate a permanent ADS-B Out installation. The FAA is offering a new type of device, a portable EC device for these aircraft.

uAvionix has launched a new Pilot Awareness Website to allow this community to learn what EC is.

uAvionix’s new Pilot Awareness & Portable EC Hub shows how Portable Electronic Conspicuity (EC) offers an immediate, proven solution:

  • See and Be Seen – A portable EC device broadcasts ADS-B Out so other aircraft, including drones equipped with ADS-B In, can detect and avoid your aircraft.
  • Low-Cost, Quick to Deploy – Compact, battery-powered units typically cost under $1,000, require no costly airframe modifications, and can move from aircraft to aircraft for owners of multiple aircraft.
  • Private and Anonymous – An EC device does not transmit a signal that is traceable to your aircraft. Avoiding mid-air collisions only requires knowledge that an aircraft exists, not who it belongs to.
  • Extends Right-of-Way Protection – Helps ensure GA pilots maintain right-of-way as intended by Part 108.
Call to Action for All Pilots

uAvionix urges every pilot to submit a public comment to the FAA supporting the acceptance of portable EC as a recognized method to extend the proven safety benefits of ADS-B to all aviators while offering an immediate solution for GA pilots to maintain right-of-way in these low altitude environments.
Pilots are also asked to share this message with fellow pilots, flight schools, and online aviation groups to strengthen the community’s voice to the FAA.

Learn more and file your comment here: https://uavionix.ac-page.com/EC_Pilot_Awareness

​

About uAvionix​

uAvionix is a global leader in ADS-B and aviation safety technology, delivering innovative solutions that keep the National Airspace System safe and accessible for every aviator.
 
Sounds more like uAvionix wants to increase their potential market share for their EC devices by having the FAA mandate ADSB or EC equipment for all manned flights below 500' vs supporting the requirement for the drones to have a DAA system installed. Be careful what you wish for.

1758832176354.png
 
I can see that you likely can't install ADS-B since you don't have an N-number.
The last video I watched stated you had to "Register" but I don't know what that means. Maybe you can get an N# if you're trying to get ADS-B Out.

Other thing might be that you "Register" like some of the drones do that have ADS-B Out.
 
Maybe you can get an N# if you're trying to get ADS-B Out.
Except that would require changes to several regulations as ultralights are not considered aircraft and do not qualify for an N-number. Technically, UAS or drones are considered aircraft so they can obtain a registration. Plus there are international requirements to adhere to with aircraft registrations as well.
 
Except that would require changes to several regulations as ultralights are not considered aircraft and do not qualify for an N-number.
Unless they are in the process of making those changes maybe??? I really don't know much about Ultralights, but it sounds like someone was pushing the "Safety" button to push it through.

Other than as a curiosity, it's not something I'm going to spend a lot of time on. But if it's something you want to track down, the guy in the video said to reach out to him for more info on how to do it.
 
Unless they are in the process of making those changes maybe??? I really don't know much about Ultralights, but it sounds like someone was pushing the "Safety" button to push it through.
Not really. Changes like these happen in a very predictable method. The Executor Order that pushed Part 108 to the forefront also pushed eVTOL ops to the front of the line. So at present there is only one NPRM in the mix for Part 108 and either the eVTOL move is following an existing NPRM or there will be a new notice published for that initiative. At best, "the guy in the video" may want to brush up on the NPRM process.
 
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 365 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.
Back
Top