It does a whole lot more than that.It might be useful for some folks, but since it's only a receiver ("ADS-B In") it won't take the place of a transponder for flight in Class A, B and C airspace. The main value to me of ADS-B In (compared to just a GPS) would be free inflight weather. Traffic is interesting, but as long as I'm flying in VMC I'll be content with see-and-avoid (opinions differ on this, I know).
I run into this a lot being a Linux (for PC) and Android (for other devices) user. Many hardware and software vendors completely ignore anything that isn't MS or Apple. As long as a company doesn't support me, I don't support them.As long as it's only for iPad, it's useless for me. The aviation community has been really slow to realize that there are far more devices out there running Android than iOS. That's not a shot against iOS, just a statement of fact. I like what I've seen of iOS, but Android suits me better. I'm not going to switch ecosystems for the sake of one third-party manufacturer.
When it supports Android, I'll look at it.
Yep. And I want to make it explicit that I'm in no way disparaging Apple or iOS. They're one of several choices, and I don't begrudge anyone their choices in this regard. Hey, whatever works best for the person involved. My choice was Android, and I'm comfortable with it. The acceptance of Android by the aviation community has been a very long time coming, and it's been frustrating for me not to have access to some of the exceptionally good aviation software available on iOS. But, as I said earlier, I'm not switching entire platforms just for one software or hardware product. Not gonna happen.I run into this a lot being a Linux (for PC) and Android (for other devices). Many hardware and software vendors completely ignore anything that isn't MS or Apple. As long as a company doesn't support me, I don't support them.
Very cool. But, he writes:https://www.reddit.com/r/flying/comments/3fscia/the_11390_adsb_receiver_for_foreflight_or_pretty/
Homemade stratus for $120. Looks really cool to me.
I think the FCC (and maybe the FAA) will have something to say about that.I'd like to work on an ADS-B transmitter, but that will come later.[/B]
Not much, really:Very cool. But, he writes:
I'd like to work on an ADS-B transmitter, but that will come later.
I think the FCC (and maybe the FAA) will have something to say about that.
The FAA's position on amateur-built ADSB-OUT equipment hasn't been made clear. From your link:
Sounds like the FAA wants the manufacturers to self-certify that any ADSB-Out devices meet TSO performance specs. They haven't said yet whether homebuilt avionics "manufacturers" will be allowed to self-certify.At an “Equip 2020” meeting involving the FAA, aviation groups, and industry officials this week in Washington, D.C., the agency restated their intent to ensure that the year 2020 mandate for ADS-B “out” installation would allow experimental category aircraft to install non-TSO equipment that meets TSO performance specifications.
I hope you are right, but I doubt it. The FAA is going to be very picky about the quality of the data that is entered into their ADSB "universe"--the whole system is based on the accuracy and reliability of that target-reported data. They'll be less picky about ADSB-In being used for the situational awareness of that single EAB pilot. But if the ADSB-OUT data being supplied by that EAB aircraft is inaccurate, it puts every other plane (commercial airliners, etc) at risk that is depending on the data for traffic separation.The final solution will be below $200 for experimental aircraft.
That is irrational ...It's also based on the pi so it's a close relative.
I agree that it could be done with a large enough market, and I hope that that will happen. But I suspect that I will end up paying closer to $500.With 5 years until we have to install something, these two projects prove that we should all wait before spending thousands of dollars on a system. The final solution will be below $200 for experimental aircraft.
But this isn't likely to be a real problem given the structure of the data packet sent. It will either be garbage or an accurate reflection of the data gathered by the GPS/sensors doing that side of the work. The FAA seems to be comfortable with the quality of the information being sent to the various cockpit devices now? It will be essentially the same data, just gathered together in a nice little packet and sent off to the receiving station.But if the ADSB-OUT data being supplied by that EAB aircraft is inaccurate, it puts every other plane (commercial airliners, etc) at risk that is depending on the data for traffic separation.
Remember that the transmitted signal is "line of sight" so the coverage would be limited without adding tens of thousands of ground stations. What would the FAA, or anyone else, do with the ADS-B data from thousands of drones?.... If the FAA were to mandate ADS-b out for all drones over "X" weight, or what ever metric they decide to use, a sub $30 module might be a reality.
That's for the FAA to figure outWhat would the FAA, or anyone else, do with the ADS-B data from thousands of drones?
Put them under positive, takeoff-to-landing, full and automatic computerized ATC control, just like they want to do with us. These are bureaucrats we're talking about, remember.... What would the FAA, ... , do with the ADS-B data from thousands of drones?