Do controllers see a different 'blip' if an aircraft has ADS-B Out?

farmerbrake

farmerbrake

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Aug 21, 2014
Messages
578
Display Name
Display name:
farmerbrake
As we get closer and closer to the 2020 deadline, I find myself wondering, Can controllers (tower and/or enroute) see a difference between the blips on the screen if the aircraft has a standard Mode C XPONDR or an ADS-B OUT XPONDR?
Thanks in advance!
 
Yes, it's puts a circle icon next to the callsign. That's if they even have it selected.
 
At our TRACON the current answer is no. May be disabled or may not be installed here. We've had no briefing about future adaptation for this.
 
Radar Contact said:
At our TRACON the current answer is no. May be disabled or may not be installed here. We've had no briefing about future adaptation for this.
Click to expand...

Lol! Which is what I hear from all my friends that still do ATC. This was supposed to be some great ATC enhancement but if you ask those who are doing the job everyday, it has little bearing on their day to day ops. No decrease in radar sep has occurred that I know. I'm also hearing a lot of glitches with the system.
 
Velocity173 said:
Lol! Which is what I hear from all my friends that still do ATC. This was supposed to be some great ATC enhancement but if you ask those who are doing the job everyday, it has little bearing on their day to day ops. No decrease in radar sep has occurred that I know. I'm also hearing a lot of glitches with the system.
Click to expand...
Then it's a good thing you are not seeing a decrease in separation; at least until they get all the glitches ironed out.
 
Velocity173 said:
Lol! Which is what I hear from all my friends that still do ATC. This was supposed to be some great ATC enhancement but if you ask those who are doing the job everyday, it has little bearing on their day to day ops. No decrease in radar sep has occurred that I know. I'm also hearing a lot of glitches with the system.
Click to expand...

Before you jump all over the failure it's 2017. The target for all of this is 2020. If by 2020 they can't use the info, then youre on to something...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Velocity173 said:
Lol! Which is what I hear from all my friends that still do ATC. This was supposed to be some great ATC enhancement but if you ask those who are doing the job everyday, it has little bearing on their day to day ops. No decrease in radar sep has occurred that I know. I'm also hearing a lot of glitches with the system.
Click to expand...
I hear you. As an active controller and pilot I'm confused on exactly how this will help out ATC in a radar environment. I get the Alaska/Gulf/Ocean non-radar applications. I also like the displayed cockpit traffic and wx. But selling this as some big ATC advancement in the CONUS is head scratching.

At this point, unless they allow us to get planes closer than 1000 and 3 this will do nothing for efficiency and I've never heard from the FAA that this is in the works. I say just give us green between :)
 
Thanks for the replies!
I'm working on a seminar about ADS-B at our local airport, and I thought a perspective from a controller would be good (if there was a difference).
I'll give our tower a call to see if they notice a difference.
Thanks#

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk
 
gsengle said:
Before you jump all over the failure it's 2017. The target for all of this is 2020. If by 2020 they can't use the info, then youre on to something...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Not saying it's a failure. I've talked to ATC friends who either don't have it, it's turned off or they have it and see no benefit. I've yet to see a proposal to reduce radar sep. Like RC said, it has great benefits for the areas he mentioned. CONUS, not so much.
 
Of course they don't see the benefits, if they aren't using it. What they will get eventually is traffic in more towers, more accurate position info, tail numbers etc. Where it has real potential though is in big airport arrivals where we don't really play anyway. And those will require all new arrival procedures that controllers im sure haven't seen yet.

This is the foundation for a house. No one gets excited pouring a foundation but it's important. Look at what digitizing driving maps has done in all sorts of realms.

I can envision a lot of long term changes enabled by digital position info. There isn't one single killer app... but it had to be done.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
After I had the ADS-B out installed, and while flying the required $500 rebate flight, I asked the approach controller if he received a different target and he said "No.".
 
Why stop at ADS-B out? Do both and see planes before ATC either notices them or bothers to tell you about them. We see them all above and below us and long before they get close enough to be a factor or most often before ATC says anything. FIS-B Nexrad weather is also worth adding "in" to your setup.
 
Once it is implemented, it will be way different. Way. It will be Next Gen for crying out loud.

Right now, suppose I want to fly from ONZ to 3NP for lunch. Detroit TRACON sees that I am VFR, not talking to anyone, I'm somewhere south of the Carlton VOR, headed west at 80ish knots, 2000ish feet based on their radar system. Since the data on my speed and location comes from the same radar as the speed and location of that Boeing 7xx climbing out of 22L, they can see how much separation there is laterally, but since my altitude comes from my own encoder / mode C transmission, it is unverified and they would be advising the 7xx of that fact.

With ADS B, they will see that I am VFR, not talking to anyone, I' somewhere south of the Carlton VOR, headed west at 80ish knots, 2000ish feet. But in this case, the data is coming from the GPS in my airplane. Now the altitude information comes from both my encoder and the GPS. I'm a little fuzzy on this bit - but I would assume there is a cross check between the two data sources.

And, if I eff up and nick a corner of the Bravo airspace, ADS-B will give them the ICO identifier for my aircraft that they can use to track me down. Of course, if I am flying something no-electric, (or "forget" to turn it on) then ADS-B does not provide a primary radar return so I can vanish completely and fly right through the B undetected if the FAA ever decides to turn off the radar.

Then there is the benefit if, for example, you are making the dash across the Gulf of Mexico where there is no radar (particularly if you are flying at, say, 50 feet AGL for some reason or another), then you don't have to be talking to anyone to get warnings about traffic conflicts. Also, places like back country Idaho - if people who fly around in the middle of nowhere were inclined to install ADS-B in and out in their Cubs, then they would get traffic information. Of course, these are the places are where ADS-B is not a requirement...

Next Gen is the new modern way of air traffic control. It will be much better. The airlines will be able to shave 5 or 10 minutes off your flight to Disney World. Next Gen. Modern. Better.
 
gsengle said:
Of course they don't see the benefits, if they aren't using it. What they will get eventually is traffic in more towers, more accurate position info, tail numbers etc. Where it has real potential though is in big airport arrivals where we don't really play anyway. And those will require all new arrival procedures that controllers im sure haven't seen yet.

This is the foundation for a house. No one gets excited pouring a foundation but it's important. Look at what digitizing driving maps has done in all sorts of realms.

I can envision a lot of long term changes enabled by digital position info. There isn't one single killer app... but it had to be done.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Most towers already have either uncertified or certified displays. Tail numbers already come up in the system if you've filed a flight plan or ATC types you in the NAS for FF.

You're not going to decrease sep to less than 1,000 / 3 (some cases 2.5). It's not a technological problem, it's a physics problem. Those min standards for radar sep are for wake turbulence. You start getting aircraft less than that and you'll have aircraft flipped on their back in a heartbeat.

Most of your extremely low targets will be acquired with ADS-B but with FUSION radar alone, they get the majority of low altitude targets anyway.

It'll have it's benefits for ATC but they aren't nearly as hyped as the Nex Gen supporters would like us to believe. The primary benefit is the SA it adds to the pilot. No doubt that's a good thing.
 
Last edited:
It remains to be seen whether the satellite-based system will be more reliable in the long run than the ground-based radar system.

But from my personal perspective, the in-cockpit traffic display is welcome in this busy airspace, and worth the investment for the ADSB-out box.
 
Pilawt said:
It remains to be seen whether the satellite-based system will be more reliable in the long run than the ground-based radar system.

But from my personal perspective, the in-cockpit traffic display is welcome in this busy airspace, and worth the investment for the ADSB-out box.
Click to expand...

Well it's an add on system so when / if ADS-B fails, traditional primary and SSR will take over.
 
It also has the potential to get "radar" coverage if they use satellites, to everywhere, every valley, every podunk airport, right down to the ground.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
We have seen benefits here, although it is not officially in use. At our midwest airport, the radar floor is around 3,000-4,000 MSL depending on the day. That means once a plane has descended on the IFR approach below 4,000 feet, no other IFR aircraft can be cleared in or out since there is no coverage. Just yesterday though I heard center call contact with an ADS-B equipped IFR aircraft at 1,800 MSL, only about 600 feet AGL for here. We can also see ADS-B traffic on flightaware down to 1,500-1,800 MSL.
 
Flightaware is tracking ADS-B below 1,500 agl. It appears could be as low as 500 agl.
 
farmerbrake said:
Thanks for the replies!
I'm working on a seminar about ADS-B at our local airport, and I thought a perspective from a controller would be good (if there was a difference).
I'll give our tower a call to see if they notice a difference.
Thanks#

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Oh....and don't assume a tower gets the ADS-B feed. Ours does not.
 
A friend and I were on a $100 hamburger run in his ADS-B Out equipped airplane a couple of weeks ago and, on the return trip, called Mpls Center for VFR flight following. Upon hearing from us, the controller knew our location and gave the nearest altimeter. From that my conclusion is the we were tagged up with the tail number on his screen before we called.

The exchange was different from the usual "Barnburner 1234 five north of nowherville ... " and "Barnburner 1234 radar contact six miles north of nowhereville airport, nowhereville altimeter is ... " Maybe my deduction was right. Maybe not.
 
I have a friend who is both a CFI and a TRACON controller in San Antonio. He likes ADS-B. He tells me he can just look a target and tell it's ADS-B because it is updating every second. In particular it helps when airplanes are shooting instrument approaches into New Braunfels (KBAZ). Without ADS-B they lose radar contact pretty quickly, but with ADS-B they can follow airplanes almost to the ground.
 
Pilawt said:
But from my personal perspective, the in-cockpit traffic display is welcome in this busy airspace, and worth the investment for the ADSB-out box.
Click to expand...

I've installed ADS-B out+in, and while the weather information is great, the traffic frankly sucks. It's definitely advisory in nature - if it says something is there, there almost certainly is. The catch is that if it doesn't show anything, that doesn't mean that there isn't anything there. It might be a Champ sans electrical system, it might be a Baron, or it might be a Citation. I've seen all three (and more) nearby yet fail to show up on the ADS-B display. I doubt the Baron or Citation were lacking an electrical system.

I can't help but wonder if it's as flaky for ATC as it is for aircraft...
 
ChiefPilot said:
I've installed ADS-B out+in, and while the weather information is great, the traffic frankly sucks. It's definitely advisory in nature - if it says something is there, there almost certainly is. The catch is that if it doesn't show anything, that doesn't mean that there isn't anything there. It might be a Champ sans electrical system, it might be a Baron, or it might be a Citation. I've seen all three (and more) nearby yet fail to show up on the ADS-B display. I doubt the Baron or Citation were lacking an electrical system.

I can't help but wonder if it's as flaky for ATC as it is for aircraft...
Click to expand...

Completely disagree, and it will only improve towards 2020. I have a Lynx 9000 and good radar coverage for traffic uplink from a nearby approach control, and I see everything, excepting the rare nordo aircraft.

Where it is flakey/partial is if you don't have ADSB out integrated with in...

If you're having that much trouble I'd get equipment checked.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
ChiefPilot said:
It's definitely advisory in nature - if it says something is there, there almost certainly is. The catch is that if it doesn't show anything, that doesn't mean that there isn't anything there.
Click to expand...
The same could be said for TIS, TCAS, ATC flight following, and Mk.1 eyeballs. Frankly, more often than not I see the traffic on the ADSB display before ATC calls it out to me. In recognition of the limitations of all of the systems, though, looking out the window is still very much the priority.
 
gsengle said:
Where it is flakey/partial is if you don't have ADSB out integrated with in...

If you're having that much trouble I'd get equipment checked.
Click to expand...

The equipment is fine, and I do have ADS-B out so not relying on someone else's "puck". The issue is that the system can be overloaded with too many aircraft in a small area - I'm based underneath a reasonably busy class B (MSP), and there's always lots of stuff around. The kind of issue I described is not uncommon around here, and so looking out the window is of paramount importance.

There are also quite a few NORDO aircraft based at the airport I'm at (KSGS). Those never show up on TIS-B/TIS-R of course and so looking outside is the only detection method available to avoid them.
 
Where do you fly and with which ADSB equipment? I'm generally in the airspace around NYC so it's plenty busy with targets and I haven't had that problem...

Edit, I see Minneapolis... can't imagine it's worse than metro NYC, what equipment you using?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Why do some think collision and traffic avoidance technology is mutually exclusive with or takes the place of scanning outside the plane? TIS for example warns of aircraft 10k plus/minus in altitude and 22nm away. ADS-B works the same way. Flying in or near congested Bravo airspace does not present a problem for these systems. One learns to distinguish threatening traffic quickly with experience augmenting their warning with an outside scan.

If all you have is outside scanning you are at the mercy of the daytime white sky, white planes and the hope ATC will give you the only warning you would receive before a possible near miss.
 
ChiefPilot said:
I've installed ADS-B out+in, ...if it doesn't show anything, that doesn't mean that there isn't anything there.

I can't help but wonder if it's as flaky for ATC as it is for aircraft...
Click to expand...

Good point.

I fly with ADSB in/out, and like you I find the traffic flaky. Nearby traffic often appears and then vanishes for no obvious reason.

Moreover, my TAS traffic detector often shows transponder-equipped traffic that doesn't show up on ADSB, even though ADSB should be showing me everything nearby with a transponder.

For ATC to use it, ADSB traffic needs to be much better than what we're seeing in the air.

I wonder how well it is working for FlightAware? They seem to have rolled out something substantial for monitoring ADSB equipped traffic -- I wonder if they can use it to track traffic better than we can in the air.
 
For ATC use, ADS-B is only one component to a bigger picture. In order to use ADS-B, the system has to be in a FUSION configuration. That means all available inputs such as terminal and enroute radar and secondary surveillance radar systems. The FAA has already stated that Nex Gen must be a FUSION system. Therefore, there's no getting rid of ground based radars and this so called savings that was being rumored because of shutting them down.

ADS-B alone gives a one second refresh and low altitude coverage but the fused primary and secondary radars CAN provide that as well. Even with all that working as one, you won't see much of a change on how they operate. MVACs will be updated but separation standards won't change much. The terminal (40 miles) radar separation is still a minimum of 3 miles as it was with older systems. That hasn't changed and despite what others say about reducing separation into our busiest airports, it won't change. Its not just a minimum separation for wake turbulence in the air, you have runway occupancy restrictions.
 
Velocity173 said:
For ATC use, ADS-B is only one component to a bigger picture. In order to use ADS-B, the system has to be in a FUSION configuration. That means all available inputs such as terminal and enroute radar and secondary surveillance radar systems. The FAA has already stated that Nex Gen must be a FUSION system. Therefore, there's no getting rid of ground based radars and this so called savings that was being rumored because of shutting them down.
Click to expand...

SoCal TRACON at least as of a few months ago had unplugged their ADS-B signal as a FUSION input source due to the erroneous and faulty info it was displaying. They were rather displeased with the development of the system. They could still see the ADS-B Out aircraft info but were not using it as a location layer in the combined radar FUSION system. They just shook their heads.
 
One Fusion limitation that irks the heck outta me associated with ADSB. If Im single sensor I'd need 3 miles separation . Now, because I'm running fusion, multiple radar sites means more accuracy right? Yeah not according to fusion if im not receiving your mode c.

Without fail, if i don't recieve mode c, ISR pops in the tag meaning min Sep in now 5 miles. Not fun when it pops up on #3 on a long final when you're busy . Oh hey everyone behind that guy, time to s turn!
 
airdale said:
A friend and I were on a $100 hamburger run in his ADS-B Out equipped airplane a couple of weeks ago and, on the return trip, called Mpls Center for VFR flight following. Upon hearing from us, the controller knew our location and gave the nearest altimeter. From that my conclusion is the we were tagged up with the tail number on his screen before we called.

The exchange was different from the usual "Barnburner 1234 five north of nowherville ... " and "Barnburner 1234 radar contact six miles north of nowhereville airport, nowhereville altimeter is ... " Maybe my deduction was right. Maybe not.
Click to expand...
That exchange sounds the same as one would expect in a radar-only environment.
 
Last edited:
gsengle said:
Completely disagree, and it will only improve towards 2020. I have a Lynx 9000 and good radar coverage for traffic uplink from a nearby approach control, and I see everything, excepting the rare nordo aircraft.

Where it is flakey/partial is if you don't have ADSB out integrated with in...

If you're having that much trouble I'd get equipment checked.
Click to expand...
In my case there isn't a LOT of traffic that doesn't show up, but there is some, once in a great while. That's just enough that I certainly wouldn't rely on it to tell me whether there's traffic out there that I need to worry about. For that I have, and still use, the Mark 1 eyeballs. Works well in VMC. In IMC, I definitely still need ATC to ensure separation.
 
ADS-B works as advertised. If controllers are unplugging equipment then it's their equipment. If you don't see all the plane out there it's because most of them don't have ADS-B out yet. Sadly many are waiting to the last minute expecting to either see the mandate disappear or because they don't want to part with the cash.
 
azure said:
In my case there isn't a LOT of traffic that doesn't show up, but there is some, once in a great while. That's just enough that I certainly wouldn't rely on it to tell me whether there's traffic out there that I need to worry about. For that I have, and still use, the Mark 1 eyeballs. Works well in VMC. In IMC, I definitely still need ATC to ensure separation.
Click to expand...

There is more traffic atc doesn't tell me about, than that they tell me about and my equipment doesn't see.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top