January Should Be Interesting

MBDiagMan

MBDiagMan

Final Approach
Joined
May 8, 2011
Messages
5,231
Location
Mount Pleasant,Texas
Display Name
Display name:
Doc
I was reading the ADS-B article of the month in the AOPA magazine. It’s worthwhile reading this month.

I have read all along that once ADS-B is mandated it will be possible to call ahead and get permission to enter. I think many people think that will be easy. This article indicates that this will not be very easy. It says that “The FAA is placing the burden for approving non-equipped aircraft operations in ADS-B rule airspace primarily on the aircraft operator-and not on the FAA.”

The FAA says “To the maximum extent possible the operators of equipped aircraft should not be penalized or have their ATC services effected by operators who choose not to equip their aircraft with ADS-B Out equipment.”

It appears that it will be only dire circumstances that will cause the issue of authorization while in flight. You will have to call an hour in advance of the flight.

This reminds me of the buzz that went on in late 1999. There were those who believed the world as we know it would end at midnight 12/31/1999 and those who believed it was a hoax. I was in the hoax camp. I expect that listening to ATC or flying into rule airspace on January 2, 2020 will be quite interesting.

I’m glad I chose to equip both my planes.
 
It really will depend on the airspace and time of day as just like highways airspace have rush hours.
 
MBDiagMan said:
I was reading the ADS-B article of the month in the AOPA magazine. It’s worthwhile reading this month.

I have read all along that once ADS-B is mandated it will be possible to call ahead and get permission to enter. I think many people think that will be easy. This article indicates that this will not be very easy. It says that “The FAA is placing the burden for approving non-equipped aircraft operations in ADS-B rule airspace primarily on the aircraft operator-and not on the FAA.”

The FAA says “To the maximum extent possible the operators of equipped aircraft should not be penalized or have their ATC services effected by operators who choose not to equip their aircraft with ADS-B Out equipment.”

It appears that it will be only dire circumstances that will cause the issue of authorization while in flight. You will have to call an hour in advance of the flight.

This reminds me of the buzz that went on in late 1999. There were those who believed the world as we know it would end at midnight 12/31/1999 and those who believed it was a hoax. I was in the hoax camp. I expect that listening to ATC or flying into rule airspace on January 2, 2020 will be quite interesting.

I’m glad I chose to equip both my planes.
Click to expand...
It may have been overblown, but it wasn't a hoax either. I know a few people who worked to make it a non-event.

Back to topic, yes, it will be interesting in some areas. There are still many airports here where I doubt people notice if the plane has a transponder. What do you think of the Canada rule where one will need 2 antennas to fly on USA and Canada airspace? It won't affect me since I don't want to deal with customs returning here anyway, so I won't fly myself there.
https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media...y/30/nav-canada-seeks-ads-b-antenna-diversity
 
Last edited:
I would guess the process won't be much different than entering the Mode C ring without Mode C. I've had to do it before when my encoder went berserk. Just a simple call ahead of time, then picked up flight following so they knew who I was, where I was, and could confirm my altitude despite no Mode C.
 
I think there are a lot of people with their heads in the sand, and once 1/1/2020 hits, they will be in for a shock. I suspect that avionics shops will be busy for quite a while.
 
I think FAA management would like you to believe it’s a big deal but on the ATC end, they couldn’t care less.

I was hanging out in the tower where my brother works earlier this month. There was a B-1 doing a TACAN approach and I asked if he was ADS-B out. A couple strokes of the keyboard later, “nope.” They said the only military aircraft that they’ve seen that have it are transports. So you’ve got a large number of military aircraft that either are not going to upgrade or are waiting to upgrade. As long as they continue to use a Mode C or S transponder, it won’t affect how they control those aircraft. Over the lower 48 ADS-B does next to nothing on the ATC side. It hasn’t reduced sep and they aren’t going to decommission any radar sites to save money.

So while it does wonders for SA on the pilot side (I love my Scout) it does little for the controller end. Showing up to a class B/C with no /inop transponder at all can be a pain, showing up with only mode C, should be a nonevent.
 
Last edited:
midwestpa24 said:
I would guess the process won't be much different than entering the Mode C ring without Mode C. I've had to do it before when my encoder went berserk. Just a simple call ahead of time, then picked up flight following so they knew who I was, where I was, and could confirm my altitude despite no Mode C.
Click to expand...

If what I am reading is correct, that will work if you call or register on the website they are building for the purpose at least one hour before wheels up. No calling from the air and being authorized.
 
midwestpa24 said:
I would guess the process won't be much different than entering the Mode C ring without Mode C. I've had to do it before when my encoder went berserk. Just a simple call ahead of time, then picked up flight following so they knew who I was, where I was, and could confirm my altitude despite no Mode C.
Click to expand...

The article reads, ATC will not issue permission based on a phone call...

"The FAA will not issue in-flight authorizations to operators of non-equipped aircraft, nor will air traffic control facilities accept telephone requests"
 
FlySince9 said:
The article reads, ATC will not issue permission based on a phone call...

"The FAA will not issue in-flight authorizations to operators of non-equipped aircraft, nor will air traffic control facilities accept telephone requests"
Click to expand...

I could be totally wrong, but I'm guessing there has to be a Plan B for aircraft that have equipment failures. There has to be a way to ferry in and out of the required airspace.
 
Velocity173 said:
They said the only military aircraft that they’ve seen that have it are transports. So you’ve got a large number of military aircraft that either are not going to upgrade or are waiting to upgrade.
Click to expand...
Secret Service: "There's a J-3 Cub inside the TFR ring. Scramble the fighters!"
Mil: "Unable. ADS-B Out not equipped."

Well, one can dream. :)
 
midwestpa24 said:
I could be totally wrong, but I'm guessing there has to be a Plan B for aircraft that have equipment failures. There has to be a way to ferry in and out of the required airspace.
Click to expand...
Equipment failures yes; ATC will be able to authorize for Airborne aircraft. Otherwise ferrying, etc. will require at least 1 hour notice through a website that is being put together and is supposed to go online by December...
And it appears that this is not something that operators will be able to get on a regular basis... It seems to be truly exceptional and non-reoccurring situations.
 
So I won’t be able to fly where I already don’t! Darn
 
FlySince9 said:
The article reads, ATC will not issue permission based on a phone call...

"The FAA will not issue in-flight authorizations to operators of non-equipped aircraft, nor will air traffic control facilities accept telephone requests"
Click to expand...

Okay, so it sound like the website is the only way to request permission.
 
For those using the term "ferry", if you mean receiving a Special Flight Permit for an inop ADS-B, the answer is no. ADS-B is an operational requirement, not an airworthiness requirement. You can fly your aircraft with the ADS-B inop in airspace that does not require it by utilizing the provisions of 91.213. So it is not something that requires a SFP to operate with it inop. You are just restricted to where you may operate.
 
147553-8957.jpg

Oh my! I'll never find a place to fly without spending my entire life's savings on ADSB!!!

My sarcasm is directed to the chicken little types who worry too much. If I flew for a living or was based out of an airport that required it, I would have ADSB out already. Until then, I'll see what happens to the price around Christmas 2021.
 
Velocity173 said:
I think FAA management would like you to believe it’s a big deal but on the ATC end, they couldn’t care less.

.
Click to expand...

IMO this is exactly it " FAA management would like you to believe it is a big deal", and it may be for a short period of time until they realize those airplanes that used to ask to transition "negative transponder or negative ADS-B" now just don't bother to call and skirt around the outside edges of the airspace without talking to anyone.

Brian
 
brcase said:
IMO this is exactly it " FAA management would like you to believe it is a big deal", and it may be for a short period of time until they realize those airplanes that used to ask to transition "negative transponder or negative ADS-B" now just don't bother to call and skirt around the outside edges of the airspace without talking to anyone.

Brian
Click to expand...

Yep. I also think the whole roll out of the ADS-B as a perfect example of the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing. I’ve talked to ATC friends who haven’t gotten anything more than a memo on the implementation of ADS-B. No classes at all. Several of my friends in the past have expressed confusion over what it even is.

Heard a tower (PDK) guy last year get a request from a Mooney for an ADS-B check. He replied “I have no idea what that is.” Now, he’s a tower guy so I can understand maybe not having the capability to distinguish between Mode C and ADS-B, but to not have any understanding of it???

Just talking to my brother today on the subject. He’s at a class C and said ADS-B hasn’t affected the way they do business at all. Said it allows them to see who a 1200 is, so that helps with traffic calls, but that’s the extent of the benefit to them. He did say that he can see the writing on the wall in the way it will communicate with their software (STARS) in the future. He predicts in the future he will mostly be out of the loop with STARS giving ATC commands in a text format to aircraft. He would only intervene when the system breaks down. Personally I see that being at least 20 years off and you’ll always have voice commands for the tower environment. But, for the time being, it does next to nothing for them.
 
The "no airborne permission" will likely not stand after there are smoking holes and dead bodies.
 
Velocity173 said:
Yep. I also think the whole roll out of the ADS-B as a perfect example of the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing. I’ve talked to ATC friends who haven’t gotten anything more than a memo on the implementation of ADS-B. No classes at all. Several of my friends in the past have expressed confusion over what it even is.

Heard a tower (PDK) guy last year get a request from a Mooney for an ADS-B check. He replied “I have no idea what that is.” Now, he’s a tower guy so I can understand maybe not having the capability to distinguish between Mode C and ADS-B, but to not have any understanding of it???

Just talking to my brother today on the subject. He’s at a class C and said ADS-B hasn’t affected the way they do business at all. Said it allows them to see who a 1200 is, so that helps with traffic calls, but that’s the extent of the benefit to them.
Click to expand...

We have seen some operation gains here. The radar floor in our area is about 3,000-4,000 feet depending on the day, so ATC services can be limited down low. But they can see ADS-B aircraft almost at pattern altitude. It's helped a little with IFR arrivals and departures from our Class E aerodrome.
 
asicer said:
Secret Service: "There's a J-3 Cub inside the TFR ring. Scramble the fighters!"
Mil: "Unable. ADS-B Out not equipped."

Well, one can dream. :)
Click to expand...

I would think the fighter will stall first before it can keep up(down?) with J-3
 
lancie00 said:
147553-8957.jpg

Oh my! I'll never find a place to fly without spending my entire life's savings on ADSB!!!

My sarcasm is directed to the chicken little types who worry too much. If I flew for a living or was based out of an airport that required it, I would have ADSB out already. Until then, I'll see what happens to the price around Christmas 2021.
Click to expand...
Your map was what I was alluding to earlier, but your picture is worth a thousand words.
 
I plan to simply always be chalk 2 in a flight when entering regulation airspace. I'll be so close, we'll look like one aircraft on radar anyway... :blueplane::blueplane::raspberry:
 
lancie00 said:
147553-8957.jpg

Oh my! I'll never find a place to fly without spending my entire life's savings on ADSB!!!

My sarcasm is directed to the chicken little types who worry too much. If I flew for a living or was based out of an airport that required it, I would have ADSB out already. Until then, I'll see what happens to the price around Christmas 2021.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, a lot of desirable destinations lie within ADSB required airspace. For me, the Washington DC, Boston, and Philly areas fill the bill, as well as trips to or through the Syracuse and Albany class C, the latter of which lies along popular routes to the east. In the NE, ADS-B will be essentially required to go anywhere IFR.
 
wsuffa said:
The "no airborne permission" will likely not stand after there are smoking holes and dead bodies.
Click to expand...

And those would most likely be preceded by an emergency situation, so declare one and exercise your PIC prerogative. Nothing in the ADS-B mandate cancels 91.3.
 
midwestpa24 said:
We have seen some operation gains here. The radar floor in our area is about 3,000-4,000 feet depending on the day, so ATC services can be limited down low. But they can see ADS-B aircraft almost at pattern altitude. It's helped a little with IFR arrivals and departures from our Class E aerodrome.
Click to expand...

Yeah it can help with surveillance in some mountainous areas. Some of that improved coverage is from overlapping (FUSION) radars that the FAA started linking in around 10-15 years ago. The problem is, unless the MVA / MIA is reduced, it isn’t much of a gain. You’ll still have min IFR altitudes in mountainous areas of at least 2,000 AGL. Also, even with coverage down low , going into non towered fields IFR is still one in and one out. Can’t use visual sep.

The biggest thing was touted for ATC was supposed to be a decrease in the current radar separation because of its 1 sec refresh rate. None of that has happened. ADS-B vs ADS-B sep was approved maybe two years back and it still has the same 3 nm sep of old radar
 
Last edited:
chemgeek said:
Unfortunately, a lot of desirable destinations lie within ADSB required airspace. For me, the Washington DC, Boston, and Philly areas fill the bill, as well as trips to or through the Syracuse and Albany class C, the latter of which lies along popular routes to the east. In the NE, ADS-B will be essentially required to go anywhere IFR.
Click to expand...
I totally understand that and like I said, if I lived in an area that needed it, I would already have it.
 
SkyDog58 said:
And those would most likely be preceded by an emergency situation, so declare one and exercise your PIC prerogative. Nothing in the ADS-B mandate cancels 91.3.
Click to expand...
Perhaps. Or not. I've done pop-up clearances to make it to my destination rather than land 75 miles away VFR.
 
wsuffa said:
Perhaps. Or not. I've done pop-up clearances to make it to my destination rather than land 75 miles away VFR.
Click to expand...

And how would you doing that result in a smoking hole?

MBDiagMan said:
That’ll work for those who enjoy doing a lot of paper work.
Click to expand...

The paperwork if any is minimal and far preferable to making a smoking hole.
 
I understand that the paperwork after declaring an emergency can be quite significant. If you do declare an emergency I think it would not work out well if it’s not truly an emergency. If you head for the rule airspace with the intent to declare an emergency rather than register the flight on the non equipped flight website, I don’t think you will like the end result.
 
SkyDog58 said:
The paperwork if any is minimal and far preferable to making a smoking hole.
Click to expand...
Yes, but. Installing ADS-B is far preferable to both of those results, it just costs money. There are plenty of pilots that lie or want to lie (judging from what I've seen in our medical forum over the years, along with a multitude of excuses) in order to get their medicals. How about pencil-whipped annuals? Or those that cheat the weather minimums?

My point is this: while most pilots follow the rules, there are always some that don't bother. Some end up dead - the "Darwin Candidates" - and some take out others at the same time.

Implementing a policy to try and "force" pilots to install the gear is one thing. Expecting it to have no impact on safety is another thing entirely. And given today's regulatory environment, those that cut corners may have a negative impact on all.

I'm all in favor of ADS-B as a safety tool for ATC and other pilots. I'm not sure I'm in favor of a hard-nosed, difficult-to-waive policy against those without in certain areas.
 
MBDiagMan said:
I understand that the paperwork after declaring an emergency can be quite significant. If you do declare an emergency I think it would not work out well if it’s not truly an emergency. If you head for the rule airspace with the intent to declare an emergency rather than register the flight on the non equipped flight website, I don’t think you will like the end result.
Click to expand...
I have heard it may not be any paperwork, depending on the circumstances.
Here's a real example:
https://www.pilotsofamerica.com/community/threads/called-a-pan-pan-yesterday.103500/#post-2298006
No paperwork.

No paperwork mentioned here:
https://www.pilotsofamerica.com/community/threads/first-declared-emergency.109376/#post-2475814

Nor here:
https://www.pilotsofamerica.com/community/threads/i-declared-an-emergency-today.89402/

If these people still post, I imagine you could get real information instead of my inferences for the second and third citations.
 
I declared an emergency a year ago when I shut down one engine at altitude, landed without any problems, zero paperwork.
 
A simple emergency like a weather divert doesn’t have any paperwork involved in it. Emergencies resulting in Accidents / serious incidents or given priority by ATC (if requested) have reporting requirements. That’s it.

The ATC end has virtually no paperwork either if the emergency isn’t one that isn’t being investigated. A red “E” on the flight strip, sup logs the emergency on the sup’s log and possibly a DEN submission. Done in maybe 5-10 minutes.
 
MBDiagMan said:
This reminds me of the buzz that went on in late 1999. There were those who believed the world as we know it would end at midnight 12/31/1999 and those who believed it was a hoax. I was in the hoax camp. I expect that listening to ATC or flying into rule airspace on January 2, 2020 will be quite interesting.
Click to expand...

Cap'n Jack said:
It may have been overblown, but it wasn't a hoax either. I know a few people who worked to make it a non-event.
Click to expand...

I received a Division Award (2nd highest individual award at Intel) for my work on checking and ensuring that our EMC lab's equipment would continue to function on 1/1/2000. It took a while to get through all the instruments in the lab that were computerized. In the end, none had a problem. But, if we hadn't checked we wouldn't have known until it was too late to do anything about it. Intel took the matter seriously.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top