You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
ADS-B Compatibility
- Thread starter thibault
- Start date
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2005
- Messages
- 13,226
We haven't committed to supporting particular devices / service types yet, other than the TIS input from the Dynon Transponder. Don't take that to be an ant-everything-Dynon statement. We simply haven't decided what to support and in what order yet. We don't have any specific arrangements with NavWorks at the moment, though we've obviously had conversations with them.
We do expect to support ADS-B traffic and wx, but we don't expect it to be over ARINC-429.
We do expect to support ADS-B traffic and wx, but we don't expect it to be over ARINC-429.
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2005
- Messages
- 13,226
We might support a greater list of devices in the future, but we don't consider something with a $14,000 MSRP to be standard in our industry, so it is low on the list. If a bunch of people write and tell us they have one, we'll be happy to bump it up the list.
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2005
- Messages
- 13,226
Europe is requiring Mode-S by 2015 which will give you full ADS-B traffic with a $1,000 1090ES receiver.
As far as I know, the Zaon devices are $1,500 and do the same things as the Avidyne does. What are the advantages of the Avidyne?
As far as I know, the Zaon devices are $1,500 and do the same things as the Avidyne does. What are the advantages of the Avidyne?
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2005
- Messages
- 13,226
1090ES and UAT traffic is broadcast at 2Hz.
Since passive systems like the Avidyne are reliant on some other thing interrogating traffic, they can be as low as once every 6 seconds, which is how fast a terminal radar spins.
Since passive systems like the Avidyne are reliant on some other thing interrogating traffic, they can be as low as once every 6 seconds, which is how fast a terminal radar spins.
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2005
- Messages
- 13,226
I apologize if I was wrong about the Ryan/Avidyne 9900B being passive. We know nothing about these units since this is the first time we have ever been asked about them.
I had read this as my reference:
http://www.avweb.com/news/reviews/182532-1.html
Which says:
"The Ryan TCAD system is different than TCAS, which is why the names differ slightly. The TCAD is a passive device, which listens to transponders, some of which may be a collision threat, while TCAS is an active device that actually interrogates transponders in the vicinity. Consequently, the TCAD is effective only if nearby transponders are being interrogated by something else, like an ATC radar facility or a TCAS-equipped aircraft. "
So are we now talking about something besides the 9900B, or is the article wrong?
We're happy to be educated about other devices, and to learn that we should be supporting more or different devices. Please let us know if you have a traffic system in your plane that isn't on our list, and we'll be happy to consider it. We generally don't know a lot about devices that cost as much or more than our EFIS systems because they seem to be rarely put in experimental airplanes.
I had read this as my reference:
http://www.avweb.com/news/reviews/182532-1.html
Which says:
"The Ryan TCAD system is different than TCAS, which is why the names differ slightly. The TCAD is a passive device, which listens to transponders, some of which may be a collision threat, while TCAS is an active device that actually interrogates transponders in the vicinity. Consequently, the TCAD is effective only if nearby transponders are being interrogated by something else, like an ATC radar facility or a TCAS-equipped aircraft. "
So are we now talking about something besides the 9900B, or is the article wrong?
We're happy to be educated about other devices, and to learn that we should be supporting more or different devices. Please let us know if you have a traffic system in your plane that isn't on our list, and we'll be happy to consider it. We generally don't know a lot about devices that cost as much or more than our EFIS systems because they seem to be rarely put in experimental airplanes.
Unless I am mistaken (and I do see that the older Ryan 9900B was mentioned, but labeled as TAS instead of TCAD), we are talking about the current Avidyne TAS600 series, about which the Avidyne site says: "Avidyne’s TAS600 series systems detect and actively interrogate other aircraft transponders within range, display the surrounding traffic on a host of compatible display systems, and provide audible and visual alerts in the event of a potential traffic conflict. All TAS600 series systems provide real-time traffic monitoring and advisories, are not radar-coverage limited, and operate independent of ground-based systems."
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2005
- Messages
- 13,226
The question that started all of this referred to "the industry standard Avidyne/Ryan 9900B TAS units" so that's what I was assuming we were discussing. Sorry for the confusion.
Yes, there was plenty of room for confusion, with TCAD being called TAS, references to MSRP of products that, to my knowledge, are no longer on the market, and further references to Avidyne's current TAS lineup. So, I guess the outstanding questions are three:
1) Will SkyView ever be able to take traffic data from the Ryan 9900B TCAD system?
2) Will SkyView ever be able to take traffic data from the Avidyne TAS600 system?
3) Will SkyView ever be able to take traffic data from any other TA system over ARINC-429?
And, of course, the common question underlying all of these is why Dynon does not expect to or currently plan to support traffic (or any other ADS-B data?) over ARINC-429? What is the reasoning behind or advantage to using another protocol?
1) Will SkyView ever be able to take traffic data from the Ryan 9900B TCAD system?
2) Will SkyView ever be able to take traffic data from the Avidyne TAS600 system?
3) Will SkyView ever be able to take traffic data from any other TA system over ARINC-429?
And, of course, the common question underlying all of these is why Dynon does not expect to or currently plan to support traffic (or any other ADS-B data?) over ARINC-429? What is the reasoning behind or advantage to using another protocol?
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2005
- Messages
- 13,226
As mentioned, we have no current plans to support Avidyne devices, since we have not been asked before this point. If people are telling us they are installing these Avidyine systems, then we will consider it.
Every device we know of that gets used in our market has a serial output (Navworx ADS-B, Zaon, Garmin 330). Every SkyView screen has 5 serial ports. SkyView does not have ARINC-429, and requires an adapter that costs $475 for 2 ARINC inputs (which both get used by a Garmin 430). So we see no reason to put work into ARINC-429 traffic input when everything sends it out serial.
So the advantage of serial is it's common and cheap, while ARINC is expensive.
Every device we know of that gets used in our market has a serial output (Navworx ADS-B, Zaon, Garmin 330). Every SkyView screen has 5 serial ports. SkyView does not have ARINC-429, and requires an adapter that costs $475 for 2 ARINC inputs (which both get used by a Garmin 430). So we see no reason to put work into ARINC-429 traffic input when everything sends it out serial.
So the advantage of serial is it's common and cheap, while ARINC is expensive.
If I caused confusion with my post regarding Avidyne TAS600 systems and TCAD Ryan 9900BX its because I am confused by the terminology. I have a system purchased as an Avidyne TAS 600, the paperwork and equipment labels refer to it as a Ryan 9900BX TCAD processor !
The situation as I understand it in Europe is that there will be no uplinked traffic data. Mode S is being made mandatory simply so the ATC controllers can filter returns and collect more data. This policy is very much how it goes in Europe. It swings the max cost on the aircraft owner for minimum return.
Richard
The situation as I understand it in Europe is that there will be no uplinked traffic data. Mode S is being made mandatory simply so the ATC controllers can filter returns and collect more data. This policy is very much how it goes in Europe. It swings the max cost on the aircraft owner for minimum return.
Richard
Richard,
Perhaps something like the DAC GDC34A will allow you to interface your Avidyne unit with a future update of SkyView. The GDC34A accepts ARINC-735A TCAS traffic advisories transmitted on an ARINC-429 link and translates them into an RS232 data stream. Chelton EFIS users have used the GDC34A to connect a 9900B to a serial port on their EFIS, so maybe the same thing will work for SkyView when it is better able to handle traffic data (e.g., TIS-B).
Unfortunately, at a dealer price of $1170, the GDC34 is only cheap in comparison to other data converters.
Then again, maybe all of that data conversion is unnecessary. I don't have TAS600 installation manuals, but from what I can tell from the Avidyne marketing literature, the TAS600s do have four RS232 serial ports that the literature says are "to allow for multiple display interfaces." Whether SkyView will ever be able to understand what is coming out of the TAS600 serial ports is, of course, another question.
Oh, and I am still confused by the various Ryan and Avidyne model names, but it is looking to me now that the Ryan 9900 series was sold in a few different configurations with upgrade paths that allowed it to go from a passive system to an active interrogation system, and that the final evolution as a Ryan product, the 9900BX, was an active TAS and essentially the same thing as the first release of the Avidyne TAS600. You've probably got a TAS600 purchased during the Ryan->Avidyne transition, and that is why you've got a mix of labels and documentation.
Perhaps something like the DAC GDC34A will allow you to interface your Avidyne unit with a future update of SkyView. The GDC34A accepts ARINC-735A TCAS traffic advisories transmitted on an ARINC-429 link and translates them into an RS232 data stream. Chelton EFIS users have used the GDC34A to connect a 9900B to a serial port on their EFIS, so maybe the same thing will work for SkyView when it is better able to handle traffic data (e.g., TIS-B).
Unfortunately, at a dealer price of $1170, the GDC34 is only cheap in comparison to other data converters.
Then again, maybe all of that data conversion is unnecessary. I don't have TAS600 installation manuals, but from what I can tell from the Avidyne marketing literature, the TAS600s do have four RS232 serial ports that the literature says are "to allow for multiple display interfaces." Whether SkyView will ever be able to understand what is coming out of the TAS600 serial ports is, of course, another question.
Oh, and I am still confused by the various Ryan and Avidyne model names, but it is looking to me now that the Ryan 9900 series was sold in a few different configurations with upgrade paths that allowed it to go from a passive system to an active interrogation system, and that the final evolution as a Ryan product, the 9900BX, was an active TAS and essentially the same thing as the first release of the Avidyne TAS600. You've probably got a TAS600 purchased during the Ryan->Avidyne transition, and that is why you've got a mix of labels and documentation.