"If you land and cross the lower 48 border at one of the International turf strips that is both in Canada and the U.S. you do not need to file a flight plan and you do not need to file an eAPIS because you did not fly across the border - you taxied across which is similar to driving a car across."

Phil, I presume you need to do customs at these airports, correct? And they must have some provision for doing so that doesn't take forever or a drive into town? And can be done without a CANPASS?

Greg

The strips I've used have road customs right next to them. I have Canpass and have never had Canadian customs meet or talk to me. I just wait till my reported time of arrival in Canada and then take off. U.S. Customs always comes and meets me, no longer then a 15 minute wait so far.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edit: I did have to meet Canadian customs once when I was taking my nephews fishing as they didn't have Canpasses


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

GregA wrote:"If you land and cross the lower 48 border at one of the International turf strips that is both in Canada and the U.S. you do not need to file a flight plan and you do not need to file an eAPIS because you did not fly across the border - you taxied across which is similar to driving a car across."

Phil, I presume you need to do customs at these airports, correct? And they must have some provision for doing so that doesn't take forever or a drive into town? And can be done without a CANPASS?

Greg

You need a flight plan in Canada.

Bonanza Man wrote:...You need a flight plan in Canada.

No you do not. You just need to tell someone where you are going. Or of course you can file a flight plan if you desire, but for VFR flying it is not required.

You old farts might want to sell your plane some day (or your heirs might have to sell it). I predict that the lack of compliance will severely shrink your pool of available buyers and the fetching price accordingly. How much will be a function of the prices to bring it into compliance of course....

Cary wrote:For you young'ns who want to wait, claiming that you just won't fly in controlled airspace that currently requires a transponder, or that you'll just ask for a waiver, remember that those spaces are gradually increasing, and waivers are discretionary. How quickly, and to what extent, those chances will go away is anyone's guess. What I'm saying is that there may very well come a time when if you're going to fly, it will be because your airplane is equipped for ADS-B Out, and if you're going to spend the money for Out, you may as spring for In and get all the benefits of the ADS-B system listed below.

For us old farts, perhaps those of us whose flying days are numbered, maybe it won't make much difference--skirting the current areas won't be all that hard for awhile. For myself, I've spent the money, my airplane is equipped with both 978 UAT and 1090 ES, and I quite frankly am very glad to have all of the benefits that the ADS-B system currently offers. That includes (quoting from Wikipedia):

Traffic – When using an ADS-B In system, a pilot is able to view traffic information about surrounding aircraft if those aircraft are equipped with ADS-B out. This information includes altitude, heading, speed, and distance to aircraft. In addition to receiving position reports from ADS-B out participants, TIS-B [USA-only] can provide position reports on non ADS-B out-equipped aircraft if suitable ground equipment and ground radar exist. ADS-R re-transmits ADS-B position reports between UAT and 1090 MHz frequency bands.

Weather – Aircraft equipped with universal access transceiver (UAT) ADS-B In technology will be able to receive weather reports, and weather radar through flight information service-broadcast (FIS-B). [USA-only]

Flight information – Flight information service-broadcast (FIS-B) also transmits readable flight information such as temporary flight restrictions (TFRs) and NOTAMs to aircraft equipped with UAT. [USA-only]

That's where I think those who choose not to equip are shooting themselves in the foot. With the investment in the equipment, the information is available without a subscription, and at this time, it's usable at any reasonable AGL altitude all across the US.

Cary

Man, you guys have really drunk the Kool Aid!

So, you guys think they'll stop manufacturing ADS-B equipment after 2020? Lots of people buy airplanes and immediately upgrade avionics, even though the old stuff would get by.

I doubt that ADS-B or no is going to be much of a factor in selling an airplane. It may well influence the sale price a little, but anybody who's done avionics upgrades then sold the plane will tell you they pretty much gave the avionics away. The same will happen with this stuff.

And, frankly, the equipment will likely get improved and maybe cheaper the longer you wait.

If I lived under a mode C veil or in Charley airspace, I'd equip, but not for another couple years.

Since my current ride has no electrical system, and I avoid "big" airspace, I'll happily spend that money on gas.

MTV

I don't doubt if you fly your cross countries at 1000' AGL, you'd have a lot of trouble getting good weather from ADS-B In. Also, without your own ADS-B Out, you will not get very good traffic coverage from your ADS-B In equipment, unless there is an airplane relatively nearby with ADS-B Out that triggers the ground towers--the hockey puck effect that is often described in articles about ADS-B.

But I don't do cross countries at 1000' AGL. I'm typically from 3000' to 10,000' AGL on cross countries, and I get good weather coverage everywhere I fly, including in the mountains (Colorado just happens to have more ADS-B towers than most other areas--that's noticeable on the FAA's coverage maps). If you look at the coverage maps for 3000' AGL and above, you see very few holes, and that's been my experience.

The ADS-B weather and XM weather have about the same displayed pixelation out to about 200 miles from the receiver. Farther than that, XM's is clearer, so I've read. That means, at the airspeeds that my airplane flies, I have very clearly displayed weather showing up to about 1 1/2 hours away, and blockier displayed weather showing beyond that. I have yet to find that to be inhibiting in any way.

XM weather is receivable on the ground, so I've read. ADS-B weather in my immediate area becomes available at about 1100' AGL, just above pattern altitude, on my Stratus 2 receiver. However, as long as I have cell coverage, I can get ADS-B weather on the ground via the Internet. There are very few places that I go that I cannot get cell coverage on the ground. In fact, the only place I've been in the last 4 years that I couldn't get cell coverage was Marble, CO. Surprisingly, I started receiving ADS-B In weather as I was climbing out over Redstone while still in the canyon, and it continued all the way to Greeley.

So really, Mike, it's not a situation of drinking the Kool-aid. While there may be areas of the country with less than good ADS-B coverage, I have found great coverage everywhere I've flown.

I now have a little over a year's experience with having ADS-B Out, and the benefits I earlier listed are real. I have had ADS-B In weather for about 4 1/2 years, so what I've said is based on my own experience, not on someone else's experience. And the end result is that I'm glad to have had my airplane equipped.

Cary

Cary,

I don't doubt much of what you posted. But, try Montana, North Dakota and South Dakota. Huge gaps in coverage, and I climbed up to a reasonable altitude at times to see if I got reception.

The issue of pixelation difference between XM and ADS-B is well documented, and it's real, and not just at some particular distance. I compared ADS-B weather with cellular reception several times and the difference in resolution was remarkable.

As to non availability of weather on the ground, that's what has gotten a number of folks to "Go take a look." And that can be disastrous.....once you're airborne, the motivation/temptation to keep going is remarkably strong. Try getting weather in the Idaho backcountry without XM.

So, ADS-B may meet your needs just fine...I'm happy for you. Now fly in to Broadus, MT, with a front ahead, and no cell coverage. XM weather will look like a much better deal, believe me.

And look at the FAAs map of ADS-B coverage. And my understanding is that coverage in that area is only guaranteed above 6000 agl. A Cub at those altitudes in th prairies isn't likely going to make much headway many days, depending on direction of travel.

But, this IS SUPPOSED to be a backcountry flying oriented site after all, and you don't see much backcountry from 6000.

MTV

Cary and MTV both have good points. I'm "drinking the ADS-B Kool-Aid" because:
a) My airplane is based inside the Mode-C veil, so I have to have it after 1/1/2020 or park the airplane,
b) Most (90%+) of my flying is within 300 miles of Dallas, and FIS-B weather reception is great here, and
c) TIS-B traffic is a game-changer for avoiding airborne traffic.

The traffic information alone would justify the upgrade for me – in my flying area. Once while on a cross-country flight from Dallas to OK CIty (and well before the ADS-B upgrade to my plane) I was overtaken from behind by a Bonanza who passed about 30-50 feet below me, from my 7 o'clock to my 1 o'clock position. There was absolutely no way I could have seen him, and he obviously never saw me! After the ADS-B upgrade to my previous plane, I was amazed at all the traffic it revealed that was previously invisible. On several occasions, I was able to observe airplanes overtaking me from behind, and reduce the potential for conflict by altering course or altitude slightly.

Probably if I was flying "out west" in the mountains, XM would be a higher priority for me. But in about 3/4 of CONUS, the slight difference in resolution between XM and FIS-B "close-in" (<250 miles) is immaterial to my weather-avoidance purposes. Beyond 250 miles, XM's advantages are increased, because they continue to supply "regional" NEXRAD, while the FIS-B broadcasts only provide the "CONUS" data, which is definitely lower resolution, but in my plane, that's 2+ hours of flying time... To be fair, XM's product is superior even in the "up-close" NEXRAD views. XM delivers smaller "chunks" (pixels) of data, so things like "hook lines" are more defined than with FIS-B. But for me, if I'm close enough that the resolution difference really matters, I'd better be on the ground (preferably in a hangar!). There's nowhere I need to be badly enough to fly close to an active thunderstorm. (And even if I DID have to go, I'd rather have a Stormscope to show the lightning activity than just rely on 10-15 minute old NEXRAD data, as good and helpful as it is...)

Here in thunderstorm country, I use FIS-B as a "strategic decision-making tool" to avoid thunderstorms by at least 40 miles (target is 50, but my personal "go-no-closer" distance is 40 miles). That's DOUBLE the distance the AOPA and FAA used to recommend, but even they are now saying 20 miles isn't enough... That's partially because of the roughly 10-15 minute delay between what you can see out the window and when it will show up on the screen. But I've also grown a bit more conservative because of personal experience with outflow winds from an thunderstorm.

In my own "I Learned About Flying From That" incident, I got caught by "outflow" winds from a thunderstorm that was over 30 miles away. I was taking off into a 10-15 knot direct headwind, trying to depart well before the thunderstorm cell got any closer. I had rotated and climbed to about 50 feet, when I got hit by a really strong tailwind that brought me down to barely above stall speed, and forced me down to about 5 feet above the runway. Fortunately, there were no obstructions off the end of the runway, and I was able to lower the nose and fly in ground effect for a while to regain some airspeed and resume my climb. Since that incident, I give thunderstorms more clearance!

XM is a great product, but it costs money. Money that for my type (and area) of flying doesn't justify the $400+ yearly expense for the subscription, and the $500+ for the hardware to receive it. Once I've upgraded my plane for the 2020 mandate, an inexpensive (<$200 to maybe $800 tops) ADS-B receiver will give me first class traffic information, and 2nd-class weather information, with no subscription fee. To me, that's a good deal.

Pass the Kool-Aid, please!

JP256,

You make good points, and I have no doubt that ADS-B has value in many parts of the country.

But as to resolution, on ADS-B I saw what appeared to be a very large gap in a line of storms.....this was Midwest, so serious t-storms. I aimed that direction, then out of curiosity I got out my phone and looked at MyRadar......that "gap" shown on ADS-B depiction was in fact nearly all orange and yellow on the phone. I checked refresh times, and was looking at the same image. This was a line that was ~ twenty miles ahead.

I reversed course and landed. If all I'd had was that ADS-B picture, I'd have got closer than wise prior to turning....it was ugly black.

Maybe an isolated instance, but I've compared the two depictions several times, and ADS-B has never impressed me.

I'm a long time XM user, and it's saved me many times flying in the Midwest. Saved me from jumping in where I shouldn't, saved me sitting on the ground when there was a good way around weather, etc.

Call me spoiled.

MTV

I'd have to wonder what your altitude was, with the possible explanation that you were too low to pick up the ADS-B towers. The fundamental source of XM and ADS-B FIS-B weather is the same, the only differences in the reception being the pixels and some minor differences in the coloring, but XM comes from satellite transmitters and ADS-B FIS-B comes from ground transmitters. If you're too low to pick up the ground transmitters with the ADS-B In receiver, then there will be gaps.

As I've said, my choice of altitudes for cross country flying is relatively high most of the time. On that annual OSH run, for instance, eastbound I usually file for 9000' out of Greeley, then 7000' out of Grand Island, and 5000' out of Dubuque. Coming back on the reverse route, it's usually 4000' out of OSH, 6000' out of Dubuque, and 8000' out of Grand Island. At those altitudes, I have yet to have any weather gaps along that route or my alternate more northerly route to Luverne, MN, then LaCrosse, WI, then to OSH, same altitudes for the comparable legs.

Cary

Cary wrote:I'd have to wonder what your altitude was, with the possible explanation that you were too low to pick up the ADS-B towers. The fundamental source of XM and ADS-B FIS-B weather is the same, the only differences in the reception being the pixels and some minor differences in the coloring, but XM comes from satellite transmitters and ADS-B FIS-B comes from ground transmitters. If you're too low to pick up the ground transmitters with the ADS-B In receiver, then there will be gaps.

As I've said, my choice of altitudes for cross country flying is relatively high most of the time. On that annual OSH run, for instance, eastbound I usually file for 9000' out of Greeley, then 7000' out of Grand Island, and 5000' out of Dubuque. Coming back on the reverse route, it's usually 4000' out of OSH, 6000' out of Dubuque, and 8000' out of Grand Island. At those altitudes, I have yet to have any weather gaps along that route or my alternate more northerly route to Luverne, MN, then LaCrosse, WI, then to OSH, same altitudes for the comparable legs.

Cary

Cary, I totally understand that the two sources of this data derive their data from the same place. It's the pixelation, as I noted earlier is the difference, I'm told. I was receiving ADS-B signal from a GBT. I've compared the "pictures" a number of times. Next time you're out and about, try comparing MyRadar on a phone or I Pad with your ADS-B picture.

mtv wrote:

Cary wrote:I'd have to wonder what your altitude was, with the possible explanation that you were too low to pick up the ADS-B towers. The fundamental source of XM and ADS-B FIS-B weather is the same, the only differences in the reception being the pixels and some minor differences in the coloring, but XM comes from satellite transmitters and ADS-B FIS-B comes from ground transmitters. If you're too low to pick up the ground transmitters with the ADS-B In receiver, then there will be gaps.

As I've said, my choice of altitudes for cross country flying is relatively high most of the time. On that annual OSH run, for instance, eastbound I usually file for 9000' out of Greeley, then 7000' out of Grand Island, and 5000' out of Dubuque. Coming back on the reverse route, it's usually 4000' out of OSH, 6000' out of Dubuque, and 8000' out of Grand Island. At those altitudes, I have yet to have any weather gaps along that route or my alternate more northerly route to Luverne, MN, then LaCrosse, WI, then to OSH, same altitudes for the comparable legs.

Cary

Cary, I totally understand that the two sources of this data derive their data from the same place. It's the pixelation, as I noted earlier is the difference, I'm told. I was receiving ADS-B signal from a GBT. I've compared the "pictures" a number of times. Next time you're out and about, try comparing MyRadar on a phone or I Pad with your ADS-B picture.

I've done that. As I said earlier, there's little difference if I'm looking at only a couple hundred miles from my position. ADS-B gets blockier much farther out from there.

Cary

Good news from FAA.

I was doing the rebate paper work for the Garmin GTX 345 ADS-B and I was red flagged on the reservation page for no model year of my Maule in the FAA register.

I personally verified that when I searched the data base there was no model year. There was not. I called the contact number, LOW AND BEHOLD A GUY ANSWERED!!!!!! He said he couldn't fix the problem but transfered me to someone he said could. HALLELUJAH I DIDN'T GET DROPPED OR PUT ON HOLD FOR HOURS!! The nice gal who helped me said she couldn't fix it but knew who could, and would email them. Ya right I thought. BUT !!! this morning 22 hours after my first call, it is fixed!!

Plus 1 for the FAA. Only a million more pluses to go to make up for their normal BS.

Cheers...Rob

OregonMaule wrote:Good news from FAA.

I was doing the rebate paper work for the Garmin GTX 345 ADS-B and I was red flagged on the reservation page for no model year of my Maule in the FAA register. Plus 1 for the FAA. Only a million more pluses to go to make up for their normal BS.

Cheers...Rob

Rob: I dropped my Maule off at Pacific Coast Avionics yesterday and saw your bird in the hangar. I tried to convince the folks there to confuse our orders to give me an upgrade. I bought the Garmin 335 Out only because I already have an ADS-B In system. They politely declined. Dang! At least your bird is the "test Maule" so my installation will benefit from lessons learned on your plane.

I bought the 1090 Mode S transponder with extended squitter because I wanted a weight neutral solution. Swapping out a transponder and not adding any antennas seemed better to me that adding a UAT 978 MHz box and an extra antenna to my existing equipment list. I regularly fly into the mode C veil around SeaTac airport, so there was no way to avoid compliance. 978 MHz units may see some slight reduction in price between now and the mandate, but I seriously doubt there will be any price reductions for Mode S transponders and the $500 rebate offer expires this September. Buying this equipment did put off buying other things I would rather have for my plane, but such is life.

Anyone seen/used/bought these?

https://youtu.be/nWOdynW0k2U


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'd be interested in a pirep also--
Levil's "Beacon" looks like it could be a neat, turn-key ADS-B solution.

Airplaneflyer wrote:Anyone seen/used/bought these?

https://youtu.be/nWOdynW0k2U


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The BEACON (ADS-B OUT) and the BOM (GPS, ADS-B IN, Wi-Fi, AoA sensor, Air Data, AHRS, and Data Recording -- all powered by a wind-driven generator) are pretty cool products that are under development. Unfortunately, neither has been released yet - only announced at Sun-N-Fun. I heard their chief engineer say they hope to have the BOM ready to take orders at OSH 2017, but the BEACON has to go through certification with the FAA, and that will take some time. I believe I heard they might make a "non-certified" version of the BEACON available for Experimental/LSA use before the FAA certification is completed, but have no first-hand knowledge of that.

There are less expensive options for experimental aircraft, but those aren't available to certified planes. SkyVision has an ADS-B in/out unit for $1,399 for experimental, uAvionix has the echo UAT unit for $999.00, and NavWorx is offering its ADS600-EXP for homebuilts for $869. In the certified market, you're looking at $2,700 as about the lowest price for hardware for just ADS-B out, then you have all the installation costs to deal with. I had about $4,200 in total costs for hardware and installation, but the $500 FAA rebate and sale of my Garmin GTX 327 Mode C Transponder for $450 brought my net cost down to $3,250. The FAA rebate goes away in September, so if you're looking for ways to cut costs one of the best deals available is about to go away.

For me, I make regular flights to Boeing Field when I'm visiting Seattle. A 20 minute flight is sooooo much faster and easier than driving for 2.5 hours (the flight is straight line distance of 44 miles, but driving around Puget Sound makes it a 99 mile slog in bad traffic). No comparison! I also transit the Class C over Whidbey Island Naval Air Station when going to the San Juan Islands, so getting equipped was essential if I wanted to continue the kind of flying that helps justify owning my plane. I also do backcountry flights where ADS-B isn't required, but that actually constitutes less than 25% of my flying. Each of us has to balance the kind of flying we want to do in the future with the cost of being compliant for affected airspace. For me, the answer was easy. I also believe that have my plane equipped compliantly will make it easier to sell when the time comes.

By the way, my installation was weight neutral. I had 1 transponder removed and another one with nearly identical weight installed. I used my existing GNS430 as the WAAS GPS source for the transponder and I was done. No new antennas, no additional boxes, no headaches.