Some thoughts:

Don't plan on Levil's thingies getting on the market very soon. Often the announcement of a new avionics doodad is literally years before it's certified, and often even longer before it's available. That's true of all kinds of avionics and instrumentation.

If I was in the market, I wouldn't even consider anything by NavWorx. Their tussle with the FAA is costing a lot of folks some money, and while they have some items that apparently aren't involved in the tussle, dealing with a company that infamously butted heads with the agency that holds the cards doesn't seem very smart. But that's my opinion.

Having had ADS-B Out for the last 1 1/2 years and ADS-B In for about 4+ years, I have to say it's marvelous technology. Not that it's a particular game-changer, but it's great to see other traffic and to be able to identify their tail numbers, altitudes, and direction. It's great to get verbal and visible warnings when they are close enough to soon pose a danger. It's even greater to keep tabs on the weather, soon enough to make a Plan B decision.

Gosh, the times they are a changin'!

Cary

Cary wrote:....it's great to see other traffic and to be able to identify their tail numbers, altitudes, and direction. ....

Curious why you think it's great to be able to identify their tail number?

hotrod180 wrote:

Cary wrote:....it's great to see other traffic and to be able to identify their tail numbers, altitudes, and direction. ....

Curious why you think it's great to be able to identify their tail number?

For me, it's because if I hear THAT tail number on the radio, I know who and where they are...

But if I hear a DIFFERENT tail number, I know I've got another bogey out there, and need to look harder to spot them... And that's one of the reasons I still announce my position with "Orange-and-white Citabria 9-5-0-2-Sierra..." If they see my plane, great. If they have me on ADS-B, great. Either way, my airplane is "unique" and identifiable.

JP256 wrote:

hotrod180 wrote:

Cary wrote:....it's great to see other traffic and to be able to identify their tail numbers, altitudes, and direction. ....

Curious why you think it's great to be able to identify their tail number?

For me, it's because if I hear THAT tail number on the radio, I know who and where they are...

But if I hear a DIFFERENT tail number, I know I've got another bogey out there, and need to look harder to spot them... And that's one of the reasons I still announce my position with "Orange-and-white Citabria 9-5-0-2-Sierra..." If they see my plane, great. If they have me on ADS-B, great. Either way, my airplane is "unique" and identifiable.

Exactly. When you've got a beehive of activity going, the more you can discern who's who, the better it is. For some reason, the last few days have seen both KGXY (Greeley) and KFNL (Fort Collins/Loveland) turn into beehives, and since many of those are students, they're not very accurate about their locations. They and I need all the help we can get!

Cary

Just got an email from foreflight about this... $199 ADS-B traffic and weather receiver, size of a pen and 17 grams
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07348TPJT

asa wrote:Just got an email from foreflight about this... $199 ADS-B traffic and weather receiver, size of a pen and 17 grams
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07348TPJT

Looks like something worth having, for those who haven't yet obtained ADS-B In. Lacking an internal battery would seem to be a problem for some. I have a Stratus 2, which has its own battery, but I also have it plugged into ship's power, so that its internal battery is essentially a backup if the electrical system fails.

For those who don't have ADS-B In, it's a marvelous addition to FF--being able to see the weather, although it's delayed up to 20 minutes, is a whole lot better than not seeing it at all. Sounds like a $200 bargain.

Cary

Hey everyone,

I've skimmed through this thread and didn't see the answer to a question I have. So here we are a year later or so and more units like Skybeacon have come to market as an option. In the beginning I was leaning towards the ESG by Appero, but then started to lean towards the Skybeacon. My dilemma now though is 978 vs 1090.

So here is my question: How will Canada and Mexico's regulations be written. The only thing that I've read is that 1090 is the standard outside of the US. But then I wondered, does that mean that every plane everywhere has to have it? Even the cub in the Yukon that never leaves a 20 mile radius from his cabin? I am wondering if Canada's regulations will be similar to the US...that it is only required in airspace where a transponder currently is. If that were the case, could one make it from the western US to AK without touching any of that airspace? Essentially, I want to find out if 1) can I install the 978 Skybeacon to meet the US mandate and 2) still make it from the lower western 48 to AK?

You guys in Canada, what are you hearing about the particulars for ADS-B up there?

Sorry if this was covered and I missed it. Thanks!

Hey Corey. From what ive been hearing we I'll be satellite based up here. We will only have 1090. So it sounds like we wont be able to get in, as I believe that's what the 978 is for.
In any case, it sounds like it will be between 5-12 years until we get mandated here, so it'll probably be at least 3 or 4 until we hear what will actually be required. It's a real pain as I've got a few customers that want to upgrade, but it's tough when we dont know how to comply yet...

Garmin GDL82 is the most cost effective certified product currently on the market. Sky Beacon looks promising but is still trying to certify. I am holding out hoping they make it in time

FYI -
I was hoping to use the GDL82 with my GTX330S and was informed that they are NOT compatible with each other. The GDL82 will not work with MODE-S transponders. I got this information from Gary at Northern Lights Avionics when I tried to buy one. He double checked with Garmin to make absolutely sure. Garmin is supposedly working on updating the literature to state this.

Actually Skybeacon just certified right before Osh Kosh.

Thanks for the input. So is every Canadian registered aircraft going to have to equip regardless of where you fly in Canada? Sounds like it may be too early to tell how they will write it. I was wondering if it was done like in the US, it might be possible to get from the lower 48 to AK if you avoided airspace that currently requires a transponder.

I have a working GTX 327 and a Garmin bias, so I went ahead and equipped with the GDL 82 (which is a 978 MHz UAT device). I'm happy with it insofar as it is an unobtrusive way to comply with the mandate. I didn't care for the aesthetics of the Skybeacon single nav/strobe replacement that wouldn't match my other wing, although I see that they are bringing a tail position replacement to market that looks slick. If I had to do another airplane with a working Mode C transponder I might go the tailbeacon route.

According to this blog post from Nav Canada it sounds like they are planning a phased implementation: http://blog.navcanada.ca/consulting-ads-b-mandate/

I've read elsewhere that they are looking at Mode C exemption corridors in areas that have radar coverage and see lots of N-registered overflight aircraft (Vancouver/Victoria and the Great Lakes region). There is also some back-and-forth as to whether Canada will require diversity (txp antennas on both bottom and top of the aircraft to enhance satellite reception), so equipping with 1090ES with a belly antenna may not be a fully compliant installation for the final mandate.

I'm just going to use the fact that there is a mandate on the horizon to motivate me to get a trip to Alaska in "sooner than later." Even so it seems like I still have 5+ years to work with...

Felix wrote:…..I didn't care for the aesthetics of the Skybeacon single nav/strobe replacement that wouldn't match my other wing, although I see that they are bringing a tail position replacement to market that looks slick. If I had to do another airplane with a working Mode C transponder I might go the tailbeacon route....

I've been leaning toward the Garmin GDL82 but this Tailbeacon from Uavionix looks promising.
Supposed to gonna be priced right around $2K.
GDL82's a bit less but probably more work (aka cost) to install.

https://uavionix.com/products/tailbeacon/

hotrod180 wrote:

Felix wrote:…..I didn't care for the aesthetics of the Skybeacon single nav/strobe replacement that wouldn't match my other wing, although I see that they are bringing a tail position replacement to market that looks slick. If I had to do another airplane with a working Mode C transponder I might go the tailbeacon route....

I've been leaning toward the Garmin GDL82 but this Tailbeacon from Uavionix looks promising.
Supposed to gonna be priced right around $2K.
GDL82's a bit less but probably more work (aka cost) to install.

https://uavionix.com/products/tailbeacon/

Yeah - I don't have a WAAS GPS so the install added about a grand.

In the wet blanket department, a lot of folks got burned during the argument between the FAA and NavWorx, because they installed early after the NavWorx box was approved, and then all of a sudden, it was disapproved and prohibited from being used. So based on that, if I were in the market for an ADS-B Out solution today (I'm not--I equipped several years ago), I'd hesitate to latch onto the uaVionix wingtip and tail solutions quite yet. Once they've been in the field for awhile, there's less likelihood that certification will be withdrawn, but if it were me, I wouldn't want to take the chance quite yet.

Cary

The good thing is they have been installing them on experimentals for a while. So they should already be down the road a bit on reliability and such.

Cory,

Other than cost, is there a reason you dont go with a Garmin 345 or Lynx? The 345 or Lynx sure do seem like nice units, almost plug and play. Just curious.

Kurt

Cost and ease of install. From the review I watched, the guy said it took about 10 minutes to wire and mount it and the same to set it up. Can’t get more plug and play than that!

Felix wrote:I have a working GTX 327 and a Garmin bias, so I went ahead and equipped with the GDL 82 (which is a 978 MHz UAT device). I'm happy with it insofar as it is an unobtrusive way to comply with the mandate. I didn't care for the aesthetics of the Skybeacon single nav/strobe replacement that wouldn't match my other wing, although I see that they are bringing a tail position replacement to market that looks slick. If I had to do another airplane with a working Mode C transponder I might go the tailbeacon route.

According to this blog post from Nav Canada it sounds like they are planning a phased implementation: http://blog.navcanada.ca/consulting-ads-b-mandate/

I've read elsewhere that they are looking at Mode C exemption corridors in areas that have radar coverage and see lots of N-registered overflight aircraft (Vancouver/Victoria and the Great Lakes region). There is also some back-and-forth as to whether Canada will require diversity (txp antennas on both bottom and top of the aircraft to enhance satellite reception), so equipping with 1090ES with a belly antenna may not be a fully compliant installation for the final mandate.

I'm just going to use the fact that there is a mandate on the horizon to motivate me to get a trip to Alaska in "sooner than later." Even so it seems like I still have 5+ years to work with...

Yes Felix. The top mounted antenna thing adds extra cost. The testing they have done has shown that the bottom antenna works just fine, but knowing them they'll still require the top antenna.
Cory, lik I said before it's hard to say how they will implement it and how th coverage will be. Hopefully they will only require it in Mode C airspace similar to down there. Otherwise it's a big cost for all us little fliers...

Thanks for all the info. Guess I’ve got some thinking to do. Always fun making decisions without all the required info!