I want to be able to fly through Canda, but I really want anonymous mode.

Looking at all of the info out there, I found this from AOPA:

In a Jan. 11 webinar, Nav Canada announced its proposed 1090 MHz extended squitter (1090ES) ADS-B Out performance requirements. Phase 1, which would be implemented Jan. 1, 2021, would include all airspace over 18,000 feet. Phase 2, beginning Jan. 1, 2022, would add Class B airspace which, in Canada, extends from 12,500 feet msl up to but not including 18,000 feet msl. Phase 3 is less defined, expanding ADS-B as needed to “specific controlled airspace, en route or at an airport, starting no sooner than 2023.”

I don't care to fly above 10,000 feet ever, so it looks like I'll be fine until at least 2023, which is the soonest they may add more ads-b requirements, but maybe not.

Given how much can change in 3 years, and how much I really dislike governments tracking me, I'm going to go ahead with 978mhz.

Barnstormer wrote:And if that's not enough to think about if you are flying thru Canada, and once they have mandated ADS-B country wide, unless I'm mistaken (and if I am I'm sure A1skinner or one of my other Canadian friends will correct me) you'll find you need a 1090 MHz unit (more expensive and no anonymous mode) and not a 978 MHz (cheaper and with an anonymous mode) unit.
.

Except that the current 1090 units won't suffice for the recently released requirements. Bummer for those who paid more and thought they were covered.

aftCG wrote:Except that the current 1090 units won't suffice for the recently released requirements. Bummer for those who paid more and thought they were covered.

I've been procrastinating while I wait to find out what Canada will require. I have a tentative appointment in March at an avionics shop to install ADSB.... they said they hope to know by then what Canada will want. I fly to / from Alaska each year and transit Canada in the process.

Did the Canadians define what they will require?

Canada’s mandate is so far in the future, I wouldn’t even consider the requirement in your decision.

For me, I think I’d buy the uAvionix for now, and deal with Canadian requirements when Canada makes up its mind.

The uAvionix will have resale value later. There will be large numbers of airplanes that only need to meet US requirements trickling into compliance for controlled airspace operation over the next decade.

The other interesting thing from what I've heard about Canada is that their system is satellite based. That means that you have to have an antenna on the top. Our system is ground-based you have to have an antenna on the bottom. From what I've read you can't have two antennas so to go to Canada might just be more than 1080 ES.

From what I was able to find with regards to Mexico, their mandate is very similar to the US. Basically required in class B, C, and above 10,000 ft MSL (unless within 2,500 ft of the ground) with similar exemptions for gliders, etc. Main difference being that the systems must be 1090; no 978 option. I have not seen any clear expression of this though from AOPA, etc. so do your research...

(Fun fact, the earlier draft I found, in Spanish, it clearly stated a "unless within 2,500 METERS of the surface", which was a rather funny units mistake I must assume.)

Also, the most recent issue of AOPA Pilot offers some clarification about crossing the ADIZ to get back into the US which is that ADS-B is NOT required for entering the ADIZ.

tbag wrote:The other interesting thing from what I've heard about Canada is that their system is satellite based. That means that you have to have an antenna on the top. Our system is ground-based you have to have an antenna on the bottom. From what I've read you can't have two antennas so to go to Canada might just be more than 1080 ES.

Actually, in Canada we will need yo have an antenna on the top and on the bottom. Systems aren't even made that can do that yet. But thankfully the mandate is a long ways out. They've already pushed the 2021 mandate back. So I would not worry about complying in Canada yet. And theres plenty of ways to get through without going through mode C zones. So still no worry.

I think Canada is still not settled on what they are going with. Talk of diversity system and even Uavionics has said they are working on such a system.

Unless I'm reading this wrong, Garmin says they have units with diversity.

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2019/march/26/garmin-adds-diversity-to-popular-ads-b-transponders

kg wrote:Unless I'm reading this wrong, Garmin says they have units with diversity.

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2019/march/26/garmin-adds-diversity-to-popular-ads-b-transponders

I had forgot about that. Just another $3500 to spend for a country that still not sure how its implementing and has no mandate...

Pinecone wrote:Canada’s mandate is so far in the future, I wouldn’t even consider the requirement in your decision.

For me, I think I’d buy the uAvionix for now, and deal with Canadian requirements when Canada makes up its mind.

The uAvionix will have resale value later. There will be large numbers of airplanes that only need to meet US requirements trickling into compliance for controlled airspace operation over the next decade.

I'm Canadian and I think I will do this. Seems like the fastest way to be legal in the US, and then flip it later.

Thanks for the link hotrod. So am I understanding this correctly, that the Pain In the Ass program only works if one is filing a flight plan?

Barnstormer wrote:Thanks for the link hotrod. So am I understanding this correctly, that the Pain In the Ass program only works if one is filing a flight plan?

Looks like it, Phil....and note these requirements: Applies only to 1090 ES systems, so you can't use this if you are equipped with UAT. Also, this requires a "third party call sign". Those have to be assigned, and used in place of your tail number.

MTV

Quotes from this article:
" To participate, the aircraft must have an alternate flight identification issued by a third-party service provider."
and
" In this first phase the FAA will operate and maintain the service; during 2020 it will be transitioned to third-party service provider(s) who will assume operational responsibility."

Makes me wonder how much these third party providers charge for their services.
Is your added privacy worth the cost?

so not being in Canada and living and flying in So Kalifornia i had ads b installed but haven't flown yet since, because of weather or family shit during the holidays..is there any requirement to fly to verify the damn thing works.. someone told me they had to fly a circuit in contact with approach or somebody...or can i just go fly like i used to...when i still had one of my rapidly shrinking freedoms....

Sorry to hear that. No requirement to fly it for the Gov't unless you want to try for one of the $500 rebates (which, I've read, are all gone anyway). You can generate a free online report to check to see if it's working correctly. It's now the responsibility of the PIC to ensure that ADS-B is working correctly, so probably a good idea to check. I haven't bothered yet. I had mine installed last August and haven't received an auto-generated nastigram from the Feds, so it must be working ok. So, stay well and go flying just like you used to. Well, almost. Watch your altitude over marine santuaries. I was flying down the coast under a 1,500 foot ceiling this weekend and made darn sure to stay inland of those areas depicted on the sectional. Not the best place for humans in an airplane, but good for sea birds.

iceman wrote:so not being in Canada and living and flying in So Kalifornia i had ads b installed but haven't flown yet since, because of weather or family shit during the holidays..is there any requirement to fly to verify the damn thing works.. someone told me they had to fly a circuit in contact with approach or somebody...or can i just go fly like i used to...when i still had one of my rapidly shrinking freedoms....

Best to check your paperwork for the install, as long as the 337 or logbook entry shows compliance with FAR 91.227 you are good to go. 91.227 says the ADS-B Out information needs to be verified either by flight test or ground test equipment.

".is there any requirement to fly to verify the damn thing works.. "

After you go fly the aircraft anywhere with your ADSB on, Go to this website:

https://adsbperformance.faa.gov/paprrequest.aspx

Answer a few questions about the aircraft and the ADSB equipment and your email and they will send you a performance report of a recent flight you took with the ADSB on. You'll get a report that should have all white fields; they'll highlight deficiencies in red, etc. If you don't file a flight plan, that field will be highlighted; you can disregard it as it is looking for a flight plan ID.

I installed my ADS-B a few months ago--
in addition to the rebate-required test flight PAPR,
I've filed for & gotten a couple PAPR's since then.
No special flying required,
you don't even have to be in "rule airspace".

IMHO it's not a bad idea to check your ADS-B performance occasionally--
better to find out on your own that it isn't performing properly,
rather than getting a nasty-gram out of the blue.