ADS-B

[HuggyU2]

Which of the single-pilot airframes have ADS-B now?

T-38C?  T-6?  Any fighters?  

If not, what are the plans?

Separate question:  If the T-6 doesn't have ADS-B, does it have some sort system to identify squawking traffic?  

Edited September 28, 2019 by HuggyU2

[hindsight2020]

2 hours ago, HuggyU2 said:

Which of the single-pilot airframes have ADS-B now?

T-38C?  T-6?  Any fighters?  

If not, what are the plans?

Separate question:  If the T-6 doesn't have ADS-B, does it have some sort system to identify squawking traffic?  

38 is getting implemented as we speak. The fleet is mixed right now. T-6s had a version of TAS (NAWCS derivative), later TCAS implementation. When I left T-6 land back to T-38s, T-6s were also mixed on TCAS capable and not. 38C is all TCAS. Not sure what the implementation timeline is for ADSB-Out for 6s.

NextGen is a joke, but that's for another thread. I do love me some FIS-B in my private flying. At least I get something out of my avgas and general funding taxes. I'm still not ADSB-Out compliant in my personal aircraft. I might just quit before sticking a 5K transponder into my spam can. Thankfully there's the skybeacon, which is probably what I'll end up doing.

[FLEA]

Last brief I received on staff said ACC has won the ADS-B argument and all fighters and bombers will be exempted. Dude was unsure when I asked about ISR and SOF, but in short there were some security issues with the technology that made it a poor choice for combat aircraft. 

[frog]

4 hours ago, hindsight2020 said:

I might just quit before sticking another 5K transponder into my spam can.

FIFY

[brabus]

2 hours ago, FLEA said:

Last brief I received on staff said ACC has won the ADS-B argument and all fighters and bombers will be exempted. Dude was unsure when I asked about ISR and SOF, but in short there were some security issues with the technology that made it a poor choice for combat aircraft. 

God I hope that holds true. We were fighting ADS-B 5 years ago and the FAA was incredulous about our arguments regarding OPSEC and cyber security. You’re right dick heads, you do know more about threats to our military. 

ADS-B in GA, love it. 

[Skitzo]

God I hope that holds true. We were fighting ADS-B 5 years ago and the FAA was incredulous about our arguments regarding OPSEC and cyber security. You’re right dick heads, you do know more about threats to our military. 
ADS-B in GA, love it. 

What’s the risk if it’s independent of IFF modes and can be turned off?

Y’all can already be tracked already thru various sources... are we using the variable call sign list?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AZwildcat]

13 hours ago, HuggyU2 said:

Which of the single-pilot airframes have ADS-B now?

T-38C?  T-6?  Any fighters?  

If not, what are the plans?

Separate question:  If the T-6 doesn't have ADS-B, does it have some sort system to identify squawking traffic?  

Edwards already did the testing the for the T-38s and T-6s, TCTOs are out.  I don't know about the T-6 timeline but the T-38s will start happening soon.  All The T-38Cs and T-6s are TCAS equipped, as far as I know no plans for ADS-B in...Stratus/iPad does that well enough.

For fighters, everyone's going to IFF Mode 5, which I'm pretty sure can satisfy the ADS-B out requirements though some sort of PFM. Same thing for the U-2. Obviously no one is meeting the 2020 deadline.

[SPAWNmaster]

It's not about being tracked, it's about see and avoid which is the issue in GA. Agree combat aircraft in highly controlled operating areas don't really need it especially with TCAS (or similar) plus a ADSB-in puck make it a moot point.

[brabus]

2 hours ago, Skitzo said:

 

What’s the risk if it’s independent of IFF modes and can be turned off?

Y’all can already be tracked already thru various sources... are we using the variable call sign list?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Bad idea for combat mil aircraft. Not as bad if you’re talking a stratus that can be disconnected from power/not taken on the plane as desired (talking C-X aircraft, not fighters). Completely different ballgame when it’s integrated into OFPs. 

[Breckey]

Especially when spotters can track tanker bridges and ISR orbits and tweet them in real time.

 

https://theaviationist.com/2018/04/14/everything-we-know-and-no-one-has-said-so-far-about-the-first-waves-of-air-strikes-on-syria/

 

 

[LookieRookie]

16 hours ago, HuggyU2 said:

Which of the single-pilot airframes have ADS-B now?

T-38C?  T-6?  Any fighters?  

If not, what are the plans?

Separate question:  If the T-6 doesn't have ADS-B, does it have some sort system to identify squawking traffic?  

The T-6A added ADS-B out that integrates with existing avionics. Nothing else was updated. T-6As have all been modded for years with TAS (TA only, no RA) which displays on the VVI instrument display. NACWS went the way of the DODO.

T-38Cs are being modded with ADS-B with a WAAS GPS that is additive to the EGI solution. No idea if Boeing will add LPV capes. As for the hardware though, it isn’t certified by the FAA yet so they currently are required to be turned off.

 

 

[Bender]

Code 2: ADS-B1 RADIO FUNCTION FAULT

[Sprkt69]

8 hours ago, SPAWNmaster said:

It's not about being tracked, it's about see and avoid which is the issue in GA. Agree combat aircraft in highly controlled operating areas don't really need it especially with TCAS (or similar) plus a ADSB-in puck make it a moot point.

The next fun is going to be figuring out airspace when combat aircraft are operating in a MOA and The weekend warrior wants to save fuel by cutting through said MOA. The outcry will be entertaining 

Edited September 29, 2019 by Sprkt69

[MechGov]

Especially when spotters can track tanker bridges and ISR orbits and tweet them in real time.
 
https://theaviationist.com/2018/04/14/everything-we-know-and-no-one-has-said-so-far-about-the-first-waves-of-air-strikes-on-syria/
 
 

Takeaway: If Eurocontrol has you on radar, that shit is online.

[SurelySerious]

4 hours ago, MechGov said:

Takeaway: If  anyone  has you on radar, that shit is online.

Fixed that for you. adsbexchange.com

They’re all about “transparency.” You can watch all the sorties you want. Over the US. Europe. Except Russia. 

Edited September 30, 2019 by SurelySerious

[FLEA]

On 9/28/2019 at 10:27 AM, Skitzo said:

 

What’s the risk if it’s independent of IFF modes and can be turned off?

Y’all can already be tracked already thru various sources... are we using the variable call sign list?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

The argument was particularly pointed on fighters because they have much smaller avionics bays and limited space to install new CB's, head units. It was going to be something that didn't have the easy functionality to turn on and off, if I can remember what was briefed. 

The FAA wanted everyone on ADSB because they realistically thought they could uninstall all of their surveillance radars across country which are expensive to maintain and operate. However, there were other reasons that became clear that they were still decades out from a level of technology that would enable this. With the legacy traffic management system required to stay, the FAA didn't have as strong of a case for the AF to keep using it. 

[abmwaldo]

2 hours ago, FLEA said:

The FAA wanted everyone on ADSB because they realistically thought they could uninstall all of their surveillance radars across country which are expensive to maintain and operate. However, there were other reasons that became clear that they were still decades out from a level of technology that would enable this. With the legacy traffic management system required to stay, the FAA didn't have as strong of a case for the AF to keep using it. 

You're mostly accurate. The FCC also wants to auction part of the frequency spectrum that made FAA/DoD surveillance radars operate in. The FAA is mostly happy with "cooperative" traffic management however the DoD maintains a "primary radar requirement for "non-cooperative targets."

The FCC didn't ask anybody (DoD or FAA) when they dropped their "vacate XXXXmhz NLT ~2025 so we can sell it to Verizon/ATT/T-Mobile/Timewarner/Disney/etc... This isn't chump change either. The last auction in 2015 netted the government something around $33 billion. DoD and FAA were left to play a pickup game of developing/fielding a new sensor in ~10 years a.k.a light speed in acquisitions land. 

You're not wrong on the cost to maintain/operate those sensors ESPECIALLY the extremely remote sites. There are radars in places in Alaska that Amazon 2 week delivery doesn't even get close. 

[SurelySerious]

23 minutes ago, abmwaldo said:

You're mostly accurate. The FCC also wants to auction part of the frequency spectrum that made FAA/DoD surveillance radars operate in. The FAA is mostly happy with "cooperative" traffic management however the DoD maintains a "primary radar requirement for "non-cooperative targets."

The FCC didn't ask anybody (DoD or FAA) when they dropped their "vacate XXXXmhz NLT ~2025 so we can sell it to Verizon/ATT/T-Mobile/Timewarner/Disney/etc... This isn't chump change either. The last auction in 2015 netted the government something around $33 billion. DoD and FAA were left to play a pickup game of developing/fielding a new sensor in ~10 years a.k.a light speed in acquisitions land. 

Primary radar? Nah, I was just counting on the enemy complying with the ADS-B mandate when they attack since their acquisition process is quicker. 

Edited October 2, 2019 by SurelySerious

[EvilEagle]

We got the waiver for fighters.  No ADSB although we did get Stratus and EFB's now so we can use that if needed for SA on traffic and WX.  (obviously that doesn't make us in compliance, thus the waiver)