Traffic Alerting Systems

Okay, after another hair raising trip to Pilot Pete's and the busy Chicagoland air traffic, I have decided to invest in a traffic alerting system. I am considering a Zaon MRX as it will supplement the Dynon transponder (TIS and ADS-B)

Does anyone have a strong opinion about:

Zaon MRX

Zaon XRX

NavWorx ADS-B

TIS Systems in general (looks like there going to be short lived)

Dynon's Transponder (TIS and ADS-B)

For me, the XRX

For me, the added advantage of azimuth and ability to display on both 496 and GRT screens was a deal-maker. YMMV.

Tony,

I have the XRX and coupled with the Aera GPS, it makes a nice package.

It is not perfect and I doubt any of the affordable ones are.

They will not report traffic not squawking MODE C. or not being hit by radar or other interigations (nearly impossible these days in most places)

They only report the 3 most threatening targets.

Zaon says that when connected to a display like the Aera, they can report direction to 22.5° resolution but if you use the built in display 45°. Dynon stated somewhere that the Garmin TIS format limits the direction resolution to 45° so I do not know who to believe since I don't have a copy of the Garmin TIS standard.

Overall the XRX works well for what it is. It sometimes is in error on the direction especially when you or the targets are turning quickly. But it does get you looking in the right direction.

The distance info is also pretty good but can be in error as well if the other bird is a bird with a high power xponder or if the other bird has a weak xponder or really dirty antenna.

The altitude data seems to be pretty well spot on.

Bad news is that the XRX requires traditional mode C and will not detect ADS-B out of any kind. This means if others are ever allowed to drop the regular xponders, it will not detect them.

If you fly loose formation with your buddies often, you either have to get them to turn off their xponders or put up with constant warnings. They also consume the max of 3 targets it will track at one time and if they are close, it can cause you to miss targets that might be more of a threat.

Bottom line is that it works pretty good and will get you looking out the window in a general direction that helps you spot other targets. Perfect? Nope but what is?

I can say that you WILL see more traffic with one of these than you will see without one.

On my way back from Dayton TN. Saturday, I was lead of a three ship and I warned them that we had a target passing overhead, I had em on PCAS but never did see them. The trailing ship did as they passed right over us about +1000ft. Just what the XRX was telling me they were doing.

Perhaps both are correct...

Brantel said:

.....

Zaon says that when connected to a display like the Aera, they can report direction to 22.5? resolution but if you use the built in display 45?. Dynon stated somewhere that the Garmin TIS format limits the direction resolution to 45? so I do not know who to believe since I don't have a copy of the Garmin TIS standard.
.....

Click to expand...

If one is saying a target within a 45 degree sector, and the other is saying a direct bearing but with a +/- 22.5 degree accuracy...

Brantel said:

stated somewhere that the Garmin TIS format limits the direction resolution to 45? so I do not know who to believe

Click to expand...

Not quite sure this is true... Mode S TIS traffic data contains somewhat coarse resolution on target heading, but the resolution supported for target bearing is higher than what any passive traffic detector I can think of can output. But as a practical matter, the Zaon products don't output target heading data at all, so this doesn't really matter anyway.

cheers,
mcb

The FAA seems to say...

mburch said:

Not quite sure this is true... Mode S TIS traffic data contains somewhat coarse resolution on target heading, but the resolution supported for target bearing is higher than what any passive traffic detector I can think of can output. But as a practical matter, the Zaon products don't output target heading data at all, so this doesn't really matter anyway.

cheers,
mcb

Click to expand...

...that this is the maximum accuracy that can be obtained. It's also updated with a possible 6 or 12 second delay...

TIS, through the Mode S ground sensor, provides the following data on each intruder aircraft:

? Relative bearing information in 6-degree increments.

? Relative range information in 1/8-NM to 1‑NM increments (depending on range).

? Relative altitude in 100-foot increments (within 1,000 feet) or 500-foot increments (from 1,000-3,500 feet) if the intruder aircraft has operating altitude reporting capability.

? Estimated intruder ground track in 45-degree increments.

? Altitude trend data (level within 500 fpm or climbing/descending >500 fpm) if the intruder aircraft has operating altitude reporting capability.

? Intruder priority as either a "traffic advisory" or "proximate" intruder.

From here -

http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/atbarc/03-2.htm

So it's only the ground track of the "intruder" that is in 45 degree increments... and no display can be better than the transmitted data above...

XRX here

I have an XRX tied into a GRT in our RV7a and am very pleased with operation and info received.

Those of you that have the MRX unit, do you regret not getting the XRX.

TIS for me...

I installed a GX330 (TIS) transponder last year and have my 696 as the display. The DFW metroplex is a busy traffic area and after a few "that was a little to close for comfort" encounters I decided on the 330 over the Zaon.

I didn't want any more boxes sitting on my glareshield, no more panel room and no extra antennas to install. The 330 works seamlessly with the 696 and offers both aural and visual warnings. After flying with it for the last year or so all I can say is I don't know why I did without it for so long! It's kinda like weather, once you fly with it you wonder how you managed without.

Downside, most major airports support TIS but outside these areas you don't get any info. Will it go away eventuallty, sure, but I venture to say thats a ways off. For a relatively small premium over the standard GX327 and if you live in a major metroplex area it's a great setup

Tony,
Here's another perspective. I wanted a simple non-integrated solution that I could mount in the panel, wire into ship's power and attach to a permanent remote antenna.

I looked at the Zaon MRX and also at the Monroy ATD-300.

Although a little more expensive for the unit itself I found the Monroy a better option for panel mounting, wiring and antenna configuration.

The Zaon MRX accessory list offers a suction mount remote antenna (which was not to my liking) or a 15ft RevSMA-to-BNC cable (for $150!!!) whereas the Monroy is happy with some home-made BNC-BNC coax and a TED rod antenna. Permanent 12V power connection seemed easier with the Monroy as well - the Zaon documentation sort of assumes cigarette lighter power connection. The Monroy documentation explains connection to ship's power & audio and using standard coax/rod antenna

I am not flying yet but a mate has a Monroy in his RV-7 and it works well.

My research is a year or so old so things could have changed.

I did like the feature list of the Zaon XRX but was not willing to have a box that size on my glareshield.

Hope this is of use.

Walt said:

I didn't want any more boxes sitting on my glareshield, no more panel room and no extra antennas to install.

Click to expand...

Ditto. I'd love to have a Zaon XRX, but it's so freakin' big I don't want it up on my glareshield right in my line of sight. On a side by side ship it'd be okay I'm sure, you could offset it a bit out of the way, but on an -8, it's right in the middle, in the way. I know the MRX doesn't have the azimuth info, but it's small, unobtrusive, and better than nothing at all. As long as it gets your attention and gets you looking outside... I'm thinking I might have to get one.

az_gila said:

If one is saying a target within a 45 degree sector, and the other is saying a direct bearing but with a +/- 22.5 degree accuracy...

Click to expand...

Well I thought about that but Zaon's normal built in screen can do 45? and they claim higher resolution when using an external screen so they must be claiming better than +-22.5?, more like +-11.25? which Dynon says is not possible using the Garmin TIS protocol so ????????

You know you guys may be onto how I might have misunderstood what Dynon was talking about.

They may have been referring to target heading limitations and not target bearing. Zaon does not output target heading at all so this must be my mistake.

Here is what they said on their forum:

"As an FYI, the Garmin TIS protocol stinks. It only allows resolution of 45 degrees on targets, even if the device knows them down to a degree. Because of this, things like the Zaon and our Transponder don't use the Garmin TIS protocol when talking to SkyView. "

I do not know if they are right or wrong so please do not think I am supporting Dynon on their statement above.

Question is, does the Garmin TIS implementation follow the TIS standard quoted below? If so, Dynon must be incorrect or they are talking about target heading not bearing to target data.

az_gila said:

If one is saying a target within a 45 degree sector, and the other is saying a direct bearing but with a +/- 22.5 degree accuracy...

Click to expand...

mburch said:

Not quite sure this is true... Mode S TIS traffic data contains somewhat coarse resolution on target heading, but the resolution supported for target bearing is higher than what any passive traffic detector I can think of can output. But as a practical matter, the Zaon products don't output target heading data at all, so this doesn't really matter anyway.

cheers,
mcb

Click to expand...

az_gila said:

...that this is the maximum accuracy that can be obtained. It's also updated with a possible 6 or 12 second delay...

TIS, through the Mode S ground sensor, provides the following data on each intruder aircraft:

· Relative bearing information in 6-degree increments.

· Relative range information in 1/8-NM to 1‑NM increments (depending on range).

· Relative altitude in 100-foot increments (within 1,000 feet) or 500-foot increments (from 1,000-3,500 feet) if the intruder aircraft has operating altitude reporting capability.

· Estimated intruder ground track in 45-degree increments.

· Altitude trend data (level within 500 fpm or climbing/descending >500 fpm) if the intruder aircraft has operating altitude reporting capability.

· Intruder priority as either a "traffic advisory" or "proximate" intruder.

From here -

http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/atbarc/03-2.htm

So it's only the ground track of the "intruder" that is in 45 degree increments... and no display can be better than the transmitted data above...

Click to expand...

jbDC9 said:

Ditto. I'd love to have a Zaon XRX, but it's so freakin' big I don't want it up on my glareshield right in my line of sight. On a side by side ship it'd be okay I'm sure, you could offset it a bit out of the way, but on an -8, it's right in the middle, in the way. I know the MRX doesn't have the azimuth info, but it's small, unobtrusive, and better than nothing at all. As long as it gets your attention and gets you looking outside... I'm thinking I might have to get one.

Click to expand...

I have the smaller MRX, and it's much better than nothing at all.

L.Adamson --- RV6A

very happy with the little brother ...........

zaon. does all i need in a small, not to expensive, portable, headset audio warning, device. enough info to help keep you alive. love that thing.

Is anyone using the XRX with either version of BK's AV8OR units ?

From what I read in the manual, it sounds like once you connect it to any third party unit, the LCD on the XRX unit no longer displays traffic information - is this true ?

Same subject - slightly different tack - what are my options for an existing aircraft adding traffic? I've got a KLN-94, KMD-550 display and KT73 Mode S transponder. As noted above (somewhere) TIS only works in the heavy traffic areas and I spend a lot of time away from those. Getting traffic via another method would be great until ADS-B is a reality.

MRX, much better than nothing. But glitchy.

I am satisfied with my panel mounted (single antenna) MRX, though I think it performed as well or better when used as a portable. It was worth the price for the "heads up, start looking harder" sort of warnings it provides.

It does not perform as well as I expected though. The consistent problem is getting ground level "targets" reported when I am < 1500 or 2000 feet AGL. E.g. At 2000 MSL, 1300 AGL, say 4 or 5 miles out from an airport, I'll get targets noted as 1200 or 1300 feet below me, with no change of altitude noted. I don't know if this is signal confusion off my own antenna, reception of some non-aviation signal, or what. Seems to me to happen only over populated areas, so I think it is a ground signal (traffic camera? Microwaves? Paul Story's music systems radiating non-standard signals back to Stein in Minnesota?) But, this means a lack of utility when approaching an airport and in the pattern -- a particularly desirable time to have traffic sensing going on.

FYI: If you permanently install, do the belly antenna installation per the manual. I tried a glareshield mount thinking that if the unit worked in portable form on the glareshield, then it ought to work with the permanent antenna mounted there. I did not. Results were completely unreliable. The manual that comes with the install kit repeatedly states: NO GLARESHIELD MOUNT, but I thought I knew better. Moving the antenna to the belly (near wing root/forward of fuel tank vent) improved results a bunch -- achieving the resulte reported in the paragraphs above.

I will get ADSB once protocol are established and the hardware market is stable. But, I think the MRX is an adequate interim tool and, knowing what I know now, I would use it as a portable.

Mike C.

I just purchased the XRX unit yesterday and when it arrives, I will be putting my 9 month old MRX unit up for sale, probably on here and the red board.

Is the XRX Bluelink the only RS232/Bluetooth adapter that will work with the XRX or could any off the shelf adapter work, like from IOGEAR ?

Between that ZAON....choose the XRX.....the MRX will drive you absolutelly nuts looking out!!!!!!!! with the XRX, at least you can concentrate on one quadrant and if you have it linked to your GPS even better.! I have mine portable and linked to my AVMAP IV and to my 496 depending which aircraft I am flying.... yes is big and I wish it had a USB port instead of a serial, but for the price, you can't beat what it does!

TIS not worth for me at all....TAS Yes but a lot more $$$$