Cheap portable proximity alerter is there an interest?

[DanH]

It's such a simple device, operationally speaking, that a few hours of flight time will tell the tale. Put me on the tester list. I base under a TRSA veil with mixed GA, airline and military traffic.

Really interesting would be flying it alongside an ADSB system...which I can also arrange.

[rjtjrt]

This thread is going to disappear in 2 weeks.
Should it be moved out from "Temp / Test / Misc" ?

[Done.; S. Buchanan]

[leos]

Quick update: we are building a few of these devises and will try to accommodate all who want to try. Just be a bit patient, we need to order some parts too.
The question of reflections: If you fly low over metal constructions on the ground it will show one or two lights depending on how close. In some airports, metal hangars are placed along the runway, it will surely make it go off. We could block it, but then it will also block some airplanes too, so we decided that it isn't really a big deal since you know that it happens. Whenever you get an alert you look forward first. 500 ft above the ground these things stop.
Reflections from a plane. Yes, they are smaller in signal, but they are enough to trigger the smallest alert when being actually 300-400 ft away. Very small time to react, but a lot better than nothing. A water tower or antenna will generate an alert 1000 ft away. Very useful at night.

[rv7boy]

Put me on the list please. I fly under Class C airspace with lots of commercial and some military traffic in the area.

[Dave_Boxall]

These guys in the UK are producing an ADSB receiver to give traffic information to 3rd party devices (running software like SkyDemon and Runway HD) at a pretty low cost. it also includes "peer to peer" traffic alerting via an open protocol (P3i).

PilotAware.com

[Snowflake]

Originally Posted by Dave_Boxall

it also include "peer to peer" traffic alerting via an open protocol (P3i).

Finally! Ever since the whole ADS-B thing started i've been wondering if a peer-to-peer system would be possible. The biggest problem that i'd always expected is in defining a standard that everyone would agree to use, and that the certified world would agree to certify and use as well. It would be great if this takes off...

[leos]

No, the biggest problem is to convince people to use ANYTHING :-)
How many times I heard people telling me stories about a "close call" near collision situation and NEVER a person would say "I want to buy a device that would alert me". Never. Personally, I had 5-6 really close calls in my 15 years of flying and I feel very uncomfortable flying without our Puppy. As a matter of fact, we started working on this after we barely avoided a head on collision. It was a classic case when both planes turned to the right steeply and we were so close we could see the tail number and the person in the cockpit. And 2 years later we had a prototype that could determine direction, distance and altitude of the target. But, we would need some serious investment to make a commercial product out of it and nobody would want to do that because nobody believed that people would pay a $1k for something like this. Then Zaon came up with their "4-reciever" design and we abandoned the "full" version and decided to make the lowest cost possible primitive, but working alerter in a hope that people would want to spend , say $150-200 for improved safety.

Well. We are building the units and will have them for anyone who wants to try. Actually, the PC boards are already built and tested, we are waiting for the plastic packages to arrive, they take some time. Probably 2 weeks.

Stay tuned.

[vlittle]

Currently, the Monroy ATD-300+ detects all mode A, C and S (ADS-B) traffic with altitude, range and azimuth.

The only restriction is that you must be in radar coverage (including TCAS interrogations or ADS-B 1090ES pings). So far, so good, but in the USA ADS-B position can also be transmitted on UAT, which is 978 MHz. The ATD-300 is blind to the UAT transmissions.

Having the dual mode ASD-B is a decision made by the FAA early on that complicates the design of passive safety devices. Europe does not use it.

So, the best passive device should have 1090 A/B/S and 978 UAT receivers to get complete air-air coverage. After 2020 in the USA, this will make all transponder and UAT equipped aircraft visible, even outside of ground radar coverage.

[vansrv8]

Originally Posted by Snowflake

Finally! Ever since the whole ADS-B thing started i've been wondering if a peer-to-peer system would be possible. The biggest problem that i'd always expected is in defining a standard that everyone would agree to use, and that the certified world would agree to certify and use as well. It would be great if this takes off...

Yes, I am building two of their units as we speak. The group is very active and the device receives 1090Mhz ADSB, can use GPS, and provides peer to peer on 868 Mhz.

It is based on the Raspberry Pi 2 and uses a transceiver available from Wireless Things in the UK. Cost is low; think of the 'stratux' and add a transceiver and one less RDL.

I have asked them to consider adding another RDL for reception of the weather that is available from US stations; that would be icing on the cake!

[leos]

I couldn't find anywhere the Monroe device that you were talking about, the 300+. Aircraft spruce has only the 300 that has no azimuth. And Sporty's don't have even that. Do you know where it is being sold?