Possible AD for certain NAVWORX ADS-B Units

[tommylewis]

The 7 page AOPA response is worth a read for anyone interested in this issue. Well done!

Here is the EAA response.

https://www.regulations.gov/document...2016-9226-0174

[flightlogic]

Felt like a member who got a fair return on his membership fees today. The AOPA response to the FAA proposed AD is pointed, fair and thorough.
I await an equally fair reaction from the Fort Worth ACO.

[GalinHdz]

Originally Posted by tommylewis

The 7 page AOPA response is worth a read for anyone interested in this issue. Well done!

Here is the EAA response.

https://www.regulations.gov/document...2016-9226-0174

Very well written response. Well done EAA!

[longline]

did very well with their response to the NPRM, as did the EAA to a lesser degree. I hope that the application of calm logic can resolve this issue. I have my doubts about hope, however.

[BHunt]

Originally Posted by rv9av8tr

Didn't work on the east coast when that F-16 center punched a C-150.

The Cessna wasn't going to be seen by the Viper based on it being below the nose. Has nothing to do with visual acuity.

[DennisRhodes]

Anyone venture a guess on how long it takes the FAA and the lawyers to resolve the issues of all this mess? My hope is that the EXP units fair well in the hatchet job. Or at least continues to function until 2020. I'm thinking there will be some other options by that time.

[aerovin]

Originally Posted by CMW

I think the proposed AD has a lot to due with the 2020 mandate. Until 2020, ADSB should not be used as a primary source of information to ensure aircraft separation. Therefore, regardless of the SIL that is transmitted (and the TSO), there should be no impact on flight safety until ADSB replaces radar and becomes the primary means used to ensure separation.

The proposed AD states the reason for the AD as:

(b) Unsafe Condition

This AD defines the unsafe condition as an ADS-B unit incorrectly broadcasting a Source Integrity Level of 3 instead of 0. This condition could result in the unit communicating unreliable position information to Air Traffic Control and nearby aircraft and a subsequent aircraft collision.

Until 2020, radar is still the primary source of position information for ATC therefore even if the Navworx units are broadcasting unreliable position information it shouldn't affect flight safety since ATC (and pilots) shouldn't be relying on that information yet.

I would suggest that an increasing number of ATC facilities are integrating ADS-B into controller displays and it can be used for aircraft separation. See the FAA Air Traffic Manual (7110.65W), paragraph 5-1-3(c):

"All procedures and requirements relating to ATC services using secondary radar targets apply to ATC services provided to targets derived from ADS-B and WAM."

There are a few exceptions but ADS-B is potentially being used for separation services. There are places where radar coverage is lacking but ADS-B works just fine for separating like-equipped aircraft.

[rv9av8tr]

Originally Posted by BHunt

The Cessna wasn't going to be seen by the Viper based on it being below the nose. Has nothing to do with visual acuity.

The point of the original comment is that "See and be seen" as the primary tool to avoid mid-airs has serious limits in the real world. We all know that. I have found ADS-B to be a very valuable tool to focus "see and be seen". Synergism of ADS-B is powerful and should not be take lightly by any pilot.
Like others have commented, until ADS-B, I had no idea the hornets nest that's out there. There have been times it actually gave me pause about flying through some areas.

Right now, I don't understand what all the fuss is with the FAA in claiming the Navworx units provide inaccurate position indication and should be removed from service forthwith. Based on the conversations I've had with ATC while flying, they don't seem to even know I have ADS-B out. Besides, what are we talking about in alleged "position inaccuracy", a handful of inches or feet.
This whole affair sounds like a loss of perspective, where real world engineering is "Measure it with a micrometer, mark it with a crayon and cut it with a chainsaw".

[recapen]

Now that the comment period has expired - should we be seeing this by the end of the year?!

Anyone in the know?

Just trying to get an understanding of the options and what NavWorx might do to help make it easier!

[Tracer 10]

It's not likely the FAA will move faster than a snails pace to bring any resolution to Nav/Worx, or its many satisfied customers. To the great satisfaction of much more expensive marketers of ADS-B systems.