What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Uavionix AV-20

terry.mortimore

Well Known Member
Uavionics TailbeaconX

Ok Beta testers, spill the beans!

I thought I would be the first in line to buy one of these when they became available, but now I?m not sure. It looks like I will have to install a controlling head in a 2 1/4? hole in the panel. I had envisioned it working with my existing GTX 327 transponder. I don?t think my Dynon D-100 is capable of integrating this into the display.

How is the controlling head connected to the tail beacon?

https://generalaviationnews.com/202...review+to+remember&utm_campaign=TPOA-20200219

Beta testers, educate us! I think your free to talk now.

Terry
 
Last edited:
"Additionally, a skyBeaconX model for wingtip fitment is scheduled for introduction in mid-2020."

nifty. late, but nifty.
 
AV30

I?m installing one this weekend with the AV30....install will be documented and reported on....stay tuned.

Don
 
Uavionics TailbeaconX

Hello All

Reference the Uavionix new ADS-B OUT Tailbeacon X, any of you Beta testers know if it will integrate with a Dynon Skyview via one of the serial port...?

If yes, I'll be buying one very soon..

Thanks

Bruno
[email protected]
 
Hello All

Reference the Uavionix new ADS-B OUT Tailbeacon X, any of you Beta testers know if it will integrate with a Dynon Skyview via one of the serial port...?

If yes, I'll be buying one very soon..

Thanks

Bruno
[email protected]

From the installation manual on the uAvionix website:

List of Compatible EFIS?s

GRT
MINI-B
MINI-AP
MINI-X
Sport EX
Horizon
MGL
iEFIS

Physical RS232
Baudrate 2400 bps 81N
Protocol UCP or SL-70 or STX165R
 
The beta test units were shipped with an AV-10, which is an even further simplified unit that fits in a 2-1/4" hole, and *just* controls the tailBeaconX.

The tailBeaconX isn't the simple "pull the taillight, plug in the tailBeacon" installation that the earlier tailBeacon had. You do need to run a pair of wires for data communication between the tailBeaconX and your instrument panel. That's because the tailBeaconX is a complete Mode S transponder, has to get static data from somewhere, and has to let you set your transponder code somehow as well.

I elected to run a brand new 4-conductor cable to the tail, replacing the original single-conductor the builder of my airplane installed originally (the original taillight was grounded back through the airframe).

And yes, we are allowed to talk about it now... Any questions, ask away!
 
Last edited:
TBX

The new uAvionix tailBeaconX (TBX). It is an "all in one" Mode S ADSB Transponder with GPS and tail light which replaces your white rear position light/strobe. https://uavionix.com/products/tailbeaconx/

Some time ago I was contacted by uAvionix to find out if I was interested in being a "beta" tester for them on this product. This came about as a result of having signed up for a Caribbean Air Rally beginning on Mar. 23, 2020
https://airrallycom.wordpress.com/portfolio/caribbean-air-rally/

They were looking for people flying into the Caribbean in order to test this unit in that area. of course I said yes. This new product is especially of interest to Canadian pilots and to anyone flying outside American airspace. It is my understanding that there are already a number of Canadians who are testing it in Canadian airspace. For now it is only approved for use on Experimental aircraft but the company plans to have it certified later this year. The cost is listed at US $2499,00

I received my unit a couple of week ago and just yesterday I completed the installation and testing. The transponder worked perfectly and the ADSB FAA compliance report came back in 100% compliance. I am now waiting for uAvionix to obtain an Aireon satellite compliance report, which I should have in the next day or two.

Here are a couple of pictures of this little jewel.
TBX2-L.jpg

TBX1-L.jpg

TBX01-L.jpg


The following pictures are of the control head. The basic installation requirement is to run a two conductor 22AWG shielded wire (for data) from the tail light position to the instrument panel. (May not be easy) use power and ground from existing tail light. Install the TBX above and the Control Head below. Both need power and ground plus the control head need static input for altitude. If you are fortunate enough to fly behind an EFIS panel which has an extra serial port and the correct Protocol UCP or SL-70 or STX165R then you don't need the control head, all the needed information can be sent directly from the EFIS via RS232. I have Grand Rapids Technologies (GRT) HXr EFIS screens in my airplane and they are compatible with uAvionix so I didn't need the control panes, which made for a very easy installation.
TBX3-L.jpg


TBX4-L.jpg


TBX5-L.jpg
 
TBX

Here is a statement I copied from the uAvionix web sirte

"The next era of global ADS-B. Compatible with space and ground-based ADS-B surveillance systems, tailBeaconX is a Mode S Extended Squitter ADS-B transponder and WAAS GPS integrated into an LED rear position light. With global compliance, tailBeaconX is the key to limitless destinations.tailBeaconX embraces the future, providing precision ADS-B data to the Aireon satellite network without the need for diversity antennas. When it comes to terra firma, tailBeaconX also exceeds the performance of traditional panel installed transponders that use belly mount antennas"
 
Couple of questions

Looks like the AV-10 dedicated beaconX control head is not yet available? Is that correct? Rob, did you use this device, and how is the user interface?

Looks like by using the AV-10/20/30 you do not need an altitude encoder in the system, correct?

This looks to be a very easy install for replacing a legacy transponder.

Thanks for the information.
 
Fin durability?

Thanks for testing and feedback. How durable do you think the antennas are? I can see myself snapping one off from the bottom of the RV rudders. Replacing a standard TED transponder antenna isn?t too expensive. But the X unit??

Also, so the location on the bottom of the rudder seems to be fine for ground based locations. Any feedback on Aireon reception?
 
Thanks for testing and feedback. How durable do you think the antennas are? I can see myself snapping one off from the bottom of the RV rudders. Replacing a standard TED transponder antenna isn’t too expensive. But the X unit??

Also, so the location on the bottom of the rudder seems to be fine for ground based locations. Any feedback on Aireon reception?

I agree, those antennas look very easy to break and when you consider the total cost now ($2499 plus another $800 at least for the control head) it looks like unless you really need it the path to 1090 is still cheaper with the panel mount transponder and safer from breaking anything. The EchoUAT keeps looking like the best deal for now. I’m going to bet that other countries around us Mexico, Canada, Bahamas and other Caribbean islands, will design some rules to accommodate GA aircraft with UAT even if it’s just for limited areas.

They’re still testing the X with Aireon so I guess the jury is still out but I don’t see why it wouldn’t work with such a clear path from antenna to satellite.
 
Answering both questions above:

Dave: My unit shipped with an AV-10 like Ivan's. Unlike Ivan, I haven't gone glass yet so I had to work with the AV-10. I have to say, the UI is painful once you've been spoiled by having all 7 digits available across the bottom of the Garmin 327 screen. Entering your code is Turn (to position) Push (to select that position) Turn (to change digit) Push (to confirm digit) Repeat. A lot more work than just hitting 1-2-3-4 across the bottom of the 327. Apart from that, the screen on the AV-10 is very small, and it packs in a lot of info (ALT/STBY/ON status, 4-digit code, Pressure altitude, and two status icons). The code is the largest, Pressure alt almost unreadable but who uses it really anyway.

It's clearly been designed with the intent of using it with an EFIS (or the AV-20 and AV-30) and I can't fault them for that. I look forward to going glass and being able to just wire it in.

Tim: My unit was a slightly earlier model that has a full plastic enclosure... It covers the antennas. For my tailwheel installation, i'm happier with that as it's a little more robust. I've smacked it with my tailwheel bar twice, and both times thought "oh ****" but haven't broken it. A hangar neighbour who also has an RV-6 and is a tester received a newer unit that doesn't have the full enclosure. He re-welded his tailwheel bar so it curves around the space where the tailBeacon sits. He won't hit it now.

Definitely, if you hit it hard, you will break it. It's just PCB material. We've both fed back our thoughts on that choice, but I suppose the target market is the largest market: tricycle gear aircraft. On a Cessna it would be well over your head. On an -A model RV, it wouldbe up where you'd put an eye out with it, but probably less likely to break it.
 
Rob, Thanks. I know the technology inside the uAvionix devices is very good. I like the wing and tail devices, but that?s just begging me to break off a fin antenna. Yet, I?m sure I?d find a way to mitigate the risk.


135,

I?m going to bet that other countries around us Mexico, Canada, Bahamas and other Caribbean islands, will design some rules to accommodate GA aircraft with UAT even if it?s just for limited areas.

They?re still testing the X with Aireon so I guess the jury is still out but I don?t see why it wouldn?t work with such a clear path from antenna to satellite.

I?d take you up on that over an oil filter ;) But, we both may be done with are oil changes before we find out the winner. I know a local GA Pilot well who also works for Aireon. Over two (maybe three) years we were hangar flying & ADS-B talking. They?ve been putting 10 satellites with ADS-B / launch since the December 2106 launch, IIRC. Tracking MH370 came up. I asked, ?Will your tech be able to replace the NAT tracks (North Atlantic Tracks) and WATRS routes (West Atlantic Route System)??
His answer was it?s already been agreed to and gave a timeline to planned cancellation of those systems. Aireon was then in discussions to replace the Pacific track system as well. I think they also were talking to the Caribbean Islands, Bahamas, etc. to use their satellite surveillance system to enhance/replace what limited radar coverage currently in use. Their belief is better ATC service for less money can be done with a space based system in these areas. Knowing the person I was talking to, I?ll bet on him and his team. Very smart but humble. That?s why I think 978 will be U.S. only area. Time will tell.
 
TBX

Thanks for testing and feedback. How durable do you think the antennas are? I can see myself snapping one off from the bottom of the RV rudders. Replacing a standard TED transponder antenna isn?t too expensive. But the X unit??
Yes I see that as a potential problem as well. In my case (RV-10) I don't have the tail wheel issue but the possibility of a tail strike exists plus if your passengers in the RV-10 aren't loaded in the right order there is a chance the tail will hit the ground. Don't ask me how I know. :eek: Both will definitely damage the tailBeaconX

Also, so the location on the bottom of the rudder seems to be fine for ground based locations. Any feedback on Aireon reception?

My test flight was just last Wednesday. I am waiting for uAvionix to get a report from NavCanada which, I am told, should be available in a day or two after the test flight. I will post the result here as soon as I get it.
 
Cool

Nice piece of tech, certainly packs a punch with all they jammed in that tiny box. Great work.

As others have said...that sure would scare me having $2500 plus in such an easy to damage part of plane. Tail draggers for sure, but like Ivan said....even the nose draggers have usually had a few tail impacts from too many people climbing in at the same time, poor landings or even cleaning, or hangar issues.
I could not imagine how bad a day that would be...and the complications of loosing adsb due to a mishap on a trip and now what do you do to get home?

Will be interested in how they pan out in the field.
 
Uavionix TB-X

Dave: My unit shipped with an AV-10 like Ivan's. Unlike Ivan, I haven't gone glass yet so I had to work with the AV-10. I have to say, the UI is painful once you've been spoiled by having all 7 digits available across the bottom of the Garmin 327 screen. Entering your code is Turn (to position) Push (to select that position) Turn (to change digit) Push (to confirm digit) Repeat. A lot more work than just hitting 1-2-3-4 across the bottom of the 327. Apart from that, the screen on the AV-10 is very small, and it packs in a lot of info (ALT/STBY/ON status, 4-digit code, Pressure altitude, and two status icons).


I wonder if we could convince someone to create a Head the size and shape of a Transponder so that it could replace my GTX 327 and have the seven push buttons to ease code input.


Wishing out loud, Terry.
 
potential for being damaged

Answering both questions above:

Tim: My unit was a slightly earlier model that has a full plastic enclosure... It covers the antennas. For my tailwheel installation, i'm happier with that as it's a little more robust. I've smacked it with my tailwheel bar twice, and both times thought "oh ****" but haven't broken it. A hangar neighbour who also has an RV-6 and is a tester received a newer unit that doesn't have the full enclosure. He re-welded his tailwheel bar so it curves around the space where the tailBeacon sits. He won't hit it now.

Definitely, if you hit it hard, you will break it. It's just PCB material. We've both fed back our thoughts on that choice, but I suppose the target market is the largest market: tricycle gear aircraft. On a Cessna it would be well over your head. On an -A model RV, it wouldbe up where you'd put an eye out with it, but probably less likely to break it.



Taking that thought further - maybe it's timely for one of the fiberglass gurus or fairing suppliers to come up with a retrofit rudder top nav light mount fairing similar to what you see on c-172s.
 
TB-X mounted on the top of RV rudders.

Taking that thought further - maybe it's timely for one of the fiberglass gurus or fairing suppliers to come up with a retrofit rudder top nav light mount fairing similar to what you see on c-172s.

I like that idea, that would allow me to retain a rear strobe (long as there would be no electronic interference from the strobe).


Terry.
 
Thanks to the beta testers for your replies.

So, the AV-10/20/30 control head must be providing the information that would normally be provided by an altitude encoder, or, the wiz-bang gps technology in the xbeacon doesn't require an altitude encoder. Which is it?

Dave
 
This TailBeaconX model has Mode S, GPS, and antennas all in the tail unit, the AV-10,20,30 may have the encoder in it as the pic shows a static connection, plus the unit is required so you can punch in the code.

On the UAT TailBeacon & other models, they are able to sense the code & what ever info from your legacy Mode C xpdr.
 
Last edited:
Rob, Thanks. I know the technology inside the uAvionix devices is very good. I like the wing and tail devices, but that?s just begging me to break off a fin antenna. Yet, I?m sure I?d find a way to mitigate the risk.


135,



I?d take you up on that over an oil filter ;) But, we both may be done with are oil changes before we find out the winner. I know a local GA Pilot well who also works for Aireon. Over two (maybe three) years we were hangar flying & ADS-B talking. They?ve been putting 10 satellites with ADS-B / launch since the December 2106 launch, IIRC. Tracking MH370 came up. I asked, ?Will your tech be able to replace the NAT tracks (North Atlantic Tracks) and WATRS routes (West Atlantic Route System)??
His answer was it?s already been agreed to and gave a timeline to planned cancellation of those systems. Aireon was then in discussions to replace the Pacific track system as well. I think they also were talking to the Caribbean Islands, Bahamas, etc. to use their satellite surveillance system to enhance/replace what limited radar coverage currently in use. Their belief is better ATC service for less money can be done with a space based system in these areas. Knowing the person I was talking to, I?ll bet on him and his team. Very smart but humble. That?s why I think 978 will be U.S. only area. Time will tell.

What I meant when I said accommodate GA with UAT didn't mean they would use UAT exclusively. What I meant was it could be just like here in the USA where there is more airspace where you DON'T need ADS-B OUT than where you need it. They could allow for some airspace to be used by UAT.
 
TBX

Ivan,

I thought it was just a rear position light and not a strobe. This might limit some folks night flying if their wing strobes aren't visible to the rear.

bob

Bob,
Yes it replaces whatever you have in the tail light position with a very bright LED white light. NOT a strobe.
 
Tailbeacon X vs DYNON SKYVIEW

As a Dynon Skyview user, I was wondering if the Tailbeacon X will work with the Skyview so I e-mailed Dynon Tech Support and here's the answer I got...not the one I wanted mind you..:rolleyes::rolleyes:
-----------------------------------------
Don Jones (Dynon Avionics)

Feb 21, 12:22 PM PST

Bruno,
The tailbeacon isn't currently supported by SkyView, but engineering is looking into the possibility. We are watching the situation in Canada closely to determine
our next steps with regard to a system to meet the specs to be compatible with the SkyView.

Don Jones
Technical Support Manager
Dynon
(425) 224-6736 Support Phone
425-402-0433 Main
www.dynon.aero





Bruno Dionne

Feb 20, 7:37 PM PST

Query: Technical
Name: Bruno Dionne
Email: [email protected]
Phone:
Subject: Compatible ADS-B OUT system

Message: Hello Everyone at Dynon

With the just release ADS-B OUT Tailbeacon X from Uavionix I will like to know if it could be compatible with the Dynon Skyview system as it is with the GRT System via a spare serial port or RS-232?

As a Canadian I'm really interested in this device as it is so far the only affordable dual diversity system on the market compatible with the upcoming Satellitte based ADS-B mandate that Canada and the rest of the world are planning to install and the US Ground base system.. Hoping Dynon comes up with a system also.

Thank you

Bruno
 
The AV-10, 20, and 30 all have Static connections on the backside, and provide the encoder function for the transponder.

A controller can certainly be devised that would offer a different interface to the tailBeaconX. It apparently talks the standard languages for communicating with EFIS systems. SL70, STX165, UDP? I forget the exact acronyms right now but if you can tell the Skyview to talk SL70 to it it should work.

I'm looking at 3D printing a cover for the antenna fins, i'll have to test it on my hangar neighbour's unit as mine is fully enclosed already. It should be possible to cover it without attenuating the signal.
 
I'm not concerned about static buildup, but I am concerned about any colorants or dyes that may contain compounds that attenuate RF.

Given how small these units are, I would guess they are operating fairly close to the lower limit of what is necessary to meet the requirements. Unlike a Garmin or other unit that may be coupled with a number of different antennas, or wired over varying distances with varying wiring products and still be expected to work, the tailBeaconX has complete control over the antenna and wiring... So it can probably be much more tightly coupled.
 
Why could we not just keep our existing tail strobe and mount this inside the wingtip instead? That would solve the strobe issue and protect the antennae.

I already use a trig tt22 so this is academic for me for now.
 
Why could we not just keep our existing tail strobe and mount this inside the wingtip instead? That would solve the strobe issue and protect the antennae.

I already use a trig tt22 so this is academic for me for now.

If you have a strobe in the tail I'd think you also have one in the wingtips. Who knows how the energy buildup before and after each flash could affect the signal.
 
I was thinking of mounting it completely inside the wingtip, wired separately from the strobes or anything else. Use all your previous lighting as before and just place this invisibly in the wingtip. Remove the light portion if desired. The strobes would have no effect on that and the unit is protected from weather and physical damage.
 
I was thinking of mounting it completely inside the wingtip, wired separately from the strobes or anything else. Use all your previous lighting as before and just place this invisibly in the wingtip. Remove the light portion if desired. The strobes would have no effect on that and the unit is protected from weather and physical damage.

Aren't your strobes in the wingtip? Aren't the wires carrying the power to make those strobes flash really close to the wires controlling the transponder? Things I think about regarding interference.
 
Yes there are strobes in the wingtips. The wires to these are shielded, as they should be and are grounded to the firewall. There would be no issue with interference if the wiring is done to best practice. The reason for the suggestion is so the lights all remain to ensure proper night time visibility. You could run shielded wire to the beacon as well for added peace of mind.
 
There is no provision for disabling the light on the tailBeaconX without disassembling the unit. Likely that would mean your warranty is void as well.

FWIW, I did run a new set of shielded wires to my tailBeaconX. 20ga, 4-conductor. Overkill for the data portion perhaps, but you can't get two 20 and two 24 in one shielded bundle...
 
AV-10

Looks like the AV-10 dedicated beaconX control head is not yet available? Is that correct?

The AV-10 control head was developed for and will be used only during the test phase, it will not be offered for sale. The price listed for the TBX of $2495.00 does NOT include a control head.

The AV-20 and the AV-30 control heads both have static and pitot inputs as well as encoders so they are complete stand alone Mode S XPDR/GPS/ADS-B 1090 out ground and satellite based solutions plus numerous other useful functions.
 
Re-thinking it yet again - the 172 rudder tapers forward down it's length, downward broadcast would be more effected with this rudder shape than with a RV rudder that tapers aft and potentially blocking transmission down & forward.
I'm changing focus to exploring mounting it either inside or trailing edge of a wingtip. Maybe I'll be the first on the block with offset rear facing nav light...
 
Re-thinking it yet again - the 172 rudder tapers forward down it's length, downward broadcast would be more effected with this rudder shape than with a RV rudder that tapers aft and potentially blocking transmission down & forward.
Every installation, bar none, will have some axis along which the transmission is muted by the airframe. The question is, will the blocked axis be significant in the overall performance of the system. The testing of the tailBeaconX suggests that despite having an entire airplane in front of it, performance isn't affected.

I'm changing focus to exploring mounting it either inside or trailing edge of a wingtip. Maybe I'll be the first on the block with offset rear facing nav light...
If you do that you'd need a second rear-facing light on the other side. Otherwise your fuselage will block visibility to that side.
 
The ultimate solution for Canadian GA aircraft remains simple... Force Transport Canada to do their jobs and rein in Nav Canada's out-of-control desire to force totally unnecessary technical standards on GA aircraft.

Nav Canada works for the airlines. Transport Canada works for Canadians. There's a devil of a difference in that one little detail.

It's time for Transport Canada to pull their pants up and do their job as Canada's airspace regulator.
 
If you do that you'd need a second rear-facing light on the other side. Otherwise your fuselage will block visibility to that side.

That would make it three if you already have a rudder light, or do a Rutan thing and run with rudder & one wingtip. (taildragger, worried about knocking TB-X off accidentally if mounted on bottom of tail)

Wingtip trailing edge mount poses another problem of some light shining into the cockpit, so maybe mount below the edge... playing out the possibilities..
 
Those of you installing a Tailbeacon X should consider running two 2-conductor shielded wires to it instead of one 4-conductor shielded wire. Reason being is the noise created by the power/ground wires could interfere with the two data wires. I would run one 20 gauge shielded wire for the power and ground with the ground attached at a common ground point under the instrument panel. In other words don't ground the Tailbeacon on it's end for power ground. Then I would run one 22-gauge shielded wire for the data stream. I would also electrically bond the shields on each end to the component chassis on each end, or a local ground point on each end if the components don't lend themselves to easily attaching a shield drain to the component chassis/backshells. On the power twisted pair wire I would ground the shielding on each end locally, but not to the power ground wire anywhere.
 
Those of you installing a Tailbeacon X should consider running two 2-conductor shielded wires to it instead of one 4-conductor shielded wire. Reason being is the noise created by the power/ground wires could interfere with the two data wires.
From first-hand experience with beta-testing the tailBeaconX, there have been no noise issues with a single 4-conductor shielded wire.
 
I would highly be interested to install a tailBeaconX to replace my Aeroled Tail light/strobe only if the unit had a strobe and talked to either Dynon, Advance or other most recent EFIS...


Maybe in the future???
 
Back
Top