Thank you, Lyn. - Martin

Thanks, Scot - glad to hear you liked it. - Martin

Thanks, Paul - glad you found it interesting. - Martin

Thanks, Alan. - Martin

Thank you, Chuck! - Martin

Thanks, Gary. - Martin

Spread the word - thank you! :) - Martin

Thanks :) - Martin

Thanks, Steve. One of the few pictures of me where I look like a responsible professional. :-) - Martin

Thanks, Mike. Glad you liked it. - Martin

Thank you, Richard. - Martin

Thank you, Alan. - Martin

Thanks, Don - I enjoyed our breakfast in Vero Beach, and the warm weather we had there. Still mostly below freezing here in Iowa, and the lows for the first nights in March are forecast to be below 0 again. It just won't end this year... Best regards, Martin

My pleasure, William. - Martin

Thanks, Nilson. - Martin

Thank you, Bill.

Thanks. I think that song for #12 came from the music library provided with Apple's Final Cut Pro, but the name escapes me right now. - Martin

Danke! - Martin

Aircraft with only a Mode C transponder will not see your position - nor will they see any other aircraft. For them to see you, they need some kind of ADS-B "in", which could be a cheap portable solution with an iPad or a more elaborate panel-mount setup. Regards, Martin

Thanks, Joey. - Martin

Thank you, Carlos. I very rarely get to SOCAL, but I would love to fly my Bonanza back there sometime. - Martin

Hi Danny, I assume you mean SQUAWK? Yes, you still need a squawk code even with ADS-B out. I agree it seems redundant because ADS-B already identifies your aircraft, but that's really been the case with all Mode S transponders for a few decades already. I do not know of any plans to get rid of squawk codes, but I cannot tell you the rationale behind it. - Martin

Thanks, Richie. I know the beeps aren't perfect, but please trust me, it was more annoying without them. There had to be some kind of break between the different segments. I'll try to find something better next time. - Martin

@@martinpauly Yup, the beeps sucked, a Garmin ding might be better next time, but thanks for doing this video Martin.

Thanks for the note, Lee. You are right, my portrayal was US-centric (since that’s where the mandate goes into effect shortly). We are all watching what Canada is going to do, after Mexico pretty much adopted the US mandate (except no UAT). Should the need for diversity arise, fortunately I can add that to my NGT-9000+ with a simple software key. It will then use the top-mounted directional antenna (active traffic) for the diverse ADS-B out. Though I’m not sure it’ll come to such a mandate, at least not in regions/altitudes I care about in my Bonanza. Best regards, Martin

Jeff A Hi Jeff, 1. Part of the time, yes. The ADS-B ground stations will send an uplink to ADS-B ‘in’ equipped aircraft with data about nearby Mode C aircraft - but only when both are tracked by ATC radar. This is called TIS-B. 2. Yes - when TIS-B fails, for example down low in the traffic pattern far away from radar, TCAS (active traffic) can still show Mode C-equipped aircraft.

Thank you Martin

Yes. Your ADS-B 'out' transmits that information to the ground, so that the ground station can determine what other ADS-B data you already have from nearby airplanes vs. what you still need to receive from the ground. - Martin

We will see, Keith. Technically it should be easy for the FAA to see when someone without ADS-B is in mandate airspace, but if they only have a Mode C transponder, it can sill be hard to identify the aircraft. - Martin

Thanks. I had a lot of fun making the 3d animation. - Martin

I don't know much about Flarm, so I'm afraid I can't answer all your questions definitively. But what I do know is this: an ADS-B receiver (ADS-B "in") will see nearby aircraft which have an ADS-B "out" transmitter, without needing ground services. They will see a Mode C-equipped airplane (without ADS-B "out") only if a nearby ground station relays that target via ADS-B to another nearby aircraft with ADS-B "out" and "in", so it'll be somewhat random with a Flarm device. Hope that helps! - Martin

@@martinpauly Thanks, The challenges of an aircraft without an engine... and foot launched ;-) Cheers....

Welcome back to aviation! - Martin

Nah, I'm just having fun playing with all these fancy video and animation toys! :-) Regards, Martin

Thanks a lot for putting this together. I tried the same thing in the video description, using links from the "Share" feature in KZfaq. But my links look different and, well, they don't seem to work. (I should have tested that.) Curious what the difference is - would you mind explaining how you created this nice summary of links? Thanks, Martin

Sure Martin - all I did was type the offset as "0:15", for example. Just type the minute:second offset as numbers and it autolinks it to the offset in the video.

Can a Garmin GTX 345 with integrated GPS for approved ATC position be upgraded to a Diversity Unit. I think in Canada we’ll need a top mounted transponder antenna. Can this non Diversity unit be reconfigured. Or will I need to buy yet another GTX 345D Unit transponder and do this all over again. I believe all other countries ( other the USA ) with a Space Based system will be requiring the Diversity units with the two antenna’s to stop shadowing to ATC while aircraft is in other than straight and level flight. I’m hoping my current GTX 345 can be ungraded to these needs of Diversity without starting from scratch again to meet the other country needs

No beeps next time - got it! :-) Thanks, Martin

I'm not saying that's a bad idea, but I can give you three reasons why it's not happening: (1) not everybody has a GPS in their aircraft - it's not required equipment (2) it would have to be a world-wide standardization effort, and replacing something as old and fundamental (in aviation) as barometric altitude takes forever (too much inertia) (3) what do you do if GPS has an outage, or there's interference? I see advantages for using GPS altitude, but I don't think it's likely going to happen. - Martin

You are right, Mark. 1090ES is a transponder, whereas UAT only works as an addition to a traditional transponder. As I mention in the video, there are other reasons (international flying) to go the 1090ES route, in addition to what you mentioned. - Martin

LitMonika Big Brother is unsatisfied unless he’s watching. The more the mandates, the less appealing it is to be a pilot.

I agree. Once you see how helpful it is to have a comprehensive picture of nearby traffic, it's hard to go back. And the technology is available and simple, especially FLARM. - Martin

I think I say pretty much this at the very beginning of the video. Except the requirement for ADS-B is not "below class B", but within 30NM of pretty much any airport that has a class B (which amounts more or less to the same thing. - Martin

Virtually everything in your reply is incorrect, misleading, or both. I guess that's what you meant by "alternative"

@@Gismo1951 That's what I like, well reasoned answers and point by point rebuttals.

Scott, my thoughts are very similar. If we could make a clean cut, get rid of SSR and equip every aircraft with ADS-B 'out' (preferably all using the 1090 flavor), it would be a much simpler and more useful system than what we have today. - Martin

@@martinpauly Unfortunately, the reason everybody cannot use the 1090 frequency is that it would be overloaded. That's why, for example, the FIS info can't be put on 1090. So as much as possible, the FAA wants all future traffic off 1090 and onto 978. The transponder system was never designed for the traffic and extended data requirements. So the FAA decided that big airplanes get 1090, little ones get 978 UAT, and the two (incompatible) frequencies get translated, one to the other, by FAA base stations, neatly negating the "A" for automatic part. ADS-B was supposed to work without a base station. The logic went that big airplanes are supposed to be under radar coverage and little airplanes wandering into paths of big airplanes would have their ADS-B pings translated. This assumes that big airplanes stay under radar! The reality is that turboprops fly in and out of light aircraft runways all the time, in small areas like roseville and others. And out of radar coverage. The makers like Garmin figured this out (and credit goes to them). In this day and age, having a dual band receiver is no big deal. So modern units get both 1090 and 978 frequencies. So what could go wrong now? Well, lots actually. Dual RECEIVERS does not mean TRANSMITTERS, so where to the ADS-B outs go in a dual band setup? The FAA has dictated, and should be no surprise, duals go to the UAT 978, so that they don't add to congestion (my Garmin is actually technically capable of output on either, or even both). Now assuming that those big aircraft flying into roseville get smart and also go dual receiver. Ok. But the FAA just spent a ton of money on a new round of Iridium satellites that receive ADS-B outs. This is a whole new age of aircraft tracking. It allows real time tracking of aircraft anywhere in the world, over oceans, mountains, and if the aircraft goes down, you have a real time track up to the time the aircraft stopped operating. Like as in "ran into the ground" or "exploded", not just "went off radar", since satellites can see anything that is not flying underwater or underground. So neat, right? Except that system was designed for big aircraft. And 1090ES. What about small aircraft? Well, there are actually two problems with that. 1. Its the wrong frequency. Even if you CAN squitter 1090ES, the FAA has told the avionics installers not to do that. They COULD have had the satellites see 978 UAT. But that would have cost extra (its almost like they are preferring one type of aircraft over others!). 2. The antenna is on the wrong side. They put them on the bottom of the aircraft so that the ground stations can see them (does the FAA actually care if different aircraft can see each other? Hmmmmm). The antennas need to be on the top, or both top and bottom. That is the way the big aircraft do it. Antennas on the bottom cannot be seen by satellites. And so on. The AOPA first requested the ability to remove transponders if ADS-B is installed. The FAA said no, even though the systems are redundant. It also might make the FAA admit that the transponder system was deployed badly and before the technology was cooked. The bandwidth is overutilized, transponders have lots of technical problems and, oh yea! Did you know that the technology behind GPS was known before the transponder mandate? As in they could have planned the bandwidth and data to accommodate that? I guess one reason I get annoyed by the FAA is that I have been flying for 47 years. The FAA introduces compromised systems like this with "oh, that's the best we could do, we can't make it better". Until the day they can. And then they change to "oh, nobody knew that at the time". Go see for example the history of VORs. The military took that technology and made a simple radial finder work for both direction and distance, and tried to work with the FAA to give that to civilians. Eventually they just gave up. The FAA was a drag on the program. Eventually they retrofitted it with DME, but the system worked far worse than what the military implemented. Regards.

Scott Franco Also the TCAS installed in Turbines and Jets is based off of Mode C Transponders. If transponders were done away with then the FAA would have to change the FARs about turbine equipment needing TCAS. Also it would remove a safety net (another set of eyes if you will). It’s all about cost. The Jets that I fly for a paycheck has ADSB Out but is not equipped with ADSB In. We only have TCAS. We also operate in and out of a lot of busy GA airports. Having ADSB in would be awesome. But again it’s about cost. Martin thanks for making well informed videos. I’ve watched a few of your videos since I ran across the one you mentioned Max G in. I’m really enjoying your effort. You make a great instructor!

Thanks for your kind words. A good TCAS is quite valuable, but also costs a lot more than ADS-B 'in'. But I understand why the airlines don't get ADS-B 'in', especially since the use of ADS-B is not yet required around the world whereas TCAS works everywhere (based on Mode C, like you said). Best regards, Martin