"Electronic Conspicuity, where are we" article in Nov 20 mag

Moderators: John Dean, Moderator

Post Reply
frasersi@btinternet.com
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 4:15 pm

"Electronic Conspicuity, where are we" article in Nov 20 mag

Post by frasersi@btinternet.com » Tue Nov 03, 2020 1:27 pm

Hi all

In the article in the Nov edition of LA I raise a couple of points that I believe merit discusion. First, the ADSB integrity standard (SIL / SDA) that will be required for a mandatory EC area. I suggested that it should be SIL 1 but, without significant preasure from us, NATS / CAA may well force it to the same standard as USA EC mandatory areas i.e SIL 3 /SDA 2. If that is allowed to happen, it will render most of our CAA subsidised TSO C199 GPS units obsolete before we even fit them. That then emphasises the point I made under the heading TL3.03 asking the question "Is it really going to be possible to ever get a legal ADSB installation at SIL 3 in a permit aircraft"? It seems to have taken the US experimental world some time to resolve this. It may not be as simple as we may like to imagine.

Ian Fraser
Ian Fraser
019212

AlanB
Posts: 9
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 7:19 am

Re: "Electronic Conspicuity, where are we" article in Nov 20 mag

Post by AlanB » Wed Nov 04, 2020 7:13 pm

The answer may be “to what purpose is the ads-data being used”.

If it’s a means of providing position data for separation in controlled airspace, class D for example, or is it for a VFR flight in class E airspace where separation is IFR to IFR. Or is it situational awareness where confliction services are not provided at all as for example in the use at places like Barton, Goodwood and North Weald.

Also is the data providing a label to a target derived from a “certified” source of primary radar.

The data integrity requirements along with other factors are driven by that initial requirement determination.
Alan Burrill
010351

Post Reply