Airbox AWARE: cost to run

[NATS General Aviation Lead]

Ian

I think you and I share the same understanding. I would be particularly interested to hear from John Brady. I think I described the original concept to him before he wrote the article and am very concerned that he would feel in any way let down by his understanding of the product now.

[John Brady]

Jonathan,
I think the issue is that from the early description of Aware, most of us thought the airspace boundaries shown on the screen were part of the overlay which would be updated in the AIRAC cycle. It was on that understanding that I wrote about it. In fact airspace boundaries are part of the underlying chart and the update is expensive.

Although Aware warns on the current airspace and there are overlay lines at the current boundaries, those are not compelling and are not in the same format as the chart depiction. So my Aware still shows Lyneham CAS but does not show Norwich CAS. My statement in the magazine "that the airspace will always be up to date" was not correct when considered from the viewpoint of the user.

When I plan a trip on my PC using the associated software, the airspace depicted there is the current airspace but when I transfer the route to Aware, its airspace is old and is not what I see on my paper chart which for me is the object to make my flight safer. I am not minded to pay £75 per year for new Aware charts (need to buy them individually at the issue dates) particularly since the recent change to the Aware software system have caused instabilities and crashes in mine leaving it unusable for periods. It also seems slower than before.

So in summary I thought this was the answer to a maiden's prayer and was all I would ever need - but it does not seem to be.

John

[Rob Swain]

Oh dear! What have I started!

It appears that my original understanding of the system may well be correct and I would be looking at some ongoing expense were I to buy an Aware - expense that is in addition to my existing purchase of up-to-date paper charts and an annual Garmin GPS database update.

Just to restate my position: it's not the fact that I would have to update the charts in the Aware that I object to, or the fact that I would have to pay for them.
It's the eye-watering cost of doing so, both the fact that the electronic copies are (unaccountably) quite a bit more expensive than paper ones, and that I have to buy them as well as the paper copies.
Or am I wrong on the last point - does an Aware satisfy the the ANO requirement to carry an up-to-date chart? Even if it does, not sure I'd be happy to solely rely on a small snippet of chart on a 5" screen for navigation, quite apart from the fact that a paper chart's battery doesn't go flat and if you happen drop it it continues to work!

[Ian Melville]

Just to restate my position: it's not the fact that I would have to update the charts in the Aware that I object to, or the fact that I would have to pay for them.
It's the eye-watering cost of doing so, both the fact that the electronic copies are (unaccountably) quite a bit more expensive than paper ones, and that I have to buy them as well as the paper copies.

That is the same issue as I have with most charts and maps available in this county. I would have no objection to paying the same as the paper versions, providing I can print a reasonable size section. Digital charts have some additional costs, Servers for downloads, and copyright protection. I am quite sure that this is off-set against the cost of printing.

[John Brady]

Following on from this thread, on Wednesday I am off to see William Moore, Chief Technical Officer at Airbox. I will take the thread with me so if you have anything to add, please do so by 10pm Tuesday.

John

[Ian Melville]

Hi John,
There is not much Airbox can do about the cost of the chart update as IIRC that is dictated by Ordinance Survey and/or NATS.

[NATS General Aviation Lead]

I am really sorry that anyone feels mislead by a product description that NATS and Airbox have always thought was completely clear.

The project was always intended and remains committed to providing simple airspace warning functionality at a very affordable cost. The inclusion of the CAA (NATS) chart was always going to be a reasonably large proportion of the cost of the product. It is probably beyond the scope of this thread but cartography costs and licence costs for background OS data mean that the initial provision of this data and the update of that data was always going to represent an ongoing cost to users of the product. We also knew that inevitably, a large percentage of pilots fly with an out-of-date chart the minute they purchase the piece of paper (or indeed the electronic scan of that chart) because things change on at least a 28 day basis. Additionally, the electronic scan of the paper chart cannot in itself generate audible/visual warnings of airspace boundaries or other VFR features. We therefore needed to specify the addition to the device of a digital database of aeronautical data which could generate warnings and alerts as well as overlay a digital depiction of this data on top the scanned chart. It is this digital data which is made available free of charge for the life of the product and means that your device will always depict and alert you to the presence of airspace boundaries and other VFR features regardless of whether the owner chooses to update the underlying scanned chart. This data is updated on the AIRAC cycle (every 28 days) and means that an updated device will always depict more up-to-date and accurate data than can ever be achieved by the underlying scanned aeronautical chart.

We firmly believe that that the concept remains valid and sound. We certainly know, from our work on infringement prevention, that the deployment of simple, cost effective AWARE functionality has afforded many hundreds if not thousands of GA aviators their first opportunity to benefit from electronic airspace orientation and alerting inside the cockpit. AWARE has also proven very attractive because it is very easily integrated in support of traditional navigation techniques. A route planned and marked on a paper chart can easily be checked in its execution by cross reference to an AWARE device by direct correlation between the paper and electronic depiction. In combination with simple but effective airspace alerts AWARE affords the VFR pilot significant reassurance as to successful execution of a VFR flight.

AWARE, in it's basic form, is very simple, good value and remains very attractive to a percentage of the GA community who may not want or be able to afford more sophisticated functionality.

Finally and very importantly for NATS (and I would suggest, in the long run for the GA community) AWARE provides airspace warning functionality and orientation which affords our operation protection from the significant risk posed by airspace infringements.

Working in collaboration with clever and innovative developers such as Airbox means that we can influence and deploy exactly the elements of functionality we know will deliver a safer airspace for us all to share.

[NATS General Aviation Lead]

A picture tells a thousand words......



The current underlying 1/2 mil charts are supplied at the time of purchase. These charts can be updated by the user, at a cost, whenever they are updated (usually annually).

The digital airspace definition within the device overlays the underlying charts with green and red lines depicting airspace boundaries and other key VFR data (see the green lines coincident with the Brize CTR, Fairford, Benson MATZ boundaries and the red line around Harwell Prohibited Area) It is this database which is updated every 28 days, free-of-charge, for the life of your device.

I hope it can be seen that regardless of the 'currency' of the underlying 1/2 mil chart, the user could, by carrying out a regular, free update process, always benefit from an up-to-date and accurate airspace depiction together with associated warnings and alerts.

I am not certain how we can make this any clearer but, on behalf of NATS, I will happily take on any suggestions from LAA members and discuss this directly with the team at Airbox.

[mikehallam]

John,

Thank you for running with this problem, as what we really get remains elusive and I'd like to know if a definitive resolution can be brokered.

Airbox' 'airspace for life' advertising promises have lead many of us astray as to what we actually get. The terminology in this context lacks sufficient lucidity, significant words have different interpretions.
e.g. 'Chart', paper - versus electronic display; or 'Airspace', purple printed lines - versus different green/red screen overlays; and 'updated airspace' ?
NATS propose a more subtle interpretation is really necessary.

We now learn that updated pre 2012 AWARE charts continue to show obsolete airspace boundary lines, overlaid with current airspace - shown as fresh green lines - turning red if we intrude.
One concludes it's perfectly safe to ignore any AWARE airspace shown, if not in green ?

Unfortunately my recent AWARE experience in France doesn't support this promise. I too bought mine not knowing their updates were only partial & flew my Rans down to near Poitiers & back, using a new 2012 paper chart (£17.99) & my Airbox/AWARE French electronic chart from 2011 (£60) "updated".

In fact the green/red AWARE overlay lines for the west side of Paris etc. were NOT in step with the paper version, I saw no correlation. After complaining Airbox said they'd sorted it, unfortunately their current green lines still don't tally with the new French paper chart.
When contradictory forum opinions were later expressed & my French discrepancy remained unresolved I mailed William seeking clarification. His solution is awaited.

mike hallam

[Trevor Harvey]

Jon
I would like to thank the team for the idea of this excellent device. My use of it is mostly over Scotland class G with little CAS apart from Edinburgh Glasgow Leuchars etc. However I note from your picture that Cotswold CTA (class A) L9 FL65+ are not coloured green, does this mean that only selected airspace is "warned" of? ie; coloured green / red.
Point 2 There seems to be a discussion on Flyer Forum about the device insisting on downloading vast amounts of software unneccesarily & then refusing to start? I recently tried to update mine twice but still see the message "Airspace warning out of date" in spite of the prior message "Your device has been updated succesfully". I shall try again.
Point 3 which may not be your domain, can I take the SD card out & poke it into A.N. Other automotive GPS with a 7" screen?
Your next assignment, should you wish to accept it, is a transponder that doesn't cost the earth, & or TCAS based on sharing of GPS data between a/c, because more a/c have GPS than transponders.

[NATS General Aviation Lead]

Mike

I cannot comment on french airspace functionality. I have enough problems trying to solve UK infringement issues )

I have pointed Airbox at this thread and I am sure they will be along with some answers shortly.

[NATS General Aviation Lead]

Trevor

Point 1. Remember the boundary generation and subsequent alerts are altitude sensitive. In the screenshot I assume the GPS derived altitude is well beneath the base of L9 at FL65.

Point 2. I will also have a go at updating my AWARE and report back but I haven't experienced similar problems to those described, on previous occasions.

Point 3. Well outside of my comfort zone but suggest you review the AWARE threads on the FLYER forum for lots of discussion and advice.

[gchater]

Many good points have been made and there is now an accurate understanding of exactly what the Aware offers. The problem is that this is at odds with what was originally promised. Some of the disappointment was caused by an Airbox response on the Flyer forum, although I did double check by phone and was given the same information.

"Free airspace updates for life" was a true statement, but it was also disingenuous, simply because the Aware actually shows two types of airspace: the active "flashing and beeping" overlay and the passive base chart boundaries. The active airspace is updated for free, but if it leaves behind obsolete airspace shown on the base chart - such as Lyneham - then it has only done half a job.

From MarkN on page five of the Flyer forum "NATS Airspace Aware GPS" thread: "Is my understanding of things correct?
The "basemap" standard 1:500,000 or 1:250,000 map data is as on a normal chart and will not be updated unless purchased again. This give topographical information, which is unlikely to change apart from the thousands of windfarms we have been promised.
The "airspace " is superimposed independently on this and will be updated free."

From oxonflyer (Airbox) in reply:
"correct"

It wasn't correct, because (a) the "basemap" does not contain only topographical information, it contains airspace as well and (b) the airspace is not wholly superimposed independently - there is some already on the "basemap", which becomes progressively out of date. This is why I describe the Airbox response and the original advertising as disingenuous.

[Flying John]

Seems to me the solution is to obtain the digital Topo information WITHOUT the airspace shown on the normal printed charts we all use, for loading as the base raster chart in the Aware.

Then the ONLY airspace is that downloaded for free every 28days. The base raster map would only be out of date if a new town, river, railway line (unlikely) were to be built.

John

[Rob Swain]

The base raster map would only be out of date if a ... railway line (unlikely) were to be built

I'm being picky, but what about HS1 (the cross-channel rail link across Kent) and the proposed HS2 (TGV line London - Brum and beyond)?

On a more serious note, it does appear, fortunately, that my initial understanding of the Airbox was wrong: it isn't navigation by message as the downloaded info is actually displayed over the underlying map after all. That is good.
However, I think I would be confused by the underlying chart continuing to display older discontinued airspace such as Lyneham. Indeed, I was, as Lynham was closed during the life of last years chart.
My comments, and the point of my original posting, about the eye-watering expense of the chart updates still stand!

This has got me thinking and considering both the overall problem and the possible solutions.
The result is I've now gone with SkyDemon. The stand alone unit (which I've got) is a lot more expensive (£549) than the Airbox AWARE and to all intents and purposes absolutely requires a PC for its planning software to run on to update the unit from. On the flip side though, it does offer a heck of a lot more functionality: as well as a track and airspace warnings you get NOTAM as a briefing, wind, TAFS and METARS, terrain awareness, PLOGging and LOADS of foreign charting which IS included in the basic subscription price. I know there's lots more as well, and probably stuff I've yet to find!
The maps are their own vector charts and are very good, and are updated very regularly. Because they are not just a raster map that the track is overlaid upon you can turn features (like roads) on and off to make the chart more readable, and zooming in and out becomes a realistic option as it doesn't just make the print on the chart bigger and smaller!
As regards prices there is a HUGE but good BUT here. If you already have an iPad (preferably, but not essentially, a 3G one) to run it on then the full SkyDemon suite is £179 for the first year, and £89 per year's subscription thereafter (same sub as for the SkyDemon hardware).

Don't just take my word for it though. Scoot over to http://www.skydemon.aero and try their 30 day trial. It's the most intuitive flight planning software I've come across.

And finally - I'm not connected with SkyDemon in any way - except as a happy customer.
To prove my impartiality, the downsides are the MD box is basically a Windows Mobile/CE machine (microshaft - ugh!) and currently there is no Android tablet version (which would be fab to have - a choice of screen size to suit your cockpit!)