Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 30, 2017, 06:30:13 PM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  Operations  |  Aviation & Flying Activities  |  Topic: Peeling the onion of ADS/B-OUT -- the CSMM problem
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Peeling the onion of ADS/B-OUT -- the CSMM problem  (Read 397 times)
Live2Learn
Seasoned Member

Posts: 339

« on: March 11, 2017, 09:37:31 PM »

The March April issue of FAA Safety Briefing has a very interesting set of articles on ADS/B.  Among 'em is a discussion of the CSMM... what they call "the Call Sign Miss Match problem".  Evidently there are a couple of fixes:  We use our registration call sign (N01234CP), we manually CHANGE our ADS/B-OUT to transmit CAP XX34 (where XX is our Wing number), or the FAA comes up with something else to resolve this otherwise bothersome (to them) problem.  See:  page 18, "What's in a Name?:  How to Avoid an ADS-B Call Sign Mismatch" at https://www.faa.gov/news/safety_briefing/2017/media/marapr2017.pdf.  Sorry, I haven't figured out where to find just this article, so you get the entire issue to browse through!    While you're browsing take a look at Q2, page 8 for a very sad story.  Imagine getting rear ended by a clueless B___d texting while speeding at 75 mph... at least the victim survived.  Also, did our south eastern friends know that ADS/B is required above 2500' over water from the beach to 12 miles out in the Gulf of Mexico?  That was news to me?!  Note also that one of the "advantages" of ADS/B is ATC will know where you are, how high you are, and where you are headed (exactly) so SAR is likely to further decline as a purpose for the large CAP fleet of aircraft.  Or, as Susan Parson, former Editor of the FAA Safety Briefing says, "Prepare to be assimilated".   :-)
« Last Edit: March 11, 2017, 09:41:10 PM by Live2Learn » Logged
PHall
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 5,606

« Reply #1 on: March 12, 2017, 12:32:45 AM »

I can't tell you how many electronic advancements were "supposed" to put CAP out of the Aerial Search business over the years.
And we're still looking for lost airplanes.....
Logged
etodd
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 550

« Reply #2 on: March 13, 2017, 01:13:35 PM »

I can't tell you how many electronic advancements were "supposed" to put CAP out of the Aerial Search business over the years.
And we're still looking for lost airplanes.....

Maybe this one will greatly reduce the time factor.  ATC might can narrow it down to a 10 sq mi area where they lost contact, whereas before CAP could have to search 200 sq miles or much more.
Logged
PHall
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 5,606

« Reply #3 on: March 13, 2017, 04:27:24 PM »

I can't tell you how many electronic advancements were "supposed" to put CAP out of the Aerial Search business over the years.
And we're still looking for lost airplanes.....

Maybe this one will greatly reduce the time factor.  ATC might can narrow it down to a 10 sq mi area where they lost contact, whereas before CAP could have to search 200 sq miles or much more.

We had that with SARSAT before they turned it off several years ago.
Logged
NIN
VIP

Posts: 4,433
Unit: of issue

« Reply #4 on: March 13, 2017, 05:27:46 PM »

The ADS-B callsign issue was very briefly mentioned at command council last week.

In most cases is a "set and forget", but in some ADS-B implementations is not user accessible. At the very least that's a trip to the avionics shop if a plane moves between wings.

When CAP-USAF flies one of our planes,  different matter.
Logged
Darin Ninness, Lt Col, CAP
Sq Bubba, Wing Dude, National Guy
The contents of this post are Copyright 2017 by NIN. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.
Live2Learn
Seasoned Member

Posts: 339

« Reply #5 on: March 13, 2017, 05:29:13 PM »

[
Maybe this one will greatly reduce the time factor.  ATC might can narrow it down to a 10 sq mi area where they lost contact, whereas before CAP could have to search 200 sq miles or much more.

We had that with SARSAT before they turned it off several years ago.

If claims are true that ADS/B-OUT will work to 2000-2500' AGL in most parts of the US that really narrows things down, AND it's absolutely more reliable than the old SARSAT 121.5 system.  FWIW, SARSAT 406 ELT, EPIRB, and PLB are still operational, so I'm not exactly sure where 'SARSAT...[was] turned off several years ago."
Logged
Live2Learn
Seasoned Member

Posts: 339

« Reply #6 on: March 13, 2017, 05:34:50 PM »

The ADS-B callsign issue was very briefly mentioned at command council last week.

In most cases is a "set and forget", but in some ADS-B implementations is not user accessible. At the very least that's a trip to the avionics shop if a plane moves between wings.

When CAP-USAF flies one of our planes,  different matter.

NIN:

I guess this would make inclusion of the aircraft registration number a mandatory item in the 'remarks' section of any flight plan.  How would this ambiguity (the difference between the 'N' number and the CAP XXXX call sign) be resolved if no flight plan is filed and there is a need to locate a missing aircraft?  Merely putting the CAP XXXX number into the ADS/B-OUT data burst doesn't seem to resolve the underlying problem... who exactly to look for if something unplanned requires a landing ... which might be out of cell coverage.  Also, what means would be used in the IG review of flight ops to determine the aircraft registration number is part of the ICAO flight plan when flight plans are required?
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
CAP Talk  |  Operations  |  Aviation & Flying Activities  |  Topic: Peeling the onion of ADS/B-OUT -- the CSMM problem
 


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.13 | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.09 seconds with 20 queries.