Blackhawk / CRJ-700 Midair

[Gatordev]

Depending on altitude:

I think he was referring to the the AIM (7-2-3) stating:

...
3. If the difference from the known field elevation and the altitude read from the altimeter is plus or minus 75 feet or greater, the accuracy of the altimeter is questionable and the problem should be referred to an appropriately rated repair station for evaluation and possible correction.

I can't find the regulatory statute that applies a number to operating VFR, as 91.411 applies to IFR flight w/ no minimum deviation and only mentions it must be certified by a repair station. No doubt the repair station utilizes the standard you mention.

But at the end of the day, you could still be 75 feet off (and within 24 months) and still be legal (non-regulatoryly speaking).

 

[Faded Float Coat]

 

[ChuckMK23]

Boom......NTSB Chair calls BS.

 

[Brett327]

We need more folks like her in government.

 

[Lawman]

I think he was referring to the the AIM (7-2-3) stating:



I can't find the regulatory statute that applies a number to operating VFR, as 91.411 applies to IFR flight w/ no minimum deviation and only mentions it must be certified by a repair station. No doubt the repair station utilizes the standard you mention.

But at the end of the day, you could still be 75 feet off (and within 24 months) and still be legal (non-regulatoryly speaking).

It’s 70 in Army aircraft… oh and that’s between 2 altimeter readings on 2 different screens and an SFD, with 100 foot deviation allowed under VFR standards so yeah….

The ADSB out/in thing is stupid based off the conversations with network latency at FVL. Effectively everybody is just accepting a multi second delay with code stripped to minimize the amount of track quality understanding in even seeing a collision in perfect conditions due to the limitations of the systems feeding the ads-b on the aircraft themselves. I don’t need to turn the system on, I need money to buy better equipment and upgrade aircraft. FAA number is 10 seconds to recognize collision, and implement correction for an average crew…. At helicopter speeds that results in 500 meters of displacement. And that’s understanding that the ads-b for the Army aircrew isn't behind the glass, it’s in a tablet. But hey, let’s mandate it for named missions so we can broadcast things to whoever and feel like that solves a problem of a >200 foot margin between a designed flight corridor and an approach path that despite numerous reports from ATC operators were simply allowed to continue.

Personally I think this is just the tip of an iceberg that AI has started exposing as far as accepted deviance built into our system. Palintir has some some pretty incredible research of close call studies at airports and the reliance in single voice direct comms is a problem given the density of aircraft in the terminal area.

If anybody else lives in the ATAK world, the software center has developed a velocity (and a few other filters) based dynamic airspace avoidance feature under the Talon App. We have been testing it to integrate the littoral air space because as we democratize that area with unmanned systems this problem only gets way worse. We will be attempting a cross domain solution to achieve common understanding between mil ATAK and civ TAK as part of the border mission this spring.

 

[sevenhelmet]

We need more folks like her in government.

I'll go ahead and predict her firing or "resignation" by Dec 31. She's probably being actively investigated for any skeletons in her closet- real or perceived- that Trump's cronies can pin on her.

Truth-telling is career suicide in today's government.

 

[Gatordev]

And that’s understanding that the ads-b for the Army aircrew isn't behind the glass, it’s in a tablet.

For -OUT? I understand it would be on a tablet for -IN, but are the Army helos not 1090 capable for OUT transmissions?

It was always a mystery and I could never find anyone who knew what the R/S APX-100 could do as it relates to ADS-B Out. You could see the Mode-S address and see the ACPM information, but no other information to the user about ADS-B. Since you can see them now in FlightAware, I'm assuming something changed, but not sure what or when.

Not sure if IKE has any insight there.

 

[PhrogPhlyer]

you can see them now in FlightAware

Operators can request the FlightAware not display their readout. This is done by several charter operators so that the customers are not tracking the aircraft, second by second.

I recommend using https://www.adsbexchange.com/. This is a global network of ADS-B real time feeds (14,000+ active feeds). If any of these stations gets an ADS-B signal from any aircraft, it will be displayed. The only aircraft in central NJ that have not shown on this map, in real time of visual observation, have been military helicopters. For this to happen, they must have their ADS-B turned off.

 

[Lawman]

For -OUT? I understand it would be on a tablet for -IN, but are the Army helos not 1090 capable for OUT transmissions?

It was always a mystery and I could never find anyone who knew what the R/S APX-100 could do as it relates to ADS-B Out. You could see the Mode-S address and see the ACPM information, but no other information to the user about ADS-B. Since you can see them now in FlightAware, I'm assuming something changed, but not sure what or when.

Not sure if IKE has any insight there.

Our 123s already have the capability for both in and out… we just didn’t pay for it across every aircraft to have the function enabled. So not all of them can do 1090ES, but most of those are in the divestment with AATI and Force redesign.

This is part of the reason Astarte hasn’t been able to achieve the dream goals yet of active airspace management and integrating the Air Litorral space below the coord because the track quality provided by 1090ES leaves way too much error of prediction for aircraft operating “tactically.” And this gets worse as commercial drones operating in the space are already maturing and that density will go up exponentially.

Right now with the total amount of money allocated across all of Army aviation though the solution was Samsung tablets and a stratus III for every aircraft in the fleet. Unfortunately those have yet to be delivered thanks in large part to the government shut down derailing the NLT timeline. And we are still providing aircrews with a look down/inside method of cueing for traffic hazards.

The goal is augmented reality and synthetic vision both for National Airspace and Combat. C scope images fed to a HMD from what the tablet is receiving whether that’s traffic, known chummed hazards, the aco, etc which is part of the “heads up eyes out” initiative that this sparked, but nobody can find money to pay for that. I’m hopeful at this point since the TAK ecosystem is getting so much use by other agencies that Cal Fire or somebody cracks this code for us and we can just steal it, because what the and Colorado and other states have done within that system is incredible. It does a lot more than just be a GRG tablet.

 

[IKE]

For -OUT? I understand it would be on a tablet for -IN, but are the Army helos not 1090 capable for OUT transmissions?

It was always a mystery and I could never find anyone who knew what the R/S APX-100 could do as it relates to ADS-B Out. You could see the Mode-S address and see the ACPM information, but no other information to the user about ADS-B. Since you can see them now in FlightAware, I'm assuming something changed, but not sure what or when.

Not sure if IKE has any insight there.

On the Navy side, I think you need an APX-123 on SW 6.8 or 7.0+ for ADS-B PUT, and that's all we get on Seahawks (out only). We also use Sentry or similar devices for ADS-B In.

I've been out of the program office for almost 2 years though, so my knowledge of this stuff will continue to rust.

 

[Lawman]

On the Navy side, I think you need an APX-123 on SW 6.8 or 7.0+ for ADS-B PUT, and that's all we get on Seahawks (out only). We also use Sentry or similar devices for ADS-B In.

I've been out of the program office for almost 2 years though, so my knowledge of this stuff will continue to rust.

Worth noting that all the 123s are built with the 2 way capability from a hardware standpoint.

It’s whether the aircraft OFP can do anything with it. Between that and the scale of the fleet to mod software plus the separate priorities of each PM has been our problem. Like RNAV this is one of those if we just spent a little more money but somehow it’s never important until it’s a disaster.