airways wrote:
- a false sense of safety
- in the case of Rosetta: a lot of heads down time trying to figure out the non-bearing targets.
This is something that I hear a lot and it’s a fair point, but I am not too concerned about it. I am quite good at self-discipline, especially when flying. It is just a matter of training yourself to proper behaviours and not indulging in negative ones.
And it is after all something that can be said of any EC device so it is not a good argument against PAW specifically IMHO.
I think that given how cheap it is I will give it a try. After all, I am based at a decently sized regional airport where a lot of traffic is anyway ADSB so if nothing else it will at least save me some time when looking for the Citations on long final.
Is there anyone here with experience flying with PA Rosetta in France?
Not much traffic in my tablet with PAW compared to those spoted outside (it’s less ideal than UK) but at least I now some mode C/S around and I have his altitude vs mine
I doubt any of gadgets is useful if you can cruise above 3000ft agl, there is not that much traffic that high, bellow 3000ft agl you are looking ahead rather than on your tablet and inside the circuit it become useless
It’s way safer if one can maintain above 3000ft (including in IMC), bellow that even radar info does not help much, you may need a proper TAS…
Not much traffic in my tablet with PAW compared to those spoted outside
That is extremely damning – because the vast majority of traffic reported by TAS/TCAS (which we know, in the UK, is of the order of 50% of traffic, with the other 50% mostly intentionally non-transponding, due to the CAA’s mad busts policy) is never spotted no matter how many people in the cockpit are looking for it. So if you spot more traffic than PilotAware (PAW) is showing, PAW must be spectacularly useless.
Certainly the risk of a mid-air is much lower above say 3000ft, and much more so above an overcast, or even in IMC. There have been suggestions that the level varies around Europe, and I would expect e.g. Swiss pilots to be flying a bit higher up. These devices are potentially most useful at lower levels, either because you chose to fly lower for a better view of something, or around the takeoff/landing phases when you don’t get any choice. With my TAS605, I have avoided countless “very close” situations in the circuit.
But ADS-B emitting boxes are slowly gaining ground, and in the UK the SkyEcho 2 can emit SIL=1 so potentially can show up on certified TAS systems, which is why I will upgrade my TAS605 to a 605A as soon as Avidyne can supply an exchange box so I can be 100% sure of being able to go back to my present fully functioning setup. Last I heard they had no exchange units and mine would have to be sent to the US first…
Using PAW you see load of PAW & SE2 guys in UK but yes sadly ModeS/C returns OCAS under LTMA did a large shrink…
We see aircraft on PAW that we never find visually.
One of those could become a potential conflict.
If I can’t find them I have a chance to decide to turn or climb/descend.
I can’t see me ever having full TAS so I either go without, or use the device that shows me the most stuff.
When we went to the LAA rally at Sywell there were 7 aircraft at or near the rendezvous circuit around the reservoir (Pitsford water). They were all on the PAW and as we were 5up with beady-eyes, we managed to spot them all.
However PAW helped to know where to look.
We still have occasions when something blasts by.
I would say more in the last 3 years than over the previous 15. But I feel I need to have something rather than say ’it’s not good enough so I’ll have nothing’
Sorry but due to Covid, I can’t help with a good recommendation for Seba
Fair enough thanks for the inputs. I will purchase it and test it (mainly in eastern France and western Germany), will report back my findings.
I will set the bar pretty low given the price, i.e. if it alerts me of even just one traffic per flight more than I could have seen looking out, it’s worth the few hundreds it costs.
On a side note, I seem to remember it was possible to couple it with a FLARM mouse to directly see FLARM traffic without relying on the ground stations, is that still a thing? I can’t find the info on their website.
Just read a short article about the French-made Neurone, which has the selling point of compatibility with most other technologies (other units, ADS-B out, mode C and S, plus Flarm shortly). The unit and antenna is €750, plus €78 for an optional cable to link to your transponder. Discounts available for large orders. Display is either through their app or your favourite moving map via GDL90. Future article to follow once the magazine has completed the air tests with ATC at Aix-les-Milles.
The FFA are currently testing the Rosetta from Pilot Aware to see if they can recommend it.
You’re right, the website isn’t very clear; looks like early days. The little infographic definitely says it’s not dependant on ground stations. From the article:
Comment ça marche? Grâce à une technologie et une électronique ultra-moderne, le Neurone peut voir tous types de signaux. Il capte bien sûr les autre Neurones, les ADS-B OUT, et détecte avec plus ou moins de précision les transpondeurs Mode C et S. Le Neurone utilise les ondes radio (LoRa = Long range) pour communiquer entre Neurones et un accord est en cours avec Flarm pour également capter et émettre les signaux IN/OUT des Flarm et Power Flarm obligatoires sur les planeurs. De plus, il croise et utilise le réseau téléphonique quand il est disponible pour transmettre et échanger ses informations, mais n’en est pas dépendant, à l’instar d’autres applications d’anticollision. Ainsi le Neurone montre un atout intéressant : son interopérabilité, c’est-à-dire sa capacité à recevoir tous les autres types de signaux et pas uniquement les siens, mais aussi son indépendance.
Translated:
How does it work? Thanks to ultra-modern technology and electronics, the Neuron can see all types of signals. It of course captures other Neurons, ADS-B OUT, and detects with more or less precision Mode C and S transponders. The Neuron uses radio waves (LoRa = Long range) to communicate between Neurons and an agreement is in course with Flarm to also capture and transmit the IN / OUT signals of Flarm and Power Flarm required on gliders. In addition, it intersects and uses the telephone network when available to transmit and exchange information, but is not dependent on it, like other collision avoidance applications. Thus the Neuron shows an interesting asset: its interoperability, that is to say its ability to receive all other types of signals and not only its own, but also its independence.
It does mention 4G later in the article, but for backing up and retrieving data in the cloud.
I understand it receives everything but only transmits on its own frequency (868Mhz, normally used for internet of things), unless you wire it to your transponder. Range is “at least 15km”.
