Welcome! Becoming a registered user of ShortWingPipers.Org is free and easy! Click the "Register" link found in the upper right hand corner of this screen. It's easy and you can then join the fun posting and learning about Short Wing Pipers!

Page 31 of 31 FirstFirst ... 21293031
Results 301 to 310 of 310

Thread: ADSB-Out . . Creeping toward 2020

  1. #301
    Administrator Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Graham, Texas, United States
    Posts
    11,103
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: ADSB-Out . . Creeping toward 2020

    The tail light looks like it will fit our rudder no problem.

    The LED strobe could be run off the nav light wire, low amp draw. If you have a Whelen or similar strobe set up with a power supply simply disconnect the power wire running to the wing from the power supply and connect it to the wire coming from the panel to turn the strobes on.

  2. #302
    grbamford's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Erie, Pa
    Posts
    170
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: ADSB-Out . . Creeping toward 2020

    https://www.flyingmag.com/uavionix-s...so?enews090618

    Steve, any word on the spacers?


    Sent from my iPhone using ShortWingPipers.Org

  3. #303
    JrBirdman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Peachtree City, GA
    Posts
    50
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: ADSB-Out . . Creeping toward 2020

    This came from an AvWeb article. There are some very good comments that follow the article from readers that are worth reading if this product is one you are considering. Also AOPA has an article about it, as well as several other websites.

    Garmin has filed a lawsuit in a federal court in Montana, where uAvionix is based, accusing that company of using Garmin’s patented ADS-B technology without permission. The products under dispute are the EchoUAT and skyBeacon, which are sold for the experimental market. In the court filing, dated June 19, 2018, Garmin says they were originally involved in discussions with uAvionix relating to drones. “Over time, those discussions changed, and Garmin eventually learned that uAvionix had taken its patented ADS-B technology without permission,” according to the lawsuit. In a statement posted online Monday, uAvionix says they did not infringe Garmin's patent. "uAvionix has our own patent-pending method for using Mode 3/A and altitude information that differs from the method in the 301 Patent [U.S. Patent No. 8,102,301]," the company said. "We won’t be able to comment on the proceedings, and it will likely take some time to resolve." Meanwhile, the uAvionix statement says, they will continue to ship the disputed products.

    Garmin says in the court filing it sought to resolve the dispute before going to court, but uAvionix “dragged its feet, hid its true intentions from Garmin, and wrongly contended it designed around the ‘301 Patent.'” Garmin said they purchased the disputed uAvionix product, determined for themselves that it utilized their patented technology and decided to file the lawsuit. "The skyBeacon and EchoUAT will directly compete with Garmin’s GDL-82, GDL-84, and GDL-88,” Garmin states in the suit. Garmin asks the court to stop uAvionix from infringing its patent, and also asks the court to require uAvionix to reimburse Garmin for all of its expenses and losses related to the infringement. A Garmin spokesperson told AVweb on Monday, “Unfortunately, we cannot comment on ongoing litigation.”

  4. #304
    Administrator Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Graham, Texas, United States
    Posts
    11,103
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: ADSB-Out . . Creeping toward 2020

    THere is also a very good rebuttal to that that I will have to find and post.

  5. #305
    Administrator Steve Pierce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Graham, Texas, United States
    Posts
    11,103
    Post Thanks / Like
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: ADSB-Out . . Creeping toward 2020

    Letters to editor AvWeb

    Paul Beard, CEO of uAionix pioneered 2.4Ghrz spread spectrum technology. It revolutionized all facets of RC modeling almost overnight. Millions of RC vehicles aerial or otherwise use this technology today including military remote piloted aircraft. RC technology has led the way for physical control of the drone/UAV/UAS 's we see today and the foreseeable future. None of this was possible with out 2.4Ghrz technology. Spread spectrum technology allowed the demonstration of 100 drones flying in a coordinated fashion at Oshkosh during the night airshow and the talented gal flying that 3D aerobatic routine with her 1/3rd scale Extra.. No drone crashed or ran into each other or was "glitched" by any other drone or frequency. Nor did the RC pilot have any frequency/jamming issues with any other transmitting or receiving device. By his own words, Beard had to deal with the American Modeling Association which is the RC modeling counterpart of the FAA. It is a huge now bureaucratic organization with congressional lobbying power not only familiar to all RC modelers but with drone integration and traffic identification/separation issues, is working with the FAA in partnership. Beard has much experience dealing with a powerful agency with a built in resistance to change. He went from being banned flying his new technology to revolutionizing all facets of remote control now embraced and recommended by the AMA. He has the intestinal fortitude and knowledge to handle Garmin, the FAA, and I believe he did not just "give away" his patented 2.4Ghrz technology which could make him well equipped to take on Garmin financially. In my layman's, blue collar opinion 2.4Ghrz technolgy applied to ADS-B OUT is the magic ingredient Garmin does not have. This is why uAvionix will prevail. And if Garmin continues down this path, it could prove to be a major blow to their already tarnished image which could cost them far more financially due to lost customer loyalty than they presently imagine.
    Jim Holdeman

  6. #306
    Stephen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Lopez Island, WA
    Posts
    2,970
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: ADSB-Out . . Creeping toward 2020

    Maybe, if Garmin puts it's time into developing a $2000 plug in ADSB and stopped trying to destroy competition through legal tactics we wouldn't mind. I resent big companies stomping on small guys.

    That's one of the reasons I use IFly gps.
    "You can only tie the record for flying low."

  7. #307
    51-pa22's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Waxahachie, Texas
    Posts
    478
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: ADSB-Out . . Creeping toward 2020

    Was that a $200 garmin plug in?

  8. #308
    Rick-CAS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Grain Valley, MO (E. Kansas City)
    Posts
    189
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: ADSB-Out . . Creeping toward 2020

    Remember Garmin was a small company trying to make it in the GPS market in the late 80’s early 90’s. Two guys deciding to take the leap from Bendix/King with a business model to take the GA market from King in 10 years. They did it, sold their shares in the company and living a good life.

  9. #309
    tnowak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Hampshire, England
    Posts
    624
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: ADSB-Out . . Creeping toward 2020

    "2.4 GHz technolgy applied to ADS-B OUT"?
    Anyone care to explain?
    I can't see what 2.4GHz technology does for ADS-B Out. Totally different frequencies...
    TonyN

  10. #310

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Hutchinson, MN
    Posts
    719
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: ADSB-Out . . Creeping toward 2020

    I think the premise is that the method he developed to use the 2.4GHz spectrum (WIFI, very noisy ) to improve the RC communications is similar technology he is using to operate ADS-B signal interrogation. Basically being able to recognize other "traffic" in the same spectrum. So he maybe able to prove commercialized "prior-art" in the method applied even though it is in a different spectrum. Patent Law is not always "rock solid" if there are competing technologies that are not appropriately covered at the time of application.

    That is the best "guess" I have. Of course we don't hear or see the full story on either side. It will be interesting to see how this all shakes out.

    Tim

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •