GAINS D4.4 Aerodrome Operations Demonstration Report

VERY LARGE-SCALE DEMONSTRATION

Deliverable ID: D4.4 Dissemination Level: PU Project Acronym: GAINS Grant: 783228 Call: H2020-SESAR-2016-2 SESAR-VLD1-09-2016 Solutions for General Aviation Topic: and Rotorcraft Consortium Coordinator: HELIOS Edition Date: 19 December 2019 Edition: 00.00.01 Template Edition: 02.00.01

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Authoring & Approval

Authors of the document Name/Beneficiary Position/Title Date Bob Darby/AOPA Work Package 4 Leader 28/10/2019

Reviewers internal to the project Name/Beneficiary Position/Title Date Philip Church/HELIOS SGA Coordinator 29/10/2019 Julian Scarfe/AOPA Work Package 5 Leader 29/10/2019 Andreia Simoes/Helios Project Manager 19/12/2019

Approved for submission to the SJU By - Representatives of beneficiaries involved in the project Name/Beneficiary Position/Title Date Philip Church/HELIOS SGA Coordinator 25/11/19 Martin Robinson/AOPA FS and LS 13/11/19 Santiago Soley/PILDO FS and LS 13/11/19 Marc Gerlach EC 13/11/19 Andy Davis/TRIG FS and LS 13/11/19

Rejected By - Representatives of beneficiaries involved in the project Name/Beneficiary Position/Title Date

Document History

Edition Date Status Author Justification 00.00.00 25/11/2019 Issued Bob Darby Initial Issue Inclusion of section A.5.5 00.00.01 19/12/2019 Issued Bob Darby Recommendations amendment Copyright Statement This document and its content is an internal deliverable of the GAINS project and may not, except with the GAINS consortia express written permission, be distributed or have its content commercially exploited. This project has received funding from the SESAR Joint Undertaking under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 783228. The opinions expressed herein reflect the author’s view only. Under no circumstances shall the SESAR Joint Undertaking be responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained herein.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

GAINS GENERAL AVIATION IMPROVED NAVIGATION AND SURVEILLANCE

This Aerodrome Operations Demonstration Report is part of GAINS, a VLD project that has received funding from the SESAR Joint Undertaking under grant agreement No 783228 under European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme. This two-year project initiated in January 2018 is overseen by a consortium from the general aviation (GA) community: AOPA UK, Pildo Labs, Funke Avionics and Trig Avionics. Aviation consultancy Helios is the project coordinator.

Abstract This document describes the aerodrome operation demonstration for a completely ADS-B equipped Electronic Conspicuity environment, using a range of ADS-B cockpit traffic display systems and ground ADS-B display systems.

The aim is to replicate a possible future scenario of full equipage and full mutual electronic conspicuity, to explore the usefulness and usability of cockpit traffic displays and ground surveillance displays in such an environment – i.e. exploring the human factors aspects as well as equipment capability considerations.

GAINS is co-funded under the Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme. This two-year project initiated in January 2018 is overseen by a consortium from the general aviation (GA) community: AOPA UK, Pildo Labs, Funke Avionics and Trig Avionics. Aviation consultancy Helios is the project coordinator.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Table of Contents

Abstract ...... 3 1 Executive summary ...... 12 1.1 Background ...... 12 1.2 Broad objectives of project ...... 12 1.3 Broad conclusions and recommendations ...... 12 1.4 Recommendations ...... 13 2 Introduction ...... 14 2.1 Purpose of the Report ...... 14 2.2 Scope ...... 14 2.3 Intended readership ...... 15 2.4 Background ...... 15 2.5 Structure of the document ...... 16 2.6 List of acronyms ...... 17 3 Technical Background and Equipment ...... 19 3.1 Project EVA and LPAT ...... 19 3.2 CAP1391 ...... 19 3.3 SESAR 2020 VLD – Surveillance Element ...... 20 3.4 Technical objectives of GAINS ...... 20 3.4.1 Reduced Capability Equipment ...... 21 3.5 EC equipment and interoperability ...... 21 3.6 Relationship to SESAR Solutions ...... 21 3.6.1 Solution 101: Improved hybrid surveillance ...... 22 3.6.2 Solution 110: ADS-B surveillance of aircraft in flight and on the surface...... 22 3.7 Cockpit Equipment ...... 23 3.8 Ground surveillance equipment ...... 23 3.9 Participating aerodromes ...... 24 4 GAINS Objectives, Concept, Preparation and Execution ...... 25 4.1 Project Objectives ...... 25 4.1.1 Usefulness...... 25 4.1.2 Usability ...... 25 4.2 Summary of Operational Concept ...... 26 4.3 Preparation of Demonstrations ...... 28 4.4 Execution ...... 29

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

5 Results, Analysis, Discussions, Conclusions & Recommendations ...... 30 5.1 Results ...... 30 5.1.1 Subjective data ...... 30 5.1.2 Objective data ...... 30 5.1.3 Additional information ...... 30 5.1.4 Contextual information ...... 30 5.1.5 Analysis process ...... 31 5.2 Analysis example: close encounter at Duxford demonstration ...... 32 5.2.1 Cockpit Usage of EC equipment ...... 32 5.2.2 Equipment ...... 33 5.2.3 Guidelines and Standards ...... 33 5.2.4 Consideration of action taken before visual acquisition ...... 34 5.2.5 Follow-up actions ...... 35 5.3 Airborne General Aviation EC equipment characteristics ...... 35 5.3.1 Pilot user interface for GA EC systems ...... 35 5.3.2 Detailed cockpit EC usage example from Dundee demonstration...... 36 5.4 GAINS equipage options ...... 36 5.4.1 EC Equipage options and GAINS demo equipage ...... 36 5.5 Results and Discussion ...... 39 5.5.1 Pilots and ground staff comments ...... 39 5.5.2 Overall comments and recommendations – airborne EC ...... 39 5.5.3 Overall comments - ground surveillance display usage ...... 49 5.6 Overall conclusions, recommendations and further work ...... 50 5.6.1 Airborne EC use ...... 50 5.6.2 Ground EC use ...... 51 5.6.3 Further investigations ...... 51 5.6.4 Index of detailed conclusions and recommendations ...... 52 6 References ...... 55 Appendix A GAINS Surveillance Demonstrations Summary ...... 56 A.1 Introduction ...... 56 A.2 Preparation visits...... 56 A.2.1 Dundee visit (2018-11-06) ...... 56 A.2.2 Barton visit (2018-12-16) ...... 56 A.2.3 Lee-on-Solent. Eye Tracking Equipment – Initial Familiarisation (30-03-2019) ...... 56 A.3 Formal demonstrations completed ...... 57 A.3.1 Stapleford demo (held on 2018-12-04) ...... 57 A.3.2 Brimpton Ground Reception Tests (2019-01-28) ...... 58 A.3.3 Duxford demo (held on 2019-04-07) ...... 58 A.3.4 Sywell demo (held on 2019-04-15) ...... 58 A.3.5 Dundee demo (held on 2019-05-10) ...... 59 A.3.6 Blackbushe demo (held on 16-08-2019) ...... 59 A.4 Formal demonstrations not completed ...... 59 A.4.1 Barton demo (first planned for 2019-05-25) ...... 59 A.4.2 Brimpton demo (planned for 27/28-07-2019) ...... 60

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

A.5 Additional visits and data gathering events ...... 60 A.5.1 Southampton (2018-11-30 & 2018-12-11) ...... 60 A.5.2 Brimpton fly-in (2019-06-09)...... 61 A.5.3 Wycombe Aero Expo (2019-06-13+14+15) ...... 61 A.5.4 Light Aviation Association Rally, Sywell, (2019-08-29 to 31) ...... 61 A.5.5 Aerobits device ...... 62 A.6 Overall GAINS surveillance activity summary ...... 63 A.6.1 Ground Surveillance ...... 63 A.6.2 Cockpit surveillance: aircraft & equipment ...... 65 A.7 Acknowledgements ...... 71 Appendix B Preparation visits ...... 72 B.1 Introduction ...... 72 B.2 Dundee visit (2018-11-06) ...... 72 B.2.1 Introduction...... 72 B.2.2 Avionix system summary...... 72 B.2.3 Control room display position ...... 74 B.2.4 Assessment of use...... 74 B.2.5 Reasons for the Dundee trial...... 75 B.3 Barton visit (2018-12-16) ...... 77 B.3.1 Introduction...... 77 B.3.2 uAvionix system summary...... 77 B.3.3 Barton Display ...... 78 B.3.4 Assessment of use...... 79 B.3.5 Motivations for the Barton trial ...... 79 B.4 Lee-on-Solent. Eye Tracking Equipment – Familiarisation (30-03-2019) ...... 79 Appendix C Stapleford Demo (4th December 2018) ...... 80 C.1 General ...... 80 C.2 Demonstration Environment ...... 80 C.2.1 Weather ...... 80 C.2.2 Control service ...... 80 C.3 Debrief summary ...... 80 C.3.1 General comments ...... 80 C.3.2 PlaneSight comments ...... 80 C.3.3 Other equipment comments ...... 81 C.3.4 Comments and Recommendations to manufacturers...... 81 C.4 Ground equipment data recordings ...... 81 C.5 Aircraft Equipage ...... 81 C.6 Pilots Questionnaires ...... 82 C.6.1 GSGAA ...... 82 C.6.2 GSGBB ...... 85 Appendix D Brimpton Ground Reception Tests (28th January 2019) ...... 87 D.1 General ...... 87

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

D.2 Demonstration Environment ...... 87 D.2.1 Weather ...... 87 D.2.2 Control service ...... 87 D.3 Ground equipment data recordings ...... 87 D.3.1 Ground Antenna installation ...... 87 D.3.2 Trajectory recordings ...... 88 D.4 Airborne installation ...... 88 D.5 Discussion ...... 89 Appendix E Duxford Demo (7th April 2019) ...... 90 E.1 General ...... 90 E.2 Demonstration Environment ...... 90 E.2.1 Weather ...... 90 E.2.2 Control Service ...... 90 E.3 Debrief summary ...... 90 E.3.1 General comments ...... 90 E.3.2 PlaneSight comments ...... 91 E.3.3 SkyDemon comments ...... 91 E.3.4 Pilot Aware comments ...... 91 E.3.5 ADS-B Ground display equipment comments ...... 91 E.3.6 Comments and Recommendations to manufacturers...... 92 E.4 Ground equipment data recordings ...... 92 E.5 Aircraft equipage ...... 92 E.6 Pilot Questionnaires ...... 94 E.6.1 GSUAA ...... 94 E.6.2 GSUBB ...... 97 E.6.3 GSUDD ...... 106 E.6.4 GSUEE ...... 108 E.6.5 GSUFF ...... 110 E.6.6 GSUCC ...... 112 E.7 FISO questionnaires ...... 113 E.7.1 Duxford 1 ...... 113 E.7.2 Duxford 2 ...... 115 E.7.3 Duxford 3 ...... 117 E.7.4 Duxford 4 ...... 119 Appendix F Sywell Demo (15th April 2019) ...... 121 F.1 General ...... 121 F.2 Demonstration Environment ...... 121 F.2.1 Weather ...... 121 F.2.2 Control service ...... 121 F.3 Debrief summary ...... 121 F.3.1 General comments ...... 121 F.3.2 PlaneSight comments ...... 121 F.3.3 SkyEcho + SkyDemon comments ...... 122

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

F.3.4 Pilot Aware comments ...... 122 F.3.5 Other ...... 122 F.3.6 FISO ...... 122 F.3.7 Comments and Recommendations to manufacturers...... 122 F.4 Ground equipment data recordings ...... 123 F.5 Aircraft equipage ...... 123 F.6 Pilot Questionnaires ...... 124 F.6.1 GBKAA ...... 124 F.6.2 GSUAA ...... 126 F.6.3 GBKBB...... 128 F.6.4 GBKCC ...... 130 F.6.5 GBKDD ...... 132 F.6.6 GBKEE ...... 134 F.6.7 GBKFF ...... 136 F.6.8 GBKGG ...... 139 F.7 FISO Questionnaire ...... 141 Appendix G Dundee Demo (10th May 2019) ...... 143 G.1 General ...... 143 G.2 Demonstration Environment ...... 143 G.2.1 Weather ...... 143 G.2.2 Control service ...... 143 G.3 Debrief summary ...... 143 G.3.1 General comments ...... 143 G.3.2 Sky Demon comments...... 144 G.3.3 PlaneSight comments ...... 144 G.3.4 Pilot Aware Comments ...... 145 G.3.5 Comments and Recommendations to manufacturers ...... 145 G.4 Ground equipment data recordings ...... 145 G.5 Aircraft equipage ...... 146 G.6 Pilot Questionnaires ...... 147 G.6.1 GPNAA ...... 147 G.6.2 GPNBB ...... 149 G.6.3 GPNCC ...... 151 G.6.4 GPNDD ...... 164 G.6.5 GPNEE ...... 168 G.6.6 GPNFF ...... 170 G.6.7 GPNGG ...... 172 Appendix H Blackbushe Demo (16th August 2019) ...... 174 H.1 General ...... 174 H.2 Demonstration Environment ...... 174 H.2.1 Weather ...... 174 H.2.2 Control service and adjacent airspace ...... 174 H.3 Debrief summary ...... 174

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

H.3.1 Ground display, Blackbushe Tower ...... 174 H.3.2 Pilot display and usage in the cockpit ...... 175 H.3.3 Comments and recommendations to manufacturers ...... 176 H.3.4 Recommendation to UK CAA ...... 176 H.4 Ground equipment data recordings ...... 176 H.5 Aircraft equipage ...... 177 H.6 Pilot Questionnaires ...... 178 H.6.1 GLKAA ...... 178 H.6.2 GLKDD ...... 180 H.6.3 GLKEE ...... 182 H.6.4 GLKCC ...... 184 H.6.5 GLKBB ...... 186 H.7 FISO Questionnaire ...... 187 Appendix I Cockpit EC Equipment and interoperability ...... 190 I.1 Introduction ...... 190 I.2 GAINS PlaneSight (CAP1391 compliant)...... 190 I.3 SkyEcho1 and SkyEcho 2 (CAP1391 compliant) ...... 190 I.4 Pilot Aware ...... 190 I.5 Transponders and GPS ...... 190 I.6 ADS-B-IN Units ...... 190 I.7 Display devices ...... 191 I.8 Equipment Interoperability ...... 191 I.8.1 CAP1391, FLARM & PAW ...... 192 I.8.2 CAP1391 interoperability with certified ADS-B equipment...... 192 Appendix J Ground ADS-B Equipment Options Summary ...... 195 J.1 Introduction ...... 195 J.2 Avionix (Dundee) ...... 195 J.3 uAvionix (Manchester Barton) ...... 195 J.4 PlaneTRack ADS-B Receiving System ...... 195 J.5 Hobbyist and amateur equipment ...... 195 Appendix K Eye Tracking investigations ...... 196 K.1 Human Performance: eye tracking measurements...... 196 K.2 Concept...... 196 K.2.1 Human Performance Implications ...... 196 K.2.2 Improve and validate the concept ...... 197

List of Tables

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Table 1. Intended readership of GAINS Aerodrome Operation Demo Report ...... 15

Table 2: List of acronyms ...... 18

Table 3. Summary view of 1090 MHz EC equipage options...... 38

Table 4. Complete list of aircraft and EC equipment used in GAINS Surveillance demonstration ...... 70

Table 5. Stapleford aircraft EC equipage ...... 81

Table 6. Duxford aircraft EC equipage...... 93

Table 7. Sywell aircraft EC equipage...... 123

Table 8. Dundee all aircraft EC equipage ...... 146

Table 9. Blackbushe aircraft EC equipage...... 177

Table 10. Transponders and GPS units demonstrated in GAINS...... 190

Table 11. EC equipment interoperability summary...... 191

List of Figures Figure 1. Sources of cockpit traffic situation awareness, highlighting EC sources ...... 27

Figure 2. Conclusions of Pilots' Workshop on EC in the Cockpit ...... 28

Figure 3. Guidelines for cockpit EC use in and near the aerodrome circuit...... 46

Figure 4. Comparison of PowerFLARM portable track (top) with Planesight track (bottom)...... 60

Figure 5. Aerobits device ...... 62

Figure 6. GAINS display. Left: Duxford. Right: Sywell...... 63

Figure 7. GAINS display. Left: Dundee. Right: Blackbushe...... 63

Figure 8. GAINS display. Left: Manchester Barton. Right: Lee on Solent, showing adjacent airspace...... 64

Figure 9. GAINS display. Left: Wycombe, with entry route for Aero Expo in blue. Right: Brimpton . 64

Figure 10. Barton display from Ping station, using Google maps ...... 64

Figure 11. Dundee display from Avionix...... 65

Figure 12. Dundee. ATCO Situational Awareness Display (ASAD) ...... 72

Figure 13. Dundee. History plots. Left: from MLAT. Right: from ADS-B. Aircraft carrying Sky Echo. . 73

Figure 14. Dundee. Example of background map used ...... 73

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Figure 15. Dundee. Terrain background map...... 74

Figure 16. Dundee Visual Control Room display position ...... 74

Figure 17. Dundee. Surveillance display example...... 75

Figure 18. Dundee. Recent example of ASAD use to prevent an accident...... 76

Figure 19. Barton FISO position and Control Tower ...... 77

Figure 20. Barton display capabilities...... 78

Figure 21. Barton dual display recently implemented. Left: designated coverage. Right: ATZ...... 78

Figure 22. Brimpton antenna installation...... 87

Figure 23. Chart of trajectories recorded at Brimpton...... 88

Figure 24. SkyEcho1, SkyEcho2 and PlaneSight cockpit installation in GLPFF...... 89

Figure 25. Duxford - all trajectories recorded...... 92

Figure 26. Duxford demonstration. Encounter of GSUAA and GSUDD...... 96

Figure 27. Dundee, all aircraft EC trajectories...... 145

Figure 28. Track plots observed from aircraft operating at Blackbushe...... 177

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

1 Executive summary

1.1 Background

The objectives of GAINS are to validate, through live flying demonstrations, concepts enabled by Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) and EGNOS. These include a Surveillance Concept proposing an electronic conspicuity solution and a Navigation Concept proposing instrument flight procedure elements to meet the needs of GA, including both fixed wing and rotorcraft. GAINS’s Surveillance and Navigation Demonstrations aim to show the wider aviation community how improvements being developed by SESAR can be adapted to the respective concepts enhancing GA operations without prohibitive cost or certification requirements.

1.2 Broad objectives of project

The GAINS Surveillance Demonstrations comprise live flying demonstrations of aircraft, all of which are equipped with 1090MHz ADS-B-IN and ADS-B-OUT EC equipment, in an aerodrome environment and nearby airspace, to replicate the possible future situation when all GA aircraft are so equipped. Such a situation requires complete interoperability between the equipment carried by the aircraft as well as direct air-to-air and air-to-ground communication.

The aerodrome staff (ATCO, FISO or AGCS) were equipped with a low assurance ground surveillance display system to receive the ADS-B transmissions and show all ADS-B equipped aircraft operating in the aerodrome ATZ and beyond.

The demonstrations investigated the usefulness and usability of ADS-B in such a future environment from a subjective human factors point of view, concerning both the cockpit usage of the EC equipment and the ground usage of the ADS-B surveillance data, by means of post flight questionnaires debrief discussions.

Objective data from data recordings of the ADS-B surveillance information collected by the ground based equipment complemented the subjective observations, to assist detailed analysis, including technical performance of the airborne and ground equipment. 1.3 Broad conclusions and recommendations

Installed EC equipment with external antennas worked well. The performance of portable equipment with internal antennas was less consistent; the effective range varying between being nearly as good as an installed transponder to being almost useless. Reliability was also an issue with some devices failing to transmit entirely.

With good transmission-reception quality, EC worked well, especially for joining traffic, integrating with other traffic in the circuit. Track presentation for situation awareness on a map background was greatly preferred. Combined use of RT and track ID with call sign on a tablet display gave good confidence of full appreciation of the airborne situation. Voice alerts reinforced both EC and visual acquisition and were useful outside the ATZ but less useful when joining the traffic pattern, and in later stages of the approach could be excessive, interfering with ATS RT.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Through cockpit EC, pilots became more aware of the presence of other aircraft in poor visibility, causing them to be more cautious when no visual contact had been made. This was emphasised by an event at the Duxford demo, described in detail in paragraph 5.2.1 and Appendix E.6.1.2. Considerations regarding the EC surveillance concept arise from this event.

Cockpit EC did not encourage “head-down” flying.

Guidance and training for best use of cockpit EC is recommended for which understanding of the equipment limitations and operational concept is important.

ATS staff on the ground gained a “comfortable feeling” from the traffic display, which was frequently more accurate than pilot voice reports. The flexibility of the ground surveillance display to be customised for local preferences was appreciated. Guidelines for consistent and comprehensive display presentation may be required. Data recording was a valuable feature for post-event analysis of unusual situations, as reported later.

GAINS is not primarily about the use of CAP1391, although CAP1391 equipment played a significant role in providing 1090MHz ADS-B capability for the demonstration. 1.4 Recommendations

Recommendations are developed

• for the airborne segment:

o Operational aspects for pilots – leading to an EC concept (separate deliverable); o Amendments to CAP1391 standard o Technical and presentation aspects for manufacturers of cockpit equipment;

• For the ground segment:

o An Concept for ground ATS staff (separate deliverable) to make use of low assurance ground ADS-B displays for traffic awareness without placing undue reliance on the traffic information; o to assist pilots with their traffic and navigational awareness in and near the aerodrome. o Particular care has to be taken with the ground to air communication phraseology to achieve this in an acceptably safe and properly understood manner.

• For follow-up activities on EC that may be carried out by the UK CAA and/or EASA, to further progress the development and wider use of ADS-B in Europe, including reduced capability equipment for EC. (For RCE definition, see para 3.4.1)

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

2 Introduction

2.1 Purpose of the Report

The Surveillance Operational Demonstrations Report is intended to be the main document that describes the Surveillance element of the GAINS Project.

This consists of live flying demonstrations of airborne (cockpit) use of 1090MHz ADS-B-IN Electronic Conspicuity (EC) equipment as well as ground use of the GAINS ADS-B display, which presents non- guaranteed quality and integrity surveillance data for the management of aircraft in the aerodrome domain of coverage. After each demonstration event, the pilots and aerodrome staff completed questionnaires and took part in debrief discussions, which are recorded in Appendices to this Report. This comprises the subjective data gathered during the Project.

The current document is complemented by D4.5 “SUR Data Recordings and Analysis”, which concentrates on the objective data gathered during the Project.

The Report does not address en-route use of ADS-B equipment on the ground or in the air.

The navigation element of GAINS is described separately. 2.2 Scope

This Report includes the • background to the Project – why it was proposed; • objectives, at both high level and in detail; • the relationship of the surveillance capabilities demonstrated in GAINS to the SESAR solutions; • operational concept considerations and constraints; [11] • participating organisations and their roles in the project; • locations at which the demonstrations took place and the relevant characteristics of these locations; • comments and conclusions reached as a result of the demonstrations, based on questionnaires completed as part of the demonstration process together with joint debriefs of all participants; • recommendations developed from consideration of the conclusions. Recommendations cover airborne aspects, ground aspects and equipment aspects. o Airborne aspects address the ▪ EC equipment used in the cockpit: how to use it most effectively together with changes to the equipment functionality that could be beneficial in helping the usage become more effective; ▪ Use of the equipment – leading towards concepts of operation and use; o In a similar manner, ground aspects address the ▪ equipment, in terms of presentation of data to the aerodrome staff (ATCO, FISO, AGCS operator); ▪ use of the equipment – specifically the use that may be made of the data when communicating with pilots in accordance with operational principles for safe

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

use of data of non-guaranteed quality and integrity. This may contribute to Surveillance ground CONOPS. o Equipment aspects are included in 5.5.2, Overall Comments and Recommendations. 2.3 Intended readership

The conclusions and recommendations of the Report should be of interest to all organisations concerned with the safe operation of aviation, especially general aviation. Some recommendations concern the data presented to pilots by equipment in the cockpit – both the data itself and the manner of its presentation. The latter point should be of particular interest to manufacturers of cockpit EC and display equipment. Many of the recommendations should also be of interest to individual pilots and may help their selection of equipment for personal use. In summary:

Readership Reason Pilots Understanding of cockpit equipment capabilities and limitations. Consideration of equipment for personal use. Aerodrome Understanding capabilities and limitations of ADS-B surveillance equipment of ground staff non-guaranteed quality and integrity Aerodrome Procurement and installation of reduced capability equipment providing management surveillance data of non-guaranteed quality and integrity. Regulators Establishing and agreeing operational concepts and guidance material for use of airborne equipment and ground equipment. Regulators Setting standards for equipment capability and performance. Avionics Improving functionality of cockpit ADS-B equipment.1 manufacturers Ground system Improving functionality of ground ADS-B receiving equipment. manufacturers SJU Noting GAINS project results for future consideration in the SESAR programme. Table 1. Intended readership of GAINS Aerodrome Operation Demo Report 2.4 Background

Interest in the use of cockpit Electronic Conspicuity (EC) for general aviation has been growing due to the influence of ICAO standards, the FAA ADS-B mandate, and the introduction of CS-STAN Issue 3; all of these leading to wide availability of ADS-B solutions from many manufacturers. Some estimates are that about 100,000 aircraft worldwide are now doing ADS-B-OUT. In the UK, the reduction in cost of certified equipment; extended squitter transponders and suitable GPS/GNSS units has spurred equipage. The CAA publication of CAP1391 has added to this.

However, relatively few aircraft are yet equipped, so it is difficult to appreciate the difference in the airborne environment that increased or complete EC might bring, or whether there may arise unexpected problems.

1 Improved functionality may include for example hardware (connections for external antennas and alternate GNSS devices) and software to connect ADS-B-IN/OUT devices to moving maps (already available in some cases).

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Ground based surveillance systems based on ADS-B reception offer a much cheaper alternative to traditional radar systems, although they are not currently permitted to be used in the UK (except for specific trials).

The conjunction of affordable airborne and ground ADS-B surveillance offers the possibility of a complete known air situation ‘picture’, which has the potential to improve the safety of operation in and near the aerodrome (the most hazardous environment). The GAINS demonstrations explore this environment by live flying in a large scale demonstration at several small to medium size GA aerodromes. 2.5 Structure of the document

This Report as a whole consists of the following sections.

Section 1. Executive Summary. Section 2. This Introduction. Section 3. Technical Background and Equipment Section 4. Objectives, Concept, Preparation and Execution Section 5. Analysis, results, discussions, conclusions and recommendations. Section 6. References.

This is complemented by several appendices.

Appendix A “GAINS Surveillance Demonstrations Summary” describes briefly the

• various practical preparation and technical events mostly preceding the formal demonstrations; • the formal demonstrations themselves - both those which were successfully carried out plus a brief summary of the circumstances surrounding other events which were not able to be completed; • additional technical visits and data gathering events.

Appendix A concludes with a summary of the activities classified as ground surveillance related and cockpit surveillance related.

A.7 describes some visits to aerodromes in preparation for the formal demonstrations, as well as some additional data gathering events, which were not formal demonstrations.

Appendix C through to Appendix H consist of the primarily subjective data gathered at each of the completed formal demonstrations. These provide the bulk of the information on which the conclusions and recommendations are based.

Appendix I summarises the main features of cockpit EC equipment and interoperability between the various types of equipment demonstrated in GAINS.

Appendix J lists other ground surveillance systems of varying capability, with reference to web sites where more information can be obtained.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Appendix K describes the eye tracking investigations which were proposed for GAINS as an optional task but which were eventually not able to be carried out 2.6 List of acronyms

Acronym Definition

A4A Airspace 4 All. https://airspace4all.org/ General Aviation organisation whose mission is “To work in partnership with other aviation stakeholders to explore innovative solutions to create a sustainable and equitable UK air traffic environment” AAIB Air Accidents Investigation Board (UK CAA) AAL Above Aerodrome Level AGCS Air Ground Radio Communication Service AGL Above Ground Level ALARP As Low As Reasonably Practical ANSP Air Navigation Service Provider AOPA Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association ASAD ATCO Situation Awareness Display (Dundee aerodrome terminology for Avionix system under trial.) ATCo Air Traffic Control ATS Air Traffic Service(s) ATZ Air traffic zone. Airspace of defined dimensions established around an aerodrome for the protection of aerodrome traffic. CAIT Controlled Airspace Infringement Tool (NATS) CAP1391 CAA standard for “Electronic Conspicuity Devices”. [2] CAS Controlled Air Space CDTI Cockpit Display of Traffic Information CPA Closest Point of Approach CRISTAL CoopeRatIve Validation of Surveillance Techniques and AppLications. Eurocontrol activity supporting trials surveillance infrastructure equipment. EC Electronic Conspicuity ECWG Electronic Conspicuity Working Group (UK CAA) EVA SESAR Project. Electronic Visibility via ADS-B. [1] FASVIG Future Airspace VFR Implementation Group FAV F.u.n.k.e Avionics – GAINS partner organisation FISO Flight Information Service Officer

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Acronym Definition

FLARM Flight Alarm (Proprietary ADS-B system developed originally for use in gliders). https://flarm.com/products/powerflarm/ GA General Aviation GAINS General Aviation Improved Navigation and Surveillance HIAL Highlands and Islands Airports Ltd HP Human Performance LAA Light Aviation Association. UK pilots association LPAT Low Power ADS-B Transceiver MAC Mid Air Collision NATS National Air Traffic Services (UK ANSP) NOTAM Notice to Airmen OTW Out The Window – describing pilot focus of attention PAW Pilot Aware (Proprietary ADS-B system). https://pilotaware.com PED Portable Electronic Device PlaneSight CAP1391 compliant stand-alone ADS-B-IN and ADS-B-OUT equipment. [3] PPR Prior Permission Required (aerodrome usage constraint) RCE Reduced Capability Equipment – for Electronic Conspicuity RTH80 FAV Ground Surveillance Equipment. [7] SDPD Surveillance Data Processing and Distribution Trig Avionics Company. GAINS partner organisation. UAT Universal Access Transceiver. FAA mandated ADS-B capability intended mainly for GA use, operating on 986MHz. uAvionix USA manufacturer of CAP1391 compliant ADS-B-IN and ADS-B-OUT equipment, known as SkyEcho. VCR Visual Control Room VFR Visual Flying Rules WAM Wide Area Multilateration Table 2: List of acronyms

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

3 Technical Background and Equipment

3.1 Project EVA and LPAT

NATS has previously led Project EVA [1] with project partners AOPA UK, Funke Avionics (FAV) and Trig. NATS was interested in reducing infringements of controlled airspace by GA aircraft and therefore transmission of aircraft position on 1090MHz was important. Recognising that GA pilots would be unlikely to invest in equipment that offers no immediate and tangible benefit to their own flying, NATS concluded that a self-contained cockpit equipment capable of transmission on 1090MHz, and also of receiving and displaying the positions of other aircraft transmitting 1090MHz ADS-B would be of value to GA pilots for air traffic situation awareness and airborne conflict alerting, to help reduce the risk of mid-air collision (MAC). Funke Avionics (FAV) was contracted to build such equipment, based on their existing TM250 device. The prototype device was called the Low Power ADS-B Transceiver (LPAT) and used a low assurance GPS source to provide ADS-B position reports.

Project EVA used the LPAT to test and demonstrate the main characteristics of EC in the cockpit. The demonstration scenarios were entirely in class G airspace. A useful air-air detection range often of 4- 6nm was demonstrated although sometimes traffic could be detected up to 10nm away. By comparison, it was also established that the effective range for visual acquisition, even in good VFR conditions, rarely exceeded 2nm. (Ref [1] Figure 16: Scatter plot of LPAT detection distance vs visual acquisition distance.)

The LPAT device also provided the capability for reception and display of ADS-B position reports and display of proximity alerts of conventional Mode A/C and Mode-S Transponders incapable of providing GPS position. During roughly the same period as EVA, the UK CAA authorised the use of ADS-B on conventional extended squitter capable Mode-S transponders by connection of low assurance GPS sources utilised in many of the GPS devices used for VFR navigation. The study, sponsored by the UK authorities, concluded that the use of low assurance transceiver devices provided comparable position reports to those from conventional radar sources and certified GPS devices and also could also act as an enabler for improved in cockpit electronic conspicuity and pilot situational awareness. Other devices from Trig, GARMIN, FLARM, Pilot Aware as well as FAV also provided cockpit display of ADS-B, and in some cases FLARM; position as well proximity alerts of Mode-S and Mode A/C Transponders displaying though a combination of dedicated displays, GPS moving maps and tablet navigation devices. 3.2 CAP1391

CAP1391 “Electronic Conspicuity Devices” [2] was originally intended as an entry level solution to counter the perception that for very light flying machines (e.g. paramotor) it would not be possible to fit a transponder. It was primarily intended to give ground ATS providers an inexpensive surveillance solution below transponder equipage. This led to CAP1391 equipment limitations: low cost, portable, battery powered, limited integrity and uncertified.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

The UK CAA, together with several UK GA organisations and NATS prepared CAP1391. CAP1391 defines a standard for the non-transponding ADS-B-OUT signal transmitted by EC devices, to enable them to be visible to ADS-B receivers both in other aircraft and on the ground. It is important to note that CAP1391 defined only the 1090MHz ADS-B-OUT signal characteristics. It was essential to regulate these characteristics, to mitigate the risk of radio frequency interference and congestion on 1090MHz, the worldwide secondary surveillance frequency.

CAP 1391 does not define any standards for 1090MHz ADS-B-IN, although this is a necessary counterpart to ADS-B-OUT to receive traffic information in the cockpit. Several manufacturers produce ADS-B-IN equipment. 3.3 SESAR 2020 VLD – Surveillance Element

The viability of the ADS-B to enable cockpit traffic situation awareness had been demonstrated by EVA, but only in the en-route environment. The overall objectives of the surveillance element of GAINS are to examine the use of cockpit EC equipment in and near the aerodrome, both in the cockpit and using the broadcast ADS-B data on an aerodrome ground surveillance display. Furthermore, it was proposed to examine the logical end-point of GA EC equipage, when all aircraft are EC equipped.

The effectiveness and usability of EC to alert pilots to the location of other aircraft is important, because alerted visual acquisition through EC is up to eight times more effective than unalerted visual acquisition. [4] This mitigates the increased mid-air collision risk (MAC) due to the greater density of traffic in and near an aerodrome. [5] The increased MAC risk can also be partly offset by traffic information from the aerodrome control service, which can be assisted by ADS-B surveillance data received on the ground, as well as pilot RT reports at various points in the approach.

The combination of FAV, AOPA and Trig to work together again was proposed in the GAINS project. This proposal was accepted by the SJU. 3.4 Technical objectives of GAINS

The specific objectives for surveillance as proposed were to demonstrate the GAINS Surveillance Concept [11] developed in WP2, as well as interoperability between the ADS-B-IN/OUT devices used.

• the use of (low-cost) on-board ADS-B surveillance equipment and its use by GA for cockpit traffic situation awareness especially in the airfield circuit (the most hazardous environment). This was achieved by the use of a wide range of airborne equipment, depending on what was already installed in volunteer aircraft, supplemented by portable CAP1391 equipment where required. Interoperability between different 1090MHz ADS-B equipment was also an objective.

• the use of aircraft position data transmitted by ADS-B and received on a low-cost and reduced capability display device at the airfield traffic service position, to assist management of aircraft in the circuit as well as arrivals and departures from the circuit. This was achieved by the demonstration to aerodrome operational staff (ATCo, FISO and AGCS operators) of the Funke RTH80 receiver together with PC display software.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

• that the reception range of the ADS-B equipment is adequate for operation in the circuit and adjacent class G airspace. This was demonstrated by recording the ADS-B data received from the aircraft to produce plots of trajectories flown during the demonstrations. A specific test of the CAP1391 equipment was also carried out for both fixed power and lower power transmission to look at the difference in performance as a function of transmission power. This is reported in deliverable D4.5, section 3.4.

3.4.1 Reduced Capability Equipment

The phrase “reduced capability equipment” (RCE) is used in this document to describe equipment that is intended solely for surveillance of General Aviation (GA) aircraft operating visual flight rules (VFR), which do not require separation services based on ATS surveillance system information. The equipment has either or both of the following qualities: • limited range, and/or, • limited position assurance i.e. the aircraft could be broadcasting its location based on GPS equipment that is not certified for aircraft navigation. 3.5 EC equipment and interoperability

For the demonstration flights to represent the GA EC equipage environment as comprehensively as possible, GAINS proposed to demonstrate as many other types of 1090MHz EC equipment in use by GA as possible, constrained only by the equipage of volunteer pilots’ aircraft, supplemented by CAP1391 devices where required. CAP1391 portable equipment is intended for the lower end of GA aircraft (including those who do not carry a transponder). Certified EC equipment is developed by Avidyne, Collins, Funke, Garmin, Trig and similar companies.

Although many of the certified ADS-B manufacturers focus on the air transport and commercial aircraft sectors, some of them also produce equipment for GA aircraft, including those which are IR capable. Some aircraft so equipped flew in the GAINS demonstrations. A complete list of aircraft types that have flown in the GAINS demonstrations together with their EC equipage is given in the separate deliverable, D4.5 “Surveillance Data Recording and Analysis” and also at Error! Reference source not found. in Appendix A.6.2.

To cater for volunteer pilots who were not EC equipped, or only partially equipped, GAINS provided loan PlaneSight equipment supplied by FAV, as well as two SkyEcho1 CAP1391 devices, loaned by uAvionix. This is portable equipment and therefore does not require modification to participating aircraft.

Conclusions and recommendations about interoperability are included in section 5.5.2.2.

A more detailed discussion of cockpit ADS-B interoperability is at Appendix I, para I.7. 3.6 Relationship to SESAR Solutions

As stated in the GAINS Surveillance Demonstration Conduct Plan [6], the most relevant SESAR Solutions for surveillance are: o Solution 101: Improved hybrid surveillance; and o Solution 110: ADS-B surveillance of aircraft in flight and on the surface.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

3.6.1 Solution 101: Improved hybrid surveillance

The overall objective of SESAR solution 101 is to reduce 1090MHz spectrum occupancy, which is achieved by using ADS-B data to further refine the hybrid ACAS concept and reduce the TCAS interrogation rate. The use of ADS-B by GA has the potential to increase 1090MHz spectrum occupancy. However, CAP1391 restricts the maximum power permitted at the transmitter port to 40W (intended to be 20W at the antenna) instead of 125W which is more usual for certified GA ADS- B equipment. Also, the duty cycle of the non transponding equipment defined in CAP1391 is much lower than standard transponders. So, the overall aims of hybrid ACAS and CAP1391 are the same but achieved in different ways.

Hybrid surveillance achieves its aims because the ACAS unit receives and accepts standard ADS-B squitters and therefore reduces its own transmissions. It ignores CAP1391 squitters. Therefore, there is no interaction between ACAS and CAP1391. An ADS-B-IN display on an aircraft transmitting CAP1391 ADS-B will show the ADS-B from the ACAS aircraft, for traffic situation awareness, after which avoidance if necessary can be carried out by following rules of the air.

There is overlap with solution 110, in that the use of ADS-B rather than SSR reduces spectrum occupancy. See below.

See also GAINS Project Demonstration Plan, para 3.2.1.2 and 3.2.1.4 [7] and GAINS Surveillance Concept of Operations [11].

3.6.2 Solution 110: ADS-B surveillance of aircraft in flight and on the surface.

SESAR solution 110 is very similar in principle to the GAINS ADS-B surveillance capability in that it uses ADS-B technology to improve spectrum efficiency. In both cases, the use of ADS-B is less costly than conventional “turn and burn” radar. However, the SESAR solution also requires networked surveillance with surveillance data processing and distribution (SDPD) functionality for use in both terminal and en-route airspace. This is an expensive and technologically complex surveillance solution, and provides data that can be used for aircraft separation.

The operational functionality of GAINS ground surveillance is much less demanding than for SESAR surveillance, being to provide traffic situation awareness and flight conformance monitoring in and near an aerodrome, on a “no-credit/no-hazard” basis.

“No credit, no hazard” refers to the use of equipment whose functionality and operation is not essential to the operation being carried out; in this case EC display equipment used to help management of aircraft in the aerodrome circuit. The EC equipment is potentially useful for knowing where to look to see the aircraft in the circuit, somewhat like a set of powerful binoculars that can see through haze, but not essential for that purpose (pilot RT calls, naked eye visibility are also possible). Therefore, there is no additional operational capability conferred by usage of the EC surveillance equipment for this purpose, hence “no credit”. Conversely, if the EC equipment is not functional for any reason, then “no hazard” is introduced, because the equipment is not an essential requirement for the operation.

“No credit, no hazard” applies equally to the airborne equipment and can be summarised as “if the reception of the surveillance transmission is not required to mitigate a hazard and does not elevate

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

the overall risk to the operation, then the performance of the portable transmitter can be accepted on a no credit, no hazard basis”.

The objectives in SESAR110 of using ADS-B to improve capacity and flight efficiency are of little relevance to most small aerodrome operations that are not usually capacity-constrained.

See also GAINS Project Demonstration Plan, para 3.2.1.3 and 3.2.1.4.[7] 3.7 Cockpit Equipment

Cockpit equipment used in GAINS demos was a range of ADS-B equipment already installed on volunteer aircraft, supplemented by portable equipment provided by GAINS (PlaneSight and SkyEcho). A complete list of equipage is at Appendix A, section A.6.2.

The equipment used fell into three categories:

• Stand-alone carry on equipment for 1090MHz ADS-B-OUT and ADS-B-IN: PlaneSight, Sky Echo. • Separate non-transponder 1090 MHz ADS-B-IN devices: Power FLARM, Pilot Aware. • Transponder-based ADS-B-IN and ADS-B-OUT on 1090MHz. Many types.

Some aircraft carried FLARM (Classic FLARM or Power FLARM) or Pilot Aware. As well as 1090MHz ADS-B-IN, required for the GAINS demos, both these devices also provide position, altitude and vector data on their own frequencies. However, these latter capabilities were not used in the GAINS demos.

Interoperability was assured by requiring all the aircraft used in the demos to be 1090MHz ADS-B-OUT and ADS-B-IN capable. A more extensive discussion of cockpit equipage is given in A.6.2. Interoperability is discussed in Appendix I.7. 3.8 Ground surveillance equipment

Currently operational ATC ground surveillance equipment in the UK does not receive and display ADS- B data, although developments may lead to this capability. For example, NATS has a trial ADS-B and multilateration ground surveillance infrastructure in the southeast of England. Some regional airports are also trialling ADS-B surveillance systems. This includes Southampton (see A.5.1) and Dundee, at which a GAINS demo was carried out, see Appendix G. In addition, some GA airports such as Manchester Barton, North Weald and Goodwood are trialling ADS-B ground surveillance systems under the auspices of “Airspace 4 All” (A4A).

A4A has recently released a report on the first period of ADS-B ground surveillance trials at Barton, “Airspace4All GA Airfield ATS ADS-B Traffic Display Trial” [15]. The scope of the ground system under trial is similar to that of GAINS.

Installation of conventional radar surveillance is typically expensive. However, receivers for ADS-B are relatively inexpensive and display of ADS-B data on a PC together with airspace and aerodrome maps for orientation is achievable using mainly off the shelf mapping and display capabilities. Google Earth is used by FAV as described in Deliverable 3.1, “Ground Equipment Validation Report [8].

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Many small aerodromes in the UK are now unofficially using such capabilities for varying degrees of traffic awareness. This is sometimes achieved by use of “hobbyist” systems such as Flight Radar 24 or 360 Radar. Such systems are primarily web-based and therefore vulnerable to internet outages, as well as having unknown data quality and latency.

For these reasons, for aerodrome use, a system that is not dependent on such external factors is to be preferred. Several manufacturers such as uAvionix2 (USA) and Avionix3 (Poland) have ground systems intended for use at small aerodromes. Manchester Barton is trialling the uAvionix system. Dundee is trialling the Avionix system.

FAV within the GAINS project has a ground system capability, based on the RTH80 ADS-B / Mode S receiver [4] which provides data that can be displayed on a Google Earth map, by means of a PC utility developed by FAV. This system was used for the aerodrome ground display in GAINS and is described in more detail in GAINS Deliverable D4.5 section 3.2 and GAINS Deliverable D3.1.[8]

An important feature of the FAV system is that it records the ADS-B data received on 1090MHz for post event analysis. This has enabled the production of aircraft trajectory plots and other analysis included in Deliverable 3.1 and Deliverable 4.5. [10] 3.9 Participating aerodromes

Aerodrome demonstration locations were selected to be representative of small to medium size GA aerodromes in the UK, operating under an Air Traffic Control Service, a Flight Information Service and an Air Ground Communication Service. The objective was to carry out the demonstration flights in VFR conditions. However, weather problems prevented this for two of the initially selected aerodromes. The formal demonstrations, including one formal air-ground reception comparison test with four different CAP1391 ADS-B devices, were carried out at the locations listed below. More detail is provided in Appendix A.

• Stapleford (EGSG) • Brimpton (EGLP) – air ground reception test • Duxford (EGSU) • Sywell (EGBK) • Dundee (EGPN) and • Blackbushe (EGLK)

The equipment was set up and demonstrated at other locations, using mostly ADS-B traffic of opportunity. This demonstrated the relative ease of configuring the ground equipment and display to be suitable for use at different aerodromes. These were

• Lee-on Solent (EGHF) • Wycombe Air Park (EGTB) during Aero Expo 2019 • Brimpton (EGLP) for the Brimpton Fly In

2 https://uavionix.com/products/pingstation/ 3 http://en.avionixsl.com/tss-traffic-surveillance-system/

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

4 GAINS Objectives, Concept, Preparation and Execution

4.1 Project Objectives

The core of the GAINS Surveillance Demonstrations is to gather information on the pilot perception of the usefulness of having cockpit EC information (i.e. the practical worth and applicability of the benefits) together with the usability of the equipment providing the cockpit information. (i.e. the degree to which the equipment and its functions are fit to be used; how easy is it to operate the equipment).

In particular, GAINS has demonstrated what it is like from the cockpit to fly in a busy environment where all other aircraft operating are visible on EC equipment. The usability of the equipment in that potential future environment has been critically examined through GAINS.

4.1.1 Usefulness.

The uptake of 1090MHz ADS-B traffic receivers worldwide (up to a quarter of a million units by some estimates) has demonstrated the fundamental usefulness of cockpit EC equipment. The inclusion of 1090MHz reception in Power FLARM and in PAW also demonstrates the value of cockpit EC information broadcast on the internationally standardised surveillance frequency. FLARM and PAW transmissions use different frequencies to output comparable position and altitude information to ADS-B. However, this dilutes the effectiveness of EC in a mixed environment.

GAINS demonstrations have included existing users of cockpit EC equipment; volunteer pilots who have already acquired such equipment, as well as pilots who are coming to this afresh and using loan equipment from the GAINS project.

The parallel and related development of the CAP1391 standard by the UK CAA has opened the door to the development of reduced capability equipment (RCE) for cockpit use that can be detected by ground surveillance systems operating on 1090MHz and potentially by certified/installed EC equipage on commercial aircraft (subject to the exact setting of certain quality parameters in the transmitted data).

There is little doubt therefore that cockpit EC equipment has shown its potential usefulness. However, its use by GA pilots in a fully equipped, busy aerodrome environment has not previously been demonstrated.in the UK.

4.1.2 Usability

Some of the comments and recommendations emerging from GAINS address the ease (or otherwise) of setting up and using GA EC RCE in the cockpit and demonstrating the GAINS Surveillance Concept[11].

It is important to realise the distinction between the applications that GA EC RCE supports, as the manner of indicating the traffic situation can vary according to the situation and equipment used.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Cockpit traffic situation awareness. To indicate the presence of other aircraft to assist visual acquisition and to apply “see and avoid” more effectively, especially in less than perfect, but still VMC conditions. Apart from general awareness of other aircraft when en-route, typical circumstances of use are to be aware in advance of concentrations of aircraft at “choke points” between areas of controlled airspace; or when approaching aerodromes so as to plan arrival and integration into the traffic pattern. In all cases, however, the basic application is to assist visual acquisition so as to fly safely and according to the rules of the air. This is the primary purpose of the EC equipment as demonstrated in GAINS. See also [11].

Traffic alerting and conflict alerting. This is a more focused application of traffic situation awareness, to alert to the presence of aircraft that may not have not been otherwise detected and which may be approaching uncomfortably close. Again, this is to assist visual acquisition and visual avoidance if necessary.

GA EC equipment demonstrated in GAINS explicitly does not provide collision avoidance guidance.

Because SkyEcho and Pilot Aware do not have their own display capability but, instead, depend on the display from moving map navigation applications such as Sky Demon, Easy VFR, Foreflight and others, the usability comments are mainly applicable to these devices. PlaneSight has its own integral display4 as does Power FLARM. 4.2 Summary of Operational Concept

The airborne and ground operational concepts for the use of ADS-B information are closely related. The VFR pilot uses all available information to conduct a safe flight. Part of this information concerns traffic awareness, which can be achieved from multiple sources, including Electronic Conspicuity, both directly in the cockpit and relayed from the ground.

4 PlaneSight can also be connected to a separate tablet-type display but, for simplicity, this feature was not used in the GAINS demonstrations.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Flight preparation and advance planning • NOTAMS regarding events and restricted airspace where concentrations of traffic may be expected, annotated on chart and/or navigation tablet application.

Out The Window (OTW) view • the VFR rule of thumb is to spend about 80% of the flying time “eyes outside” conducting a systematic visual scan.

Radio communication • en-route traffic information from the Flight Information Service (FIS) received as RT call- outs from ATS staff; • ATZ traffic information from other pilots’ calls at reporting points when approaching the zone and within the circuit (overhead, dead side, crosswind, downwind, base, final, go- around, …) • Traffic information and position in the landing sequence within the ATZ from the ground operator (depending on the level of service at the aerodrome) possibly based on ADS- B ground surveillance information derived from aircraft EC

Electronic conspicuity information • On dedicated traffic-only displays: FLARM, Plane Sight, TAS, TCAS, … • Overlaid on navigation application displays: SkyDemon, Easy VFR, … Figure 1. Sources of cockpit traffic situation awareness, highlighting EC sources

There is no formal operational concept for the airborne use of cockpit EC equipment, other than general guidance that the EC device should be regarded as an aid to ‘see and avoid’ and that manoeuvres to regain adequate separation should not be based on alerts issued by the EC device alone5. The separate deliverable D2.4 “GAINS Surveillance Concept”.[11] also considers this.

The EVA Report [1] contains guidance on cockpit EC operation in Appendix A “Guidance for maximising benefit of alerted visual scan”.

5 Manufacturers of other EC display devices have similar warnings, including:

Garmin GDL39 Manual: WARNING: Traffic information is provided as an aid in visually acquiring traffic. Pilots must manoeuver the aircraft based only upon ATC guidance or positive visual acquisition of conflicting traffic.

Pilot Aware Manual: “It must, therefore, be stressed that PilotAware does not replace the need for an effective visual scan, which as pilot in command is your sole responsibility and the primary method for seeing other aircraft. PilotAware Ltd will take no responsibility for your safety when using this equipment.”

Sky Demon: As a display device this popular product provides no warning on use or interpretation of Traffic information.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

A Pilots Workshop on the use of EC was held at AOPA London on 5th February 2019. AOPA, NATS UK, MOD UK, and others reached the following conclusions. Point 6 notes the benefit that an ATS unit can bring by passing on information obtained from a surveillance display.

5th February 2019. Pilots’ Workshop on Electronic Conspicuity in the Cockpit 1. The group recognises the value of EC in mitigating MAC risk. 2. Information about a collision hazard from any source should still be passed regardless of data quality. 3. Pilots should be warned of surveillance data of lower than ICAO standard (verified) quality. 4. ATS and pilots may use all information/data they have to improve situational awareness. 5. Pilots accept responsibility for how they treat all information whether it is verified or not. 6. It was acknowledged that the ideal solution would be to have air-to-air electronic conspicuity without the intervention of a human to relay the information. However, until all airspace users have perfectly interoperable EC equipage, ATS units can provide benefit by aggregating data from different sources* and passing traffic information to airspace users. For example, an ATS unit might pass traffic information derived from a transponder that does not have ADS-B OUT capability to other pilots. *Note: It is acknowledged that the probability of detection by ground equipment for some of the surveillance devices used in VFR aircraft is limited by the low transmission power. Figure 2. Conclusions of Pilots' Workshop on EC in the Cockpit

The use of surveillance systems by ATS staff is regulated by the UK CAA. Currently, no operational credit can be taken for using such systems. The UK CAA has been examining the possible use of surveillance systems by FISOs. The CAA has taken part in a meeting in Eurocontrol on 11th February 2019 with representatives from AOPA, UK CAA, NATS, Eurocontrol, EASA and others in order to explore what usage may safely be made of such surveillance systems and in accordance with ICAO and European standards.

A separate deliverable, D2.4 Electronic Conspicuity ConOps [11],addresses the operational concept for use of EC both by the pilot and aerodrome staff. Operational guidance considerations for cockpit use are covered in para 5.5.2.9 below. 4.3 Preparation of Demonstrations

Planning and coordination in advance of the demonstration activity was challenging, requiring the coincidence of

• Aerodrome: interested, willing and able to host the demonstration • Date: to be suitable for the host aerodrome and also to be possible for the pilots. • Volunteer pilots: sufficient number to be available for the date chosen. • Suitable aircraft EC equipage for taking part. • Suitable weather for the chosen date. • An acceptable period during which the aerodrome could be NOTAMed closed to non- participating aircraft

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Aerodromes were approached on the basis of their previous or current involvement with AOPA activity and/or because they were known to be already involved in related activities. A target date was agreed with the aerodrome. From responses to an AOPA call for interest, volunteer pilots based at or near the demo aerodrome were identified and contacted to check their availability, aircraft type and present EC equipage. To ensure maximum pilot involvement, the Project provided the FAV PlaneSight portable CAP1391 equipment for those not suitably EC equipped. This all required a minimum of about 2 weeks, meaning that the weather on the chosen day could not be reliably forecast when the target date was set. This was the most difficult factor, resulting in the postponement or cancellation of five demo dates in total. 4.4 Execution

From several days in advance to just before the demo.

• Distribute briefing about the demo, together with forms to be completed and brought. • Preparation of Google Earth overlays for the surveillance display, to be agreed with the aerodrome as a useful depiction of the ATZ and adjacent airspace. • Installation of the GAINS ground surveillance equipment; the most time consuming task usually being placing the antenna in a suitable position. • Final check the day before of aircraft availability – e.g. no technical problems. • Weather check the evening before and early on the demo day itself.

Demonstration day.

• Recheck ground surveillance equipment. • Install loaned cockpit EC equipment on aircraft as needed. • Pilots briefing: reminder of aims and objectives; local airspace constraints; organisation of flying. • Live flying period: typically 1 hour with no other (non EC equipped) aircraft in the ATZ. o Observers fill in flight log during the flying period. o Ground display observers make notes from watching the demo display. • After flying period, questionnaires filled in by pilots/cockpit observers and ground display observers. • Joint debriefing session: pilots/cockpit observers and ground display observers. GAINS leads the discussion and takes notes. • Loaned cockpit equipment removed. Ground surveillance equipment removed.

Post demo. • Completed post flight questionnaires returned to pilots for additional comments. Several pilots added useful information and/or sent screen shots obtained from their EC equipment during the demo. These are included in the Appendices to the current document.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

5 Results, Analysis, Discussions, Conclusions & Recommendations

5.1 Results

The data for analysis consists of subjective data, objective data, additional information and contextual information about the equipment used.

5.1.1 Subjective data

The subjective data consists of • Individual handwritten logs taken during the demonstration. • Pilot questionnaires completed immediately after the demonstration. • Ground staff/FISO questionnaires completed immediately after the demonstration. • Debrief notes made by GAINS personnel based on joint debrief discussions after completion of the questionnaires. • Additional comments and information sent by pilots soon after the demonstration. This consists mostly of tablet display screen shots and clarification comments. All this information is included in the Appendices to the current Report.

5.1.2 Objective data

The objective data consists of • Aircraft equipage configuration summaries, from pre-demo questionnaires • ADS-B ground recordings of trajectories of aircraft taking part in the demonstration.

A summary of the objective information is contained in the current report. More information, including trajectory plots of participating aircraft received by the ADS-B ground surveillance equipment, is in GAINS deliverable D4.5 “Surveillance Data Recordings and Analysis” [10].

5.1.3 Additional information

Additional information is also collected, including • Aircraft equipment cockpit instrument panel photos and other equipment photos. • Ground display screen shots and short videos.

Some of this data is also included in Appendices.

5.1.4 Contextual information

A wide range of ADS-B IN and OUT equipment is available on the market

ADS-B OUT capability is represented by certified transponders with either certified or uncertified GPS sources as well as devices meeting the CAP1391 standard.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

ADS-B IN capability is represented by a broad range of ADS-B receivers and display combinations linking to certified and non-certified GPS moving map displays, navigation applications on tablets and standalone displays.

A complete list of available equipment and manufacturers is not provided in this report. Appendix I and A.6.2 provide a summary of the equipment installed in participants’ aircraft plus further discussion.

5.1.5 Analysis process

5.1.5.1 Objective data The objective ADS-B data recordings have been processed into trajectory plots for each aircraft. This illustrates the surveillance coverage of the demonstration which is important for the assessment of usefulness and usability by the aerodrome staff. The trajectory plots are presented in GAINS Deliverable D4.5 “Surveillance Data Recordings and Analysis “.

Note that, as most of the flying was in or near the ATZ, the trajectory recordings are NOT an investigation into maximum range of detection, with one exception, which was the Brimpton ground reception tests. See Appendix D. These were carried out to confirm the capability of the ground equipment and cockpit equipment provided by GAINS to detect aircraft at a sufficient range to be useful for the aerodrome operation.

Aircraft EC equipage data is in Error! Reference source not found..

5.1.5.2 Subjective data The purpose of the demonstrations was to explore the usefulness and usability of cockpit ADS-B data and ground display of ADS-B data in a fully equipped 1090MHz ADS-B environment. This is the logical end point of GA ADS-B equipage, when all GA aircraft and the aerodromes are equipped; all aircraft are mutually visible to each other electronically; and the aerodrome has the possibility of a complete traffic picture within its area of interest.

All the subjective data from pilot/observer logs and questionnaire responses has been transcribed and is included in Appendices to the current document.

5.1.5.3 Subjective data review process There are three main stages.

Stage 1. Post demo debriefs. Pilots and aerodrome staff state the main impressions and experiences they had during the demos, which are recorded and summarised by GAINS.

Stage 2. Review. GAINS reviews the debrief notes against the questionnaires to

• identify common themes for usage of the on-board EC equipment, and • consider comments made about the equipment itself. To be passed to the cockpit equipment manufacturers for consideration.

Stage 3. Consolidation.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Common themes and comments are brought together below in the current section of this Report. Some of the themes and comments contribute to concepts of operation and guidance for operational use of EC equipment in the current and possible future EC environment. As well as the Electronic Conspicuity Concept [11], these comments may also contribute to such publications as “Safety Sense” leaflets and other regulatory publications from the UK CAA and EASA.6 5.2 Analysis example: close encounter at Duxford demonstration

There was considerable interest at a Project Meeting in the close encounter event at Duxford described in E.6.1.2. The discussion led to considerations of • cockpit usage of EC devices • the possible need for new standards and/or guidance for use of ADS-B-IN • the suitability of existing standards • consistency (or otherwise) with the draft GAINS EC concept

GAINS has demonstrated the fully ADS-B-IN/OUT equipped scenario to see how well the current ADS- B usage model works. I.e. what works well, what works less well, where might changes be useful to ensure that equipment capability is suitable for a future situation of increasing equipage.

5.2.1 Cockpit Usage of EC equipment

This section concerns the use of the ADS-B-IN capability highlighted by the event at Duxford.

If the equipment is in the cockpit, it will be used. An important consideration is to understand how it will be used and to frame some recommendations for its use. Its use cannot be prohibited; if it is there providing information relevant to the flight, especially safety information, it will be used. Therefore, guidelines and concept must deal with all possible uses.

For best and safe usage, does the capability based on being able to receive the 1090MHz ADS-B signal need to be regulated in any way? This may simply mean guidance as to best use of the existing equipment capability or something stronger, such as minimum information that must be displayed for the intended function, together with presentation requirements. Note also that monitoring the traffic display is a low priority task. Ab initio pilots need to learn that high priority tasks are to fly the aircraft whilst maintaining an effective visual search. This is an example of how guidance in the use of EC could be included in the PPL syllabus.

Nominally there are three potential use cases for EC: (a) Situation awareness (b) Conflict detection and alerting (c) Collision avoidance

The boundary between (a) and (b) for the purpose of this discussion is that (b) implies a process by the EC device to detect a potential conflict and to alert the pilot by display indication (e.g. change of colour) or other means. Situation awareness in (a) includes the pilot’s unaided assessment of the situation

6 https://www.easa.europa.eu/easa-and-you/safety-management/safety-promotion

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

and his judgement that a conflict may exist. Use case (c) is a last resort capability to recover from a situation that has not been resolved by the capability of EC equipment and the pilot with regard to use cases (a) and (b). That goes beyond what is expected from a relatively inexpensive, low certification GA device and is not discussed further.

5.2.2 Equipment

In the UK context GA EC equipment includes certified and installed equipment operating on 1090MHz; uncertified 1090MHz ADS-B-IN devices such as GDL50; EC RCE devices working on their own frequency and protocol such as Power FLARM and Pilot Aware which also can receive 1090MHz ADS-B-IN; and CAP1391 RCE portable devices. GAINS includes all these types of equipment with interoperability between them being an important element of the demonstration. The ADS-B-IN capability is standardised only for its ability to receive and understand 1090MHz ADS-B-OUT signals. There are no regulatory requirements.

The performance and capabilities of these devices should be the starting point.

5.2.3 Guidelines and Standards

Guidelines and standards may concern any or all of the following. • ADS-B data broadcast on 1090MHz by the device. • Usage of the EC data as displayed on an EC cockpit device • Quality of the ADS-B-IN that feeds the cockpit device. Currently SDA=1 is required for interoperability with ADS-B devices compliant with ED-194 (MOPS for Aircraft Surveillance Applications) [14] • Display guidance and advice to support situation awareness – use case (a). • Conflict detection and alerting mechanism and algorithm - use case (b). o Criteria for an algorithm for conflict detection need to be explicit but not over- prescriptive to enable manufacturers to develop their own implementation. Some manufacturers already have a conflict detection capability. o Alerting to a detected conflict may include a display indication and/or synthetic audio alert.

Note 1. Note that guidelines and standards need to be applicable and usable in a partly ADS-B equipped environment, especially if the signal is not broadcast effectively. That is the current situation which will pertain for a long time yet. Also, there can be no guarantee even in a nominally fully equipped environment that equipment will not fail.

Note 2. Also note indications from UK CAA that there may be moves towards a mandate for certain volumes of ADS-B airspace to be fully ADS-B-OUT equipped. Guidelines must cater for this situation.

Note 3. Currently, there is low equipage of ADS-B-OUT for GA. This implies little experience can be gained even by those pilots whose aircraft is equipped to properly exercise ADS-B-IN capabilities. On most flights, there may be only one or two other GA ADS-B aircraft visible. Therefore, guidelines are necessary as a starting point because of few opportunities to learn from experience.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Note 4. CAP1391 statements on usage of cockpit ADS-B-IN consist of the following, amended in italics from GAINS experience. (4) Many EC devices also receive the signals from other such devices. This then alerts pilots to the presence of other aircraft which may assist the pilot in being able to visually acquire the aircraft and take avoiding action as necessary.

(1.6) Good practice recommends that pilots flying under VFR should spend most of their time looking out and searching the airspace. However, there are indications that pilots spend insufficient time on visual searching or may have an ineffective search technique such as scanning the sky without making a determined effort to search for aircraft. 7 EC could enhance their situational awareness through augmenting their lookout.

(1.7) An Australian Transport Safety Bureau report [13] concluded that pilots are significantly more effective at seeing and avoiding other aircraft when they receive some form of additional cue – known as ‘alerted search’.

(1.9) It must therefore be stressed that any EC device does not replace the need for effective visual searching. (Comment: this does not say that the EC device may not be used by itself if the conditions are not conducive to visual acquisition.)

5.2.4 Consideration of action taken before visual acquisition

The Duxford event offered an opportunity to analyse the actions taken based on the information available. The aircraft EC equipage was • Aircraft A: ADS-B-OUT: GPS+transponder; ADS-B-IN: pilot aware. • Aircraft B: ADS-B-OUT and ADS-B-IN: PlaneSight.

Aircraft A, on noticing the impending close encounter, turned to give aircraft B more room. Aircraft A then followed downwind. The actions taken by aircraft A can be looked at on a balance of risk; i.e. what is the risk • if aircraft A does NOT act on the EC information? • If aircraft A DOES act on the EC information?

Use of RT is also mentioned in the pilot narrative. Can the use of RT plus EC be considered as • An alternative to See and Avoid (in this instance)? • See and Avoid enhanced by EC (including call-sign information on the display) plus RT? In that aircraft B was sighted, but rather late in the event; perhaps to be described as “advanced situation awareness”?

The definition problem is one of where to draw the line between situation awareness and conflict alerting. It is arguable that situation awareness includes detection of possible conflict from the indications on the display, without any specific alerting function in the EC device.

7 The “eye tracking” investigation proposed for GAINS but eventually not conducted could shed light on this aspect.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

In the scope of the EC concept, can this event emphasise the use of combined EC+RT to provide a conflict detection function? Is the conjunction of two additional sources of information enough to modify the basic current guidance that manoeuvres should be carried out only after visual acquisition?

There is also guidance quoted in the EC Concept document from the pilots’ workshop that says “ATS and pilots may use all information/data they have to improve situational awareness.” This event could be regarded as such a usage for SA.

Another type of event where visual acquisition is not achieved but EC indication is given is the case of blind spots – where the airframe makes it impossible to see the other aircraft. There have been accidents recorded where one aircraft descended on top of another, because of being unable to see the aircraft below. Use of EC and acting on the EC indication without visual confirmation could have prevented an accident and saved lives.

These considerations are not intended to lead to a conclusion about the event under consideration; only to explore the boundaries of what might and might not be included in guidance – where to draw the line in usage of EC information in the cockpit.

5.2.5 Follow-up actions

Follow up action is recommended, with the aim of developing better guidance on the use of EC equipment as well as some aspects of its capability. Actions may include • Bringing this situation to the attention of the ECWG and/or the AAIB and asking advice. • Developing a problem statement for consideration by an expert group within the UK environment • Developing a problem statement for consideration by EUROCAE and/or EASA, especially if there is a long term intention to bring the usage of low certification EC usage to Europe. 5.3 Airborne General Aviation EC equipment characteristics

In order to understand better the results and discussion from the demos, this section presents the main characteristics of the different equipment.

5.3.1 Pilot user interface for GA EC systems

Cockpit EC equipment is effective only if it is straightforward to use and presents readily understood information about other traffic to the pilot. The purpose of the equipment is to inform the pilot of the presence of other aircraft in his vicinity so that, if they may present a threat to the safe conduct of the flight, appropriate action can be taken – i.e. traffic situation awareness leading possibly to conflict alerting to support See and Avoid. This is primarily in class G airspace but can also be applicable in other airspace where the pilot is not receiving a traffic service or a separation service. The use of such equipment is explicitly NOT “collision avoidance”; instead it is intended to facilitate directed or assisted visual search so that the pilot can visually acquire the other traffic and take appropriate action in accordance with rules of the air.

The manner of informing the pilot varies according to the equipment used. The principal method used by all equipment is a visual display of some sort. This can be complemented by a warning “beep” or a

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

synthesised voice alert about aircraft that may be coming into close proximity, similar to a traffic call- out provided by a controller. Photographs of cockpit equipment in situ and screen grabs from some of the devices used are to be found in Appendix E, Appendix F, Appendix G and Appendix H.

Pilot comments about the manner of traffic information presentation and alerting were a significant part of the debrief discussion sessions. Recommendations to manufacturers included in this document are documented in section 5.5.2.

5.3.2 Detailed cockpit EC usage example from Dundee demonstration

One of the flight crew of aircraft GPNCC took many screen shots of the SkyDemon display of EC information and accompanied this with a narrative of events during the demonstration. This has been included in Appendix G, para G.6.3.3 and provides a good example of EC information coupled with display and alerting capabilities. 5.4 GAINS equipage options

In order to put the comments from pilots into context, it is necessary to understand the EC equipage demonstrated in GAINS. This section explains the options and the equipment capabilities.

5.4.1 EC Equipage options and GAINS demo equipage

GAINS deliberately focused on the usage of 1090MHz ADS-B IN/OUT equipment because this is the only EC equipment for which there is international spectrum approval. In addition there are published specifications and standards approved by the UK CAA for reduced capability equipment. The equipment used in the GAINS demos included several transponder-based ADS-B-OUT configurations, supplemented by CAP1391 equipment. Full details are given in Error! Reference source not found..

ADS-B-IN display equipment included almost the same number of tablet displays (SkyDemon) and dedicated displays (PlaneSight).

5.4.1.1 1090MHz ADS-B Equipage options Several ADS-B equipage options are possible, depending on the current equipage and the aircraft type. Placing equipment can be difficult for very small aircraft. Some microlights and flex-wing types do not have enough panel space or coaming space for more than the basic flight instruments. One such aircraft (GPNDD) flew in the Dundee demo. The pilot of an autogyro commented that he had to carry a SkyEcho1 in the map pocket of his aircraft. ADS-B reception from this aircraft was relatively poor and ADS-B transmission was especially poor.

The table below sets out a general means to achieve 1090MHz ADS-B-IN and 1090 MHz ADS-B-OUT capability. Detailed advice for specific aircraft must be obtained from the aircraft avionics specialist/supplier. o 1090MHz ADS-B-OUT is possible only via aviation transponder or, in the UK, a CAP1391 transceiver. o An ADS-B enabled transponder is the preferred option to provide full coverage. o 1090MHz ADS-B-IN is possible o Via transponder (many manufacturer options for compatible avionics equipage)

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

o Via separate receive only devices from various manufacturers for receiving ADS-B. These may incorporate a display or or require a separate display connected via wifi, Bluetooth or cable. o Via CAP1391 ADS-B transceiver, with integral display or linked to a separate display.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Capability required ➔ 1090MHz ADS-B-OUT 1090MHz ADS-B-IN End State (Note 1) (Note 1) (Note 3) Current transponder equipage ↓

(A) Mode S with ES Add a GPS source certified Add ADS-B-IN receive Full 1090MHz ADS-B-IN + capability but without or non-certified. Several capability plus display OUT connected GPS suppliers available. device.

(B) Mode S without ES Preferred: upgrade to Add ADS-B-IN receive Full 1090MHz ADS-B-IN + capability Mode-S with ES capability capability plus display OUT and add a suitable GPS device. source.

OR add CAP1391 device. A CAP1391 device may Low Power 1090MHz ADS- Currently approved for LAA provide ADS-B IN capability B-OUT + IN a/c. Not (yet) for EASA a/c. with display device (Note 2) OR add a standalone ADS-B receiver and display.

(C) Mode A/C Preferred: Upgrade to Add ADS-B-IN receive Full 1090MHz ADS-B OUT + Mode-S ES capable capability plus display IN transponder and GPS device. source.

(D) No transponder Preferred: Upgrade to Add a suitable ADS-B Full 1090MHz ADS-B OUT + Mode-S ES capable receiver and display. IN transponder and GPS source.

OR: add a CAP1391 device. A CAP1391 device may Low Power 1090MHz ADS- (Note 2) provide ADS-B IN capability B-OUT + IN with display device

OR add a standalone ADS-B receiver and display.

Note 1. A conventional Mode-S transponder with ES capability remains the preferred option to provide maximum transmitter coverage. Note 2. The CAP 1391 standard is currently approved only for use in the UK Airspace. Note 3 The CAP 1391 device receive capability and display device depends on manufacturer options. Table 3. Summary view of 1090 MHz EC equipage options.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

5.4.1.2 EC equipage options of aircraft taking part in GAINS PlaneSight devices were supplied by GAINS to volunteer pilots who did not have any 1090MHz EC equipage or who had incomplete 1090MHz equipage.

The most frequent option used by the a/c already equipped with 1090Mz ADS-B was separate ADS-B- OUT 1090MHz and ADS-B-IN 1090MHz devices. ADS-B-OUT is provided by installed transponder ES and ADS-B-IN by means of a portable device. This option is suitable for aircraft that have an Extended Squitter (ES) capable Mode S transponder. For aircraft upgrading to ADS-B-OUT, the 1090MHz ADS-B- OUT may be achievable by the installation of a suitable GPS connected to the transponder. This can provide ADS-B-OUT for a reasonably modest outlay.

The portable device for ADS-B-IN is a separate receiver feeding ADS-B positions to a tablet with a navigation / EFB application. PAW is popular as the separate portable receiver. As well as receiving and displaying (via tablet) 1090MHz traffic, PAW also supports GPS position data and altitude IN/OUT on its own separate frequency (869.5 MHz). The aircraft is therefore a full participant with full interoperability on both 1090MHz ADS-B-OUT and PAW for ADS-B-IN.

For aircraft that frequently operate near gliding sites, a similar equipage option can be used, with Power FLARM providing GPS position data to an ADS-B capable transponder instead of Pilot Aware. Aircraft so equipped are full participants with full interoperability on both 1090MHz ADS-B-OUT with Power FLARM providing ADS-B-IN, as well as the common FLARM IN/OUT capability on 868.2 – 868.4 MHz.

An alternative option, used by aircraft with no ADS-B capability at all and with otherwise no easily affordable path to ADS-B-OUT is to use a device such as a CAP1391 device (in UK airspace) that is capable of both ADS-B-OUT and ADS-B-IN on 1090MHz.

Conclusion. GAINS has shown that the equipage options demonstrated in GAINS are effective in providing traffic information on most of the aircraft for much of the time and provide useful and usable mutual interoperability with each other in the Air to Air environment based on the common use of the standard ADS-B solution utilising the 1090 MHz frequency. 5.5 Results and Discussion

5.5.1 Pilots and ground staff comments

Specific comments below are qualitative and are based on observations drawn from debriefs and questionnaires. Details are recorded in the Appendices to the current document.

Comments on the aerodrome ground display are also to be found in D3.1 “Ground Equipment Validation Report” [8] .

5.5.2 Overall comments and recommendations – airborne EC

In general, the improved cockpit traffic awareness provided by the EC equipment deployed in the GAINS demos was found to be effective and helpful, but not guaranteed. Some flights were carried out in conditions that were close to the VMC minima and the knowledge of other aircraft likely positions was useful to plan the trajectory before the other aircraft came into visual contact.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

During the course of the demonstrations, it became apparent that there were two main uses of EC traffic information: (1) To improve overall situational awareness, for example, planning how to sequence the aircraft into an arrival stream.

(2) To highlight proximate traffic that present a high risk of an air proximity.

Although both use cases aid flight safety, a distinction is that the first mainly aids flight efficiency and the second focuses on flight safety. The way the data is presented to the pilot is typically optimised for each of these use cases. It should be noted that advanced algorithms need to be developed for effective collision alerting.

The equipment demonstrated includes alerting capability, realised in different ways but not developed according to any standardised algorithm. It should also be very clearly understood that there was no intention in the GAINS demos specifically to test and demonstrate collision avoidance, for obvious safety reasons. However, circumstances arose where the situation awareness capability of the equipment demonstrated came into play enabling the pilot to detect a potential conflict, even without an alert. One example is referred to in 5.2.4 above and explained in detail in para E.6.1.2.

5.5.2.1 Illustrated example of cockpit usage and tablet display. An example of the EC equipment in use, with equipment screenshots, is given in G.6.3.3. Much of the more detailed pilot feedback included in the Appendices can be better understood with this example to hand. Some important conclusions, elaborated later, are summarised below.

Tablet traffic displays, with the traffic displayed against a moving map navigation background were very much preferred to the integral traffic-only displays on PlaneSight8 for situational awareness, because the navigation background gave more cues for locating the other aircraft visually. Display of call-sign for each aircraft on the display was very helpful for correlation with RT.

The small “traffic window” on the SkyDemon tablet display was not considered to be very effective and became rather cluttered to the detriment of its usefulness in the busy circuit environment. Screen shots in the Appendices illustrate this.

PilotAware has a presentation of traffic information that is similar to SkyDemon but with an additional voice feature to notify pilots of proximate traffic. The pilots that used PAW commented that the algorithm for generating voice warnings was overly sensitive for a busy visual circuit and voice warnings sometimes distracted them from hearing ATC instructions.

Pilots were very conscious that the role of the cockpit traffic information was to assist and direct visual acquisition of other aircraft. They recognised the risk and avoided too much “head down” usage.

8 During GAINS only the built-in display of the PlaneSight was used. It also has an interface to connect with external tablets and moving maps. This feature was not used in GAINS in order to find out if the small built-in display is sufficient compared to other devices where tablet displays are used. It turned out (in the GAINS trials) that pilots preferred tablets.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

There were several usability comments about both the visual displays and the audio alerts, recorded below.

5.5.2.2 All devices – comments, conclusions and recommendations to airborne EC equipment manufacturers BASIC INSTRUCTIONS AND SET-UP • Ensure that operational instructions and guidelines that accompany the EC equipment emphasise the that “eyes outside” should remain the normal flying mode and that the equipment functional purpose is “directed visual acquisition” • Recommendation. Facilities of all portable EC equipment should be reviewed for avoidance of unexpected default settings and for guidance on optimal set-up arrangements

ALERTING IN GENERAL • Although not explored in detail with equipment manufacturers, alerting mechanisms seem mainly to operate on the basis of proximity. The work a few years ago on TSAA (Traffic Situation Awareness with Alerts9) came up with validated more effective algorithms now publicly available in RTCA DO-317B. These require considerable processing power. • Recommendation. The consequences of implementing alerting mechanisms as defined in DO-317B should be examined and they should be implemented if feasible on low cost GA ADS-B devices.

AUDIO ALERTS AND WARNINGS • Voice warnings as currently implemented by devices demonstrated in GAINS are not helpful in the busy circuit environment, because of the intensity of RT traffic. • Recommendation. Consider ways of reducing audio alerts when in the aerodrome circuit. E.g. o These could include auto detection of being in an ATZ at circuit operational height to cause auto reduction of alerts, for example by adjustment of the alerting parameters. o A simple way (single input) to cancel audio alerts manually before joining the aerodrome traffic circuit; Note: this option should be considered especially carefully as the greatest chance of a MAC is in or near the aerodrome circuit.

AIRCRAFT ON THE GROUND • Conclusion. Transmission from aircraft on the ground can potentially cause confusion and unnecessary alerts, revalidating previous work on air/ground determination. • Discussion. Without Air/Ground determination, early trials showed that ADS-B on an airport surface would be a mess. Thus, the FAA final rule for ADS-B, published in 2010, mandated that all ADS-B equipped aircraft must automatically determine their air/ground state, and transmit the correct messages. As of 2019 all the main vendors have solved how to do this and there is a subcommittee of RTCA working on publishing the definitive algorithm, Meanwhile, manufacturers have shipped approximately 80,000 airframes that implement air/ground.

9 TSAA subsequently renamed to ATAS.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

• Almost no light GA aircraft have a “weight on wheels” sensor that can be used to suppress transmissions from a/c on the ground although this is common on commercial aircraft. • Recommendations o All ADS-B Out equipment SHALL implement automatic air/ground determination and SHALL transmit the applicable surface or airborne squitters. o CAP1391 should include a requirement for air/ground determination. o All ADS-B receivers (airborne and ground based) SHALL distinguish between airborne and surface targets and SHALL display them in such a way that the pilot/FISO can tell them apart. o All ADS-B alerting applications SHALL NOT alert against targets reporting on the surface.

INTEROPERABILITY • Aircraft carrying EC equipment should be able to receive and understand transmissions from all other GA EC devices so as to inform or alert the pilot as appropriate. • Recommendation. Manufacturers should cooperate so that all GA cockpit EC equipment is fully interoperable. Such cooperation has already begun for interoperability between uncertified EC equipment. • Current certified receiver standards recommend that low assurance position information should be ignored. Such information is transmitted by many EC devices and is derived from the GNSS data source used. • Recommendations. o A change to the requirements for certified ADS-B-IN receivers should be considered, so as to accept low assurance data. Specifically, for the traffic situational awareness and aid to visual acquisition applications, we recommend that receiving equipment SHALL process and display all received data, including data with zero quality indicators. Displays of aircraft with low quality indicators SHOULD distinguish between known-good (non-zero quality) traffic, and unconfirmed traffic (zero quality indicators). This could be by use of distinct icons or colours. • Comment. Because this recommendation has potential impact on existing standards, it should be carefully considered. More discussion is at Para.I.8.2. • Comment. An interim alternative for CAP1391 devices would be to allow them to transmit non-zero quality indicators. This has been proposed but is a limited solution that would solve the problem for only one EC device.

5.5.2.3 SkyEcho specific • SkyEcho2 (SE2) instructions state ”Transmission and reception performance are affected by antenna placement within the aircraft and is subject to airframe shadowing. Best performance is achieved when the SE2 is placed vertically oriented on the aircraft window mounted with the suction cup mount in a forward or side facing window with clear line of sight visibility in the direction of travel and clear visibility to the sky for GPS reception.” • Testing of the SE2 shows that the best signal transmission is obtained from the front and left side of the SE2 unit. The transmission from the right hand side and rear of the SE2 is particularly poor. • Recommendation. Systematic investigation of the transmission characteristics of SE2 by the manufacturer is advised.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

5.5.2.4 Plane Sight specific DISPLAY • The PlaneSight integral display is too small and the display is not bright enough. Because of the small size, the display easily becomes too cluttered. • A wifi or other connection to a separate display might solve this problem. (This is available but was not demonstrated in GAINS.) • If that can be achieved, then display against a chart background would also be useful.

DEFAULT SETTINGS • Transmit default of PlaneSight. Despite a label on all demo equipment “After power off/engine start, re-enable transmitter” this has not been enough to ensure transmitter activation in all cases. It should be noted this was a NATS requirement for the predecessor LPAT equipment used in the EVA project. • Recommendation. Facilities of PlaneSight equipment should be reviewed for avoidance of unexpected default settings and for guidance on optimal set-up arrangements.

5.5.2.5 SkyDemon specific DEFAULT SETTINGS • The option to show call-signs is very useful in the circuit environment to correlate the traffic display with RT calls. • The call sign display option should have the default to “on”. • Traffic window is not very helpful in circuit. • SkyDemon has very flexible display options. In order for pilots to use the display facilities optimally for their flying, training in the use of the display options should be made available by SkyDemon. • Recommendation. Facilities of SkyDemon should be reviewed for avoidance of unexpected default settings and for guidance on optimal set-up arrangements.

5.5.2.6 SkyDemon + PAW • Audio warnings in the circuit are too verbose. • Recommendation. A mechanism should be devised to reduce audio warnings in the circuit. (It is not clear if this is a PAW action or SkyDemon action.)

5.5.2.7 Ground display • Recommendation. On power failure or abrupt switch off, GAINS ground display equipment should be more robust, to retain display configuration settings.

The detailed comments below are organised according to

• Overall usage and usability • Phase of flight in the local area • Types of alerting • Points for further consideration

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

5.5.2.8 Usage and Usability comments

5.5.2.8.1 Usage • ADS-B indications in the cockpit display and ground display were helpful in locating other aircraft visually. • In conditions that are close to the VMC minima such as were experienced during the demo (Duxford) pilots felt that when it was not possible to see other aircraft at an early stage, the situational information on the device display was helpful. • Guidance to use EC equipment to locate traffic and then follow visually is good and effective.

The Duxford demonstration provided an interesting result. During Project EVA there was a concern that traffic information devices may create a false sense of security and perhaps encourage pilots to “press on” in poor visibility. Duxford demonstrated the opposite: knowledge that there were other aircraft close by, which could not be seen caused unease for most of the pilots.

Conclusion. Hence it would seem that pilots are more likely to continue flying in poor visibility if they do not realise other aircraft are close by. (Ignorance is bliss but a standard flight safety message is don’t die of ignorance.)

Conclusion. Despite the frequent use of the display to help locate other aircraft, the general feeling was that this did not induce too much “head down” flying.10 • A commonly accepted rule of thumb is that the balance of attention inside the cockpit and OTW should be mainly OTW (80%).

5.5.2.8.2 Usability General • SkyDemon display is very clear with good symbology and gives good situational awareness. • En-route, when a/c may not be on the same frequency, traffic indication from EC is useful. • Location awareness of traffic in visual blind-spots is good. • Helicopter pilots also found EC equipment useful and easy to use. • Useful to be able identify traffic from call-sign shown on display and relate to RT in all circumstances. • Mixed traffic performance as well as mixed equipment interoperability was effectively exercised at Sywell. The aircraft types ranged from a large and relatively fast twin to small and slow microlights. • Use of navigation information and traffic information on the same display is good. Navigation background info enables easier location OTW by reference to visual cues in addition to relative bearing. • Call-sign info on display is very important to correlate with RT. • Workload slightly higher with EC but much better awareness of all traffic in the area (in a completely equipped environment).

10 Demonstration of the correctness of this statement is one reason for the proposal to carry out an eye tracking study, as described in 5.6.3.2, A.2.3 and Appendix K.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Traffic acquisition • Traffic often visible electronically before being visible by eye. • I was hearing traffic position before seeing the traffic as a pilot, seeing on SkyDemon before seeing in the sky. • Good accuracy for EC display vs OTW view. • EC is helpful for acquiring a/c that are further away. Visual is better for a/c nearby. • Gives excellent indication of other aircraft and very useful in hazy conditions such as today’s. • A couple of times we would not have spotted circuit traffic without ADSB. • My eyes were constantly flicking between IN and OUTSIDE. It was hugely effective.

Complementary use of EC and RT • Visibility of traffic flow was useful in circuit. • Conclusion. Even with a good EC display, RT is most important. • Conclusion. RT traffic awareness is more useful than ADSB derived voice alerts in the circuit.11

5.5.2.9 Guidelines for use of cockpit Electronic Conspicuity CAP1391 [2] specifies a standard for 1090MHz ADS-B-OUT and makes only minimal statements about cockpit use of received traffic information (Paras 1.5 to 1.11). CAP1391 also cites [13] “Limitations of the See and Avoid Principle” ATSB Transport Safety Report, Alan Hobbs. ISBN 0 642 16089 9 (April 1991)..

Project EVA made recommendations for use en-route within the cockpit. See EVA Demonstration Report [1] Appendix A, which refers also to [4], “Unalerted Air-to-Air Visual Acquisition” J. W. Andrews, MIT Lincoln Laboratory Project Report ATC152, 26 November 1991.

From the cockpit experience in the GAINS aerodrome environment of using EC equipment, reported by phase of flight in the following section, brief guidelines for cockpit use in and near the aerodrome are proposed below. These are complementary to the overall Electronic Conspicuity Concept document. [11]

In general, electronic conspicuity in the cockpit is used to increase awareness of the position and trajectory or short term intentions of proximate traffic, in order to conduct a safe flight by remaining at a suitable distance from other aircraft. EC provides directed visual guidance to augment the imperfect “see” function of “see and avoid”. Avoidance, if necessary, is carried out by visual means according to rules of the air.

The focus of pilots’ attention and decision making is a function of the phase of flight. These brief guidelines concern EC use near the aerodrome and within the aerodrome traffic pattern.

11 As mentioned previously some pilots reported a conflict between the voice alerts provided by PAW and ATC instructions when operating in a busy visual circuit.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Approach to the aerodrome. EC can allow an early appreciation, well beyond visual detection range of other aircraft, of how busy the aerodrome area is and also of other aircraft approaching the aerodrome from any direction. This can help planning the join by taking an extended route or calling up earlier than might otherwise be the case if the aerodrome is very busy. Traffic display against a moving map navigation picture is particularly helpful.

Circuit integration and operation. EC can facilitate suitable spacing over VRPs to integrate with other traffic (possibly of different types and operating speeds) so that operation through the subsequent parts of the traffic pattern is more easily manageable. In this respect EC can complement RT traffic calls, which may be inaccurate because of delay due to congestion on the aerodrome frequency. Again, traffic display against a moving map navigation picture is valuable.

Base and final. When turning onto base and final, EC can help to confirm that sequencing and spacing with respect to other aircraft is properly established, especially for an uncontrolled aerodrome. This can be particularly helpful in reduced visibility conditions, to re-establish visual contact if it is momentarily lost. RT and visual information remain most important, however. During final approach, pilot concentration should be on speed and runway ahead, but an occasional glance at the EC display can alert to aircraft that may be joining out of sequence – e.g. a straight-in approach.

Note. These guidelines are applicable for any degree of EC equipage of the participating aircraft. Even in a nominally completely EC equipped environment, three things must be borne in mind especially for the use of portable EC equipment: • continuity can be affected due to non-optimum positioning of antennas, resulting in the possibility of short-term (a few seconds) loss of signal. Both loss of reliable GPS reception and/or poor ADS-B-OUT transmitter coverage will result in the ADS-B-IN receiver not receiving an updated position report. • Overall reliability may mean that the equipment of another aircraft has failed and it is invisible by EC means. • Alerts generated by parked aircraft on the ground can be distracting in the critical phase of flight, especially if voice alerts are operative. Visual contact with other traffic is always essential, especially in the later stages of the approach. Figure 3. Guidelines for cockpit EC use in and near the aerodrome circuit.

5.5.2.10 PHASE OF FLIGHT

5.5.2.10.1 Approaching aerodrome • The use of ADS-B by the pilot for early sequencing during approach planning was effective. This is one of the main benefits as it allows a view ahead of time of what it might be like in terms of how busy it is and where other aircraft may be joining from other directions (or indeed the same). It can quickly show that it may be prudent to take an extended route for example or to call up earlier than might otherwise be the case if it is seen to be very busy. • Spacing arrival over the VRP was helped by EC.

5.5.2.10.2 Circuit integration and operation • EC indications of traffic behind are useful for spacing in the circuit.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

• Extremely useful for crosswind to downwind (via upwind and dead side). Provides much better picture of location of a/c in downwind leg. Knowledge of positions of a/c ahead when non-visual useful for situation awareness and speed decisions. • RT traffic awareness is more useful than ADSB-derived voice alerts in the circuit.12

5.5.2.10.3 Base and final • Conclusion. EC information was more distracting than useful when on base and especially when on final, when concentration should be almost entirely on speed and runway ahead to ensure a stable approach.

5.5.2.11 TYPES OF ALERTING

5.5.2.11.1 Audio alerts • Conclusion. Audio information on nearby traffic is a key feature but excessive audio information destroys this benefit. • Recommendations regarding alerting in general are also covered in 5.5.2.2 above. • Audio alerts when on ground and in circuit are useless in busy environment. The frequency of audio warnings can be too great in a busy circuit, especially if there is no prioritisation as to which is the most important. 13 • Audio alerts in a less busy environment were regarded as useful. • Audio traffic call-out by synthesised voice is useful en-route.

5.5.2.11.2 SkyDemon traffic window and PlaneSight display screen • The small screen of PlaneSight and the traffic window of SkyDemon are less useful in the circuit when the traffic flow is more regulated and predictable. It is difficult to reconcile the small screen/display to OTW.

5.5.2.12 POINTS FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION

5.5.2.12.1 Training for EC usage. • Situation awareness is not the same as collision alerting. Clear understanding of the distinction and different usage strategies and capabilities of EC devices for the separate functions is important. • Map orientation is not useful for collision alerting and avoidance. Relative position – where to look OTW – is most important. • Recommendation. Awareness of the role of EC in safe flying should be considered for inclusion at a late stage in PPL training.

12 As mentioned previously some pilots reported a conflict between the voice alerts provided by PAW and ATC instructions when operating in a busy visual circuit.

13 As mentioned previously some pilots reported a conflict between the voice alerts provided by PAW and ATC instructions when operating in a busy visual circuit.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

5.5.2.12.2 Portable devices: ignorance of ADS-B technology and lack of understanding of cockpit EC equipment set-up • Although mostly not attributable to any specific demonstration, GAINS staff noticed on several occasions a significant lack of understanding of basic set-up and operation of EC equipment on the aircraft as well as ignorance of the technology, for example:

o The 1090 transmissions, as for FLARM and PAW, are vertically polarised and require the antenna to be mounted vertically, away from physical interference by metal components. We have witnessed portable EC devices with antenna mounted horizontally; antennas fastened to metal supporting struts in a manner likely to impede transmission and reception; devices shrouded by the metal skin of the aircraft and even the occupants. o Loss of Wi-fi/Blue Tooth connectivity resulting in loss of traffic and GPS data to moving maps, especially tablet devices which either goes unnoticed or distracts the pilot from the Aviate/Navigate/Communicate elements of flying for a significant amount of time to resolve the problem. o One portable device requires quite stringent power requirements and not adhering to this impacts its ability to provide wi-fi connectivity to the display devices and processing of GPS position and targets reception. o Portable devices providing altitude information based on cabin pressure rather than true static and differences of +/- 200ft as a norm. o Poor understanding of how to configure devices e.g 3 portable devices in use by a flying club were found to have 1200 set as the VFR squawk code rather than the normal UK setting of 7000, plus other settings making the device report unsuitable for the aircraft in which they were being used i.e ground vehicle, balloon as well as No Callsign (as the pilot didn’t want to be tracked but wanted an EC device).

• Recommendation. Understanding of the technology behind equipment in the cockpit is part of pilot training. Understanding of the technology behind EC devices should also become a training subject, particularly if the future vision for EC is to mandate EC equipage in any way. This recommendation may be addressed by a joint action between the CAA, manufacturers and installers.

5.5.2.12.3 Monitoring of EC operation • Currently, GA ADS-B transmissions are not monitored and used by ATC. Therefore, unlike a transponder, there is no external check of reception. An ADS-B enabled transponder will alert the pilot should ADS-B capability be lost. However, the CAP1391 devices do not currently have the ability to provide an alert function. • Although pilots carrying ADS-B-IN see ADS-B-OUT equipped aircraft on EC displays, they do not know what aircraft they do not see (“unknown – unknowns”) nor who can see them. In other words, the performance of EC is not measured or guaranteed in normal use. • Recommendation. A self-monitoring capability should be considered. CAP1391 should be reviewed with this (lack of) capability in mind. • As an interim measure, a procedure for operational confirmation of ADS-B reception, carried out by a ground ADS-B receiver unit, should be established as soon as feasible.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

• For example, as for transponder usage, confirmation of ADS-B reception by the ground unit should be obtained on first contact. (Note that trial operational procedures for ADS-B usage at Manchester Barton include this requirement.14)

5.5.2.12.4 Portable EC equipment used on more than one aircraft • For the use of EC devices deployed on more than one aircraft, or devices that are removed and reinstalled on each usage, there is no certainty that the placing of the equipment, and therefore its transmission and reception performance, is the same every time. Transmission and reception are strongly influenced by 1090MHz antenna placement and by GPS antenna placement – examples were evident during the GAINS demonstrations. This problem can be mitigated by installation of permanent external antennas to which the removable device can be connected each time. • Likewise, the positioning of the GPS antenna to ensure good GPS reception is essential. Breaks in GPS reception will cause breaks in 1090MHz squitter transmission. • Recommendation. The CAA and EASA should facilitate antenna installation for improvement of RF performance for portable EC devices. (Note that the CAA is already taking action on this point.)

5.5.2.12.5 CAP1391 amendment • Recommendation. CAP1391. To resolve the uAvionix comment in H.3.2 (that CAP1391 does not have any specific guidance about ground reception of CAP1391 signals) and to make it clear that ground based reception and use of the signal is expected, the CAA should consider issuing an amendment to CAP1391 to include mention of ground use of the ADS-B-OUT signal, with appropriate guidance on transmission characteristics to facilitate this usage.

5.5.3 Overall comments - ground surveillance display usage

Analysis of the comments on the ground surveillance display has been carried out by FAV. The results are given in D3.1, “Ground Equipment Validation Report”.[8]. These comments should also be considered in the context of the GAINS Surveillance Concept [11].

Overall, the display was regarded as capable of being very helpful to the FISO operation, subject to training and usage constraints. From a practical set-up point of view, it took a couple of hours to prepare an overlay in Google Earth to customise the display to each airfield. A summary of the main comments from D3.1 is given below.

• Ground display could be very valuable to give traffic information (subject to usage constraints and phraseology as being trialled at A4A sites). • Equipment would be very useful if a GNSS approach is ever approved. • Equipment is useful to see arrival direction of joining traffic as not all aircraft report that. • There were several occasions when display information was better than pilot report; e.g. reporting downwind when actually on base leg. • In less than optimal visibility EC can enable an earlier visual detection of aircraft position in the circuit.

14 https://airspace4all.org/projects/ec/ec-detail/

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

• Rotation of the display orientation to match the outside view was a helpful feature. • The display background with Google Earth was found by some FISOs to be too cluttered. Google Maps could be a better option. • Ground display equipment should be more robust, so that display configuration settings are retained after power failures or abrupt switch-off.

As well as these display capability comments, and reflecting the comment above in para 5.5.2.12.3 the ground equipment can verify operation of 1090MHz ADS-B-OUT equipped aircraft within its coverage range.

For comparison, refer to the A4A Report on ADS-B trials at Manchester Barton [15]. 5.6 Overall conclusions, recommendations and further work

5.6.1 Airborne EC use

• EC in the cockpit is effective in improving pilot understanding of the traffic situation. • When approaching an aerodrome ATZ, traffic situation knowledge definitely helps planning the approach and integration into the circuit traffic. • Knowledge of the presence of other traffic but without visual acquisition does NOT encourage pilots to press on – the opposite is true. • Pilots taking part in GAINS were very aware of the risk of “head down” operation. • On at least one occasion, traffic situation awareness before visual acquisition caused a pilot to take early precautionary action to avoid a potentially hazardous situation. This would not have been possible without EC on board. (See 5.2.1 and E.6.1.2.) • In the circuit, RT information and visual acquisition combined is most important. EC information supplementing the visual information can provide useful early anticipation of the need for manoeuvres such as a go round.

There are two major uses for electronic traffic information:

(1) General situation awareness, typically in low workload environments where they wanted to plan ahead and had more time to absorb the information on a map display.

(2) Conflict alerting, i.e. indication of a highly probable rather than possible risk of collision. These warnings have priority that overrides routine cockpit tasks and should be given with an audible warning to attract attention even when the pilot is not looking at the traffic display

Most pilots reported that the Planesight system did not support situational awareness adequately because they could not relate the position of other aircraft to the ground.

None of the GA surveillance devices studied during this project fully supported the collision awareness function. Most (all?) devices used a simple algorithm based on the range of the other aircraft for triggering alerts rather than comparing velocity vectors of ownship and threat aircraft. This means that spurious warnings were generated in a busy visual circuit, which was particularly problematic when an ATC service was being provided. For example, at Dundee, pilots reported that they needed to concentrate their attention on flying the aircraft, visually searching for aircraft and listening to the ATC instructions.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Recommendation: To be fully effective in the phases of flight that carry the greatest risk of conflict, if conflict alerting is provided, it needs to be intelligent enough to cope with a busy aerodrome environment, or it risks being more distracting than useful.

5.6.2 Ground EC use

The overall subjective conclusion was that seeing traffic on a situation display gave a “comfortable feeling” of understanding the airborne traffic situation.

5.6.2.1 Display information and traffic information • The ground display could be very valuable to give traffic information to pilots (subject to usage constraints and approved phraseology). • The equipment is particularly useful to see the arrival direction of joining traffic as not all aircraft report that accurately. • There were several occasions when display information was better than pilot report; e.g. reporting downwind when actually on base leg. • In less than optimal visibility EC can enable an earlier visual detection of aircraft position in the circuit.

There were several helpful features for setting up the display and filtering data, namely:

• Rotation of the display orientation to match the outside view. • Adjustable level of suppression of map background (ranging from a dark background with no topographical information showing, to being able to see topographical information in detail). See Appendix A.6.1 for screenshot examples. • Adjustable lower and upper height filters, to suppress non-relevant tracks, i.e. overflying commercial aircraft. • Adjustable track history to suit local preference. • Track plot data recordings for post-flight analysis (see example at E.6.1.2).

5.6.2.2 Recommendations For easier display set-up it would be helpful to have a dedicated display set-up menu to enable ATS staff to customise the display to individual or local preferences. However, such a feature should be used with caution so as not to obscure important information.

There could be a requirement for regulatory guidelines to ensure reasonable consistency of data presentation and display features, so as to make training and transfer of ATS staff between locations easier.

5.6.2.3 Future demonstrations GAINS had originally intended to use Manchester Barton, to complement the A4A trial with a GAINS 100% airborne equipage demonstration. Weather prevented this. However, Barton or another A4A ground surveillance site could be worth considering for better exploration of the operational interaction between ATS staff and pilots.

5.6.3 Further investigations

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

5.6.3.1 Use of EC equipment by GA pilots – Eye tracking It was proposed, if possible, that during some of the demo flights “eye tracking” or “gaze tracking” equipment should be deployed to measure the pilot’s focus of attention. A preliminary exercise was carried out at Lee-on-Solent, as described in A.2.3 and B.1.3. The main objective of the eye tracking task is to measure and compare the eyes-inside/head-down proportion of attention time vs the out- the-window proportion of time for the situations of having and not having an EC ADS-B display in the cockpit. The purpose is to find out if having an EC display causes significantly greater proportion of head-down time than not having an EC display.

It was not possible to carry out any actual measurements. However, effective use of EC equipment depends on sensible use for assisted visual acquisition. It therefore would be a valuable area for a future study to measure the effect of EC equipment in the cockpit as summarised above, in order to develop sound evidence-based operational guidance for pilots, positioning of displays and use of audio alerts.

An explanation of the purpose of the eye tracking investigations and an outline of proposed demonstration and investigation activities is provided in the Project Demonstration Plan [7] Appendix D. The main text is also provided in Appendix K to the current document.

5.6.3.2 Recommendation: eye tracking study A study should be carried out along the lines of the proposed eye tracking investigation for GAINS to provide evidence-based guidance on the use of EC equipment in the cockpit.

5.6.4 Index of detailed conclusions and recommendations

For convenience, this section gathers together conclusions and recommendations from elsewhere in the Report, with cross references to the relevant paragraph.

(5.4.1.2) EC equipage options Conclusion. GAINS has shown that the equipage options demonstrated in GAINS are effective and provide useful and usable mutual interoperability with each other in the Air to Air environment.

(5.5.2.2) All devices. Basic instructions and set-up. (Manufacturers) Recommendation. Facilities of all portable EC equipment should be reviewed for avoidance of unexpected default settings and for guidance on optimal set-up arrangements.

(5.5.2.2) All devices. Alerting in general. (Manufacturers) Recommendation. The consequences of implementing alerting mechanisms as defined in DO-317B should be examined and they should be implemented if feasible on low cost GA ADS-B devices.

(5.5.2.2) All devices. Audio alerts and warnings. (Manufacturers) Recommendation. Consider ways of reducing audio alerts when in the aerodrome circuit.

(5.5.2.2) Aircraft on the ground. (Manufacturers) Conclusion. Transmission from aircraft on the ground can potentially cause confusion and unnecessary alerts, revalidating previous work on air/ground determination.

(5.5.2.2) Aircraft on the ground. (Manufacturers and CAA)

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Recommendations • All ADS-B Out equipment SHALL implement automatic air/ground determination, and SHALL transmit the applicable surface or airborne squitters. • CAP1391 should include a requirement for air/ground determination • All ADS-B receivers (airborne and ground based) SHALL distinguish between airborne and surface targets and SHALL display them in such a way that the pilot/FISO can tell them apart. • All ADS-B alerting applications SHALL NOT alert against targets reporting on the surface.

(5.5.2.2) All devices. Interoperability. (Manufacturers) Recommendation. Manufacturers should cooperate so that all GA cockpit EC equipment is fully interoperable.

(5.5.2.2) All devices. Interoperability and CAP1391. (CAA) Recommendation. • A change to the requirements for certified ADS-B-IN receivers should be considered, so as to accept low assurance data. Specifically, for the traffic situational awareness and aid to visual acquisition applications, we recommend that receiving equipment SHALL process and display all received data, including data with zero quality indicators. Displays of aircraft with low quality indicators SHOULD distinguish between known-good (non-zero quality) traffic, and unconfirmed traffic (zero quality indicators). This could be by use of distinct icons or colours.

(5.5.2.3) SkyEcho specific. (Manufacturer) Recommendation. Systematic investigation of the transmission characteristics of SE2 by the manufacturer is advised.

(5.5.2.4) PlaneSight specific. Default settings. (Manufacturer) Recommendation. Facilities of PlaneSight equipment should be reviewed for avoidance of unexpected default settings (such as transmit inhibit on restart) and for guidance on optimal set-up arrangements.

(5.5.2.5) SkyDemon specific. Default settings (Manufacturer) Recommendation. Facilities of SkyDemon should be reviewed for avoidance of unexpected default settings and for guidance on optimal set-up arrangements.

(5.5.2.6) SkyDemon + PAW. (Manufacturers) Recommendation. A mechanism should be devised to reduce audio warnings in the circuit. (It is not clear if this is a PAW action or SkyDemon action.)

(5.5.2.7) Ground display. (Manufacturer) Recommendation. On power failure or abrupt switch off, GAINS ground display equipment should be more robust, to retain display configuration settings.

(5.5.2.8.1) EC Usage in poor visibility. Conclusion. It would seem that pilots are more likely to continue flying in poor visibility if they do not realise other aircraft are close by. (Ignorance is bliss but a standard flight safety message is don’t die of ignorance.)

(5.5.2.8.1) Risk of “head down” usage of EC equipment.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Conclusion. Despite the frequent use of the display to help locate other aircraft, the general feeling was that this did not induce too much “head down” flying.

(5.5.2.8.2) Usability Conclusion. Even with a good EC display, RT is most important. RT traffic awareness is more useful than ADSB derived voice alerts in the circuit.

(5.5.2.10.3) Base and final Conclusion. EC information was more distracting than useful when on base and especially when on final

(5.5.2.11.1) Audio alerts Conclusion. Audio information on nearby traffic is a key feature but excessive audio information destroys this benefit.

(5.5.2.12.1) Training for EC usage. (CAA) Recommendation. Awareness of the role of EC in safe flying should be considered for inclusion at a late stage in PPL training.

(5.5.2.12.2) Understanding of EC technology. (CAA, manufacturers and installers) Recommendation. Understanding of the technology behind equipment in the cockpit is part of pilot training. Understanding of the technology behind EC devices should also become a training subject, particularly if the future vision for EC is to mandate EC equipage in any way.

(5.5.2.12.3) EC operation monitoring. (CAA) Recommendation. A self-monitoring capability should be considered. CAP1391 should be reviewed with this (lack of) capability in mind. As an interim measure, a procedure for operational confirmation of ADS-B reception, carried out by a ground ADS-B receiver unit, should be established as soon as feasible.

(5.5.2.12.4) Portable EC equipment and installed antennas. (CAA) Recommendation. The CAA and EASA should facilitate antenna installation for improvement of RF performance for portable EC devices.

(5.5.2.12.5) CAP1391 amendment. (CAA) Recommendation. CAA should consider issuing an amendment to CAP1391 to include mention of ground use of the ADS-B-OUT signal, with appropriate guidance on transmission characteristics to facilitate this usage.

(5.6.1) Airborne EC use. (Manufacturers and CAA) Recommendation. To be fully effective in the phases of flight that carry the greatest risk of conflict, if conflict alerting is provided, it needs to be intelligent enough to cope with a busy aerodrome environment, or it risks being more distracting than useful.

(5.6.3.2) Eye tracking study. Recommendation. A study should be carried out along the lines of the proposed eye tracking investigation for GAINS to provide evidence-based guidance on the use of EC equipment in the cockpit.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

6 References

Reference Documents

[1] “EVA Demonstration Report”. LSD.02.07-D002-EVA. Edition 01.01.00, issued 24/09/2016 Created by NATS, AOPA, FAV & Trig for the SESAR Joint Undertaking

[2] “Electronic Conspicuity Devices”. CAP1391 E2 APR 2018. UK CAA Publication.

[3] “PlaneSight. Low Power ADS-B Transceiver Operation Manual”. Document-No.08.311.010.71e1. Funke Avionics (FAV).

[4] “Unalerted Air-to-Air Visual Acquisition” J. W. Andrews, MIT Lincoln Laboratory Project Report ATC152, 26 November 1991.

[5] “Mid Air Collisions: An Evidence Based Analysis of Risk 1975 to 2018” V5-2. Airspace 4 All (24 April 2019)

[6] “Surveillance demonstration conduct plan”. GAINS D4.4

[7] “Project Demonstration Plan”. GAINS Deliverable

[8] “Ground Equipment Validation Report”. GAINS Deliverable 3.1

[9] “RTH80. ADS-B / Mode S Receiver Operation and Installation”. Document-Nr. 03.234.010.71e. Funke Avionics (FAV).

[10] “Surveillance Data Recordings and Analysis”. GAINS Deliverable D4.5

[11] “Electronic Conspicuity Concept” GAINS Deliverable 2.4.

[12] “16.06.05 D 27 Human Performance Reference Material D27”. SESAR Final Project Report. 04.07.2016

[13] “Limitations of the See and Avoid Principle” ATSB Transport Safety Report, Alan Hobbs. ISBN 0 642 16089 9 (April 1991).

[14] “Minimum Operational Performance Standards (MOPS) for Aircraft Surveillance Applications (ASA) system” EUROCAE ED-194. (2014)

[15] “Airspace4All GA Airfield ATS ADS-B Traffic Display Trial” Version 1.0, 30th September 2019

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Appendix A GAINS Surveillance Demonstrations Summary A.1 Introduction This Appendix summarises in narrative form all the events where GAINS airborne or ground-based surveillance equipment has been deployed during the Project. The events are divided into preparation and technical check events, formal demonstrations and additional events. Full details are given in separate Appendices below. From the point of view of data gathering, especially pilots’ opinions of the usefulness and usability of cockpit ADS-B displays and aerodrome ground staff opinions of the capability of ground displays, the formal demonstrations are the most important. The preparation events laid the groundwork for the formal demonstrations and useful information was gathered there as well. The ground equipment is fairly easy to deploy and demonstrate (after initial teething troubles) and the cockpit equipment as a portable electronic device (PED) is designed for easy installation and removal. Additional opportunities were taken to operate both airborne and ground equipment and to make data recordings as summarised below. A.2 Preparation visits More details of the events in this section are provided below.

A.2.1 Dundee visit (2018-11-06) Dundee Airport has installed a combined 1090MHz ADS-B and wide area multilateration (WAM) system, which also has FLARM reception because of nearby glider operations. This offered a ready- made operational environment for demonstrating cockpit ADS-B equipment so, before the formal demonstration, a visit was made by AOPA (GAINS), NATS and CAA to see the system in operation and to fly a brief sortie to check out reception of the GAINS CAP1391 cockpit equipment by the Dundee ground system. This worked very well and is described below in Appendix B.2.2.

A.2.2 Barton visit (2018-12-16) Manchester Barton has been preparing for the use of uAvionix “Ping station” 1090MHz ADS-B ground surveillance equipment for several months and is now formally approved to use the ADS-B displays for an operational trial. This capability has been developed under the “Airspace for All” (A4A) initiative. A visit was made to Barton on 16th December 2018 to see the system in operation and to explore the possibility of Barton hosting a GAINS demo. This was agreed and the Barton system is described in Appendix B.3 below.

A.2.3 Lee-on-Solent. Eye Tracking Equipment – Initial Familiarisation (30-03-2019) Eye tracking investigations (sometimes also referred to as gaze tracking) were proposed as an optional element of the GAINS surveillance project. The investigations require pilots to wear a headset that can track the direction of vision of the pilot and that also records on video where the pilot’s attention is focused. The main objective of this was to measure and compare the eyes-inside/head-down proportion of attention time vs the out-the-window proportion of time for the situations of having and

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

not having an EC ADS-B display in the cockpit. The main purpose was to find out if having an EC display causes significantly greater proportion of head-down time than not having an EC display. On 30th March, the eye tracking equipment was demonstrated in the cockpits of two different GA aircraft at Lee-on-Solent by Dr Julie Kirkby and colleagues from Bournemouth University. A short flight was also carried out, to familiarise the Bournemouth staff with the phases of flight to be examined. (Take-off, establish en-route, cruise, approach zone and re-join, circuit, final. The purpose of this element of the investigation was to explore the proportion of time remaining for acquisition of traffic over and above the high workload flying tasks.) A few Lee-on-Solent training aircraft were fitted with ADS-B-OUT equipment by GAINS, so as to have targets for demonstration flying. The GAINS ground equipment was also set up to record ADS-B data. It was proposed that one of the pilots from each of the formal demonstrations (listed below) would take part in an eye-tracking flight during the ADS-B demo period, to collect the data for analysis by the Bournemouth team. Unfortunately, largely due to a change of personnel at Bournemouth University, the inclusion of eye tracking flights was eventually not possible. This optional element of the GAINS surveillance demonstrations was therefore not completed. Nevertheless, it would be a worthwhile investigation in the future. An Eye Tracking data collection exercise should be carried out if the opportunity allows it. The objective is to gather data on pilots’ focus of attention when using EC equipment in all phases of flight. Appendix K contains the details of the proposed investigations. A.3 Formal demonstrations completed A.3.1 Stapleford demo (held on 2018-12-04) (See also Appendix C) This was the first formal demonstration. The procedure was to brief volunteer pilots several days in advance and, for those who did not already have 1090MHz ADS-B equipment, to leave the GAINS PlaneSight equipment with them for a few days familiarisation before the formal demo. This would have worked reasonably well, except that the weather on the nominated demonstration day (3rd December) was very poor and the demo had to be postponed 24 hours. The weather on the next day was much better but some of the pilots were unable to take part. The GAINS ground equipment was set up on 3rd December. Reception of overflying commercial aircraft (into London Stansted) was good but it was not possible to check out the ground equipment performance against GA aircraft because no GA aircraft were flying, due to the weather. On the contingency day (4th December) it was found that the reception by the GAINS ground equipment of GA ADS-B aircraft was not working. The equipment was subsequently returned to FAV and the fault was traced to an incorrect set-up parameter. To get some value from the demo, the two GAINS volunteer aircraft that were available flew, to assess the air-air performance of each receiving the other’s ADS-B. The pilots’ comments are given in a separate appendix below. However, this was a very limited demonstration compared to what had been intended.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

It was as a result of the ground equipment problems experienced that, before embarking on more formal demonstrations, the ground equipment reception test flights at Brimpton were carried out, summarised below.

A.3.2 Brimpton Ground Reception Tests (2019-01-28) (See also Appendix D.) Because of difficulties with the GAINS ground surveillance equipment at the Stapleford demo on 4th December a day of ground reception tests was carried out at Brimpton. Four CAP1391 airborne devices were flown on brief sorties to examine the reception range at all aspects of the aircraft to the ground station. This showed that all the devices flown were detected at a similar range, suitable for operations in and near the aerodrome, which is the operating scenario of the GAINS surveillance demonstrations.

A.3.3 Duxford demo (held on 2019-04-07) (See also Appendix E.) The Duxford demo took place in early April, with the hope of getting better weather and more flexibility in timing due to a longer period of daylight. The ground equipment was set up the day before the demo and checked out against local ADS-B equipped GA aircraft. It should be noted that the GAINS ground equipment was NOT used operationally, because the approval mechanism for this was too onerous and lengthy. However, the equipment was set up so that FISOs not operating were able to assess the display information and presentation. A total of 5 fixed wing and one helicopter took part. Although the weather was not suitable in the morning, the forecast was accurate and it improved sufficiently for the demo to start in the early afternoon. The detailed information collected and analysis is given in Appendix E.

A.3.4 Sywell demo (held on 2019-04-15) (See also Appendix F.) The demo at Sywell was held 8 days after Duxford. Some modifications to the GAINS ground display were made from the Duxford experience, to improve the background presentation of runways, VRPs, and noise sensitive areas. This is facilitated by the use of Google Earth. The presentation of ADS-B track data was also slightly modified. Example screen shots are in para A.6.1. As for Duxford, the GAINS ground equipment was NOT used operationally. The equipment was set up in the room immediately below the visual control room (VCR), together with an audio feed from the VCR. FISOs not operating were able to assess the display information and presentation. The GAINS ground equipment was set up the day before the demo and checked out successfully against local GA aircraft and against the same helicopter that had taken part at Duxford. However, that aircraft was not available to take part in the demo. Several of the participating aircraft at Sywell were already fitted with 1090MHz ADS-B-IN and ADS-B- OUT, so only 3 aircraft used the GAINS PlaneSight equipment. The aircraft types ranged from a large and relatively fast twin to small and slow microlights, so this turned out to be a valuable interoperability test of mixed traffic performance as well as mixed equipment.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

A.3.5 Dundee demo (held on 2019-05-10) (See also Appendix G.) Dundee has permission to use the Avionics ADS-B, WAM and FLARM installed surveillance system on a trial basis. The GAINS ground surveillance equipment was also put in place to ensure that ADS-B data recordings could be made as for all other sites. The ground display presentation of runways, advised circuits, approach routes, VRPs, and noise sensitive areas was set up appropriately. Screen shots are in Appendix A.6.1. As for Sywell, there was a variety of aircraft and 1090MHz ADS-B equipment installed on participating aircraft, again providing a useful interoperability test. An autogyro took part in the demonstration.

A.3.6 Blackbushe demo (held on 16-08-2019) (See also Appendix H.) Despite attempts to include helicopters in the demonstration events, only very limited participation had been possible before the Blackbushe demo. Therefore arrangements were made with Phoenix helicopters at Blackbushe to hire two helicopters plus pilots for the demo event to be held there. Because the Brimpton demonstration had not been able to take place, fixed wing pilots who had been going to fly at Brimpton were invited also to take part. The demo at Blackbushe was held on 16th August 2019. Because Phoenix Helicopters are based at Blackbushe, the project hoped to ensure that the helicopters would be able to operate. There was the possibility of up to ten fixed wing participants as well. The weather on the day was reasonable in the immediate neighbourhood of Blackbushe, although with low cloud, about 1500ft, but the forecast was that it would deteriorate from about midday, which it did. Several of the fixed wing pilots would have had difficulty getting back home after the flying and therefore they withdrew. Three fixed wing took part, all coming from very close to Blackbushe. The GAINS ground equipment was set up in the tower but was not used by the FISO on duty. Being in the tower enabled the non-operating FISO observer to listen to the RT and correlate that with the displayed information. A.4 Formal demonstrations not completed A.4.1 Barton demo (first planned for 2019-05-25) The first date arranged for Barton was 25th May. Two members of the GAINS team flew up to Barton the afternoon before to set up the ground equipment in the VCR and to manage the demo. Unfortunately, on the day of the demo, the weather was not as good as forecast. In the morning, the visibility was poor with low cloud. This cleared considerably for the afternoon to be replaced with strong winds; too strong for some of the aircraft planning to take part. The demo was cancelled. However, there were useful discussions with the tower staff about their experiences with the ADS-B surveillance equipment. The forecast for the following (contingency) day was not significantly better, so the whole event was postponed to the weekend of 29th June. Too few pilots were available for this date, which would have made the demo not worthwhile. The following weekend, 6th July, was initially better as far as the

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

number of pilots was concerned. However, aircraft problems reduced this below a useful number and the event was again cancelled. Reference [15] is a detailed report of the ADS-B trials at Manchester Barton, which have been conducted over several months under the auspices of A4A.

A.4.2 Brimpton demo (planned for 27/28-07-2019) Eight aircraft plus crew were arranged for the demonstration at Brimpton, planned for 27th July. Unfortunately, although the early part of the week had been fine weather, a slow moving front arrived for 27th July, stretching the length of the UK. Met forecasts were not entirely consistent, so an attempt was made to hold the demo. Two aircraft from very close to Brimpton managed to fly in but they reported a cloud base of 700ft AAL. As this was not enough for the planned flying, the event was cancelled. The forecast for the following day was hardly any better, largely because of the slow-moving front, so the demo for 28th July was also cancelled. A.5 Additional visits and data gathering events A.5.1 Southampton (2018-11-30 & 2018-12-11) NATS Research and Development are investigating the performance of relatively low cost, reduced capability (RCE) surveillance systems to complement and support ATS. One of these systems has been installed at Southampton with the aim of examining air to ground performance of FLARM and CAP1391 ADS-B equipment. GAINS pilots were requested to help for the initial validation of the ground system by flying pre-briefed profiles across the Southampton CTA.

Figure 4. Comparison of PowerFLARM portable track (top) with Planesight track (bottom).

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

A.5.2 Brimpton fly-in (2019-06-09) Brimpton airfield held a “fly-in” event on 9th June, at which it also invited those aircraft with suitable GA ADS-B equipment to take part. The GAINS ground equipment was set up and recorded the ADS-B data of equipped participants. This also served as an additional check out for the planned Brimpton demonstration later in July. Six out of 54 aircraft were ADS-B equipped. Several more stated that they were equipped but may not have arrived, or may have misunderstood that ADS-B equipage meant 1090MHz ADS-B transmission. Confusion on this is issue is persistent.

A.5.3 Wycombe Aero Expo (2019-06-13+14+15) As part of the Aero Expo held at Wycombe Air Park from 13th-15th June, the GAINS ground display equipment was set up in the AOPA tent and operated throughout the Expo operating hours. The display facilities were demonstrated to visitors to AOPA. As at the formal demos, ADS-B data from arriving and departing aircraft was recorded. This was partly to gauge very roughly what proportion of the aircraft was fitted with 1090MHz ADS-B-OUT. Only 10 aircraft were equipped.

A.5.4 Light Aviation Association Rally, Sywell, (2019-08-29 to 31) The LAA Rally takes place over three days and typically attracts up to about 1000 aircraft. Foreign based and registered aircraft also take part. As the aircraft should be a fairly representative sample of UK light aircraft, the “Airspace 4 All” (A4A) organisation made arrangements to record EC data received and displayed on a ground station display set up at the Rally. The aircraft arriving at the rally were expected to carry a variety of cockpit ADS-B EC equipment, as well as or instead of transponders. This included CAP1391 portable equipment on 1090MHz, installed and certified ADS-B-OUT equipment on 1090MHz, transponders with lower integrity GPS devices providing the position data, FLARM equipment and Pilot Aware equipment. The ground data collection equipment was set up to be capable of handling the signals from all these devices, as well as inputs from the Open Glider Network (OGN)15 received by internet connection and multilateration data calculated and distributed via internet connection. This exercise could support two main analyses. • An indication of the relative numbers of aircraft equipped with each type of equipment; • An assessment of the range, accuracy and latency of the positional data as received and displayed (backed up by data recordings) as well as differences in the received data as a function of the aircraft aspect to the ground receiving equipment; The LAA Rally hosts insisted that all data should be made available to pilot organisations, including AOPA, for post event analysis and that the data should not be used for commercial gain or for promotion of any particular manufacturer’s products. Results and conclusions from this exercise were not available within the GAINS project timescale. However, arrangements to obtain and analyse data are under discussion and a supplementary report

15 http://wiki.glidernet.org/

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

on this subject may be issued. From initial data, 205 ADS-B aircraft had registered to take part; 18% of the total participants.

A.5.5 Aerobits device Aerobits is a Polish company developing technological solutions for the systematic integration of UAS into the airspace. (http://www.aerobits.pl/) A TR-1W transceiver (http://aerobits.pl/component/virtuemart/tr-1w-detail?Itemid=0) was obtained on loan. The device claims the following capability. “The device operates on 1090MHz band and allows to receive and transmit ADS-B data with 1 Watt output power. The transceiver does not require any external devices to operate. It is equipped with a high quality multi-GNSS receiver and a barometric altitude sensor.” Nominally, the RF capability (except power) seems similar to ADS-B transceivers demonstrated in GAINS that are deployable in a GA cockpit. The device is approximately 5cm x 2.5cm x 1cm, see picture.

Figure 5. Aerobits device

Test of ADS-B transmission by Aerobits. Helios arranged for a device to be delivered, preconfigured for operation in the cockpit of a TB20 aircraft. Before flying, a ground transmission test was carried out, with the receiver being a SkyEcho connected to SkyDemon ADS-B display on a tablet PC. SkyEcho/SkyDemon was working properly as shown by reception and display of overflying commercial aircraft. However, the Aerobits transmissions were not received, although the operating lights were working. The Aerobits and SkyEcho devices were about 2m from each other. That distance does not saturate the SkyEcho receiver as has been shown by previous ground checks. It seemed therefore that the device was not transmitting.

There was also an opportunity to carry the Aerobits device to Wycombe Aero Expo in June 2019. For comparison purposes, a CAP1391 device was flown in the same aircraft but with a different (dummy) ICAO address. The ground installation was a GAINS RTH-80 receiver together with PC and ground display software configuration, as mentioned in para A.5.3 above. However on examining the data recordings later, the Aerobits device did not show up, although the SkyEcho transmissions were received well. Test of ADS-B reception by Aerobits. After receiving a link to more detailed instructions from Aerobits, tests of ground reception by the device were carried out, with partial success, when connecting the device to a PC. The device appeared to receive both SkyEcho ADS-B and commercial aircraft but the recording and playback functions did not work. Also, again, the device transmission did not appear to work. The instructions were badly written and very difficult to understand. The poor performance, the difficulty in resolving the technical issues and the poor support of Aerobits led to the cancellation of further demonstrations with this equipment.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

A.6 Overall GAINS surveillance activity summary This section summarises the total amount of flying and ground surveillance activity accomplished by and during the GAINS demonstrations and other events where ground-based or cockpit-based EC equipment was deployed, as described above.

A.6.1 Ground Surveillance GAINS ground equipment was operated, data recordings made and displays customised for aerodrome use at • Stapleford • Duxford • Sywell • Dundee • Barton • Wycombe Air Park • Brimpton • Lee-on-Solent • Blackbushe

Images of the display as set up at the demo aerodromes are included below; also in D4.5. The displays were set up with local overlays (in Google Earth) with advice from aerodrome staff. The images indicate the flexibility of the overlay capability. More details regarding customisation of the displays are given in D4.5.

Figure 6. GAINS display. Left: Duxford. Right: Sywell.

Figure 7. GAINS display. Left: Dundee. Right: Blackbushe.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Figure 8. GAINS display. Left: Manchester Barton. Right: Lee on Solent, showing adjacent airspace.

Figure 9. GAINS display. Left: Wycombe, with entry route for Aero Expo in blue. Right: Brimpton

In addition to GAINS equipment which was set up for demonstration to observers, local equipment in operation was observed at Stapleford (Flight Radar 24), Dundee (Avionix) and at Barton (uAvionix Ping station together with locally developed software and display adaptations based on Google Maps).

Figure 10. Barton display from Ping station, using Google maps

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Figure 11. Dundee display from Avionix.

A.6.2 Cockpit surveillance: aircraft & equipment A total of 42 volunteer pilots and observers (most of whom were also pilots) flew at the formal demos, accumulating a total of nearly 43 flying hours, using 27 different fixed wing and rotary wing aircraft and several configurations of EC equipment, both installed and carry-on. Full details are in the table at the end of this Appendix.

A.6.2.1. Fixed wing participants • PA28 (several variants) GSGAA, GSGBB, GSUAA, GSUDD, GBKFF, GPNCC, GPNGG, GPNHH • PA31: GBKGG • Cessna 172 (variants) GSUBB, GPNBB • Cessna 182: GBKCC • Grumman AA1: GSUEE • Chipmunk DHC1: GSUFF • Skyranger Nynja: GBKAA, GBKBB, GBKDD • Groppo Trail: GBKEE • VANS RV7A: GPNAA • Pegasus Qwik: GPNEE, GPNFF • Robin DR400: GLKAA • Beechcraft Bonanza: GLKBB • Bristell NG5: GLKCC

A.6.2.2. Rotary wing participants - helicopters and autogyros • Hughes 500: GSUCC

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

• Rotorsport UK MT03: GPNDD, • Robinson R22: GLKDD, GLKEE

A.6.2.3. Cockpit EC equipment types The equipment used was in three main categories: • Stand-alone carry on equipment for 1090MHz ADS-B-OUT and ADS-B-IN. PlaneSight, Sky Echo. • Separate non-transponder 1090 MHz ADS-B-IN devices. Power FLARM, Pilot Aware. • Transponder-based ADS-B-IN and ADS-B-OUT on 1090MHz. Many types.

Some aircraft also carried FLARM (Classic FLARM or Power FLARM) or Pilot Aware. Both these devices have position altitude & vector data input/output on their own separate frequencies and protocols. However, these latter capabilities were not used in the demonstrations.

A.6.2.4. Stand-alone carry on equipment (PED). Stand-alone is used to mean that the equipment is capable of both ADS-B-OUT transmission on 1090MHz and ADS-B-IN reception on 1090MHz. ADS-B-OUT signal characteristics and power are defined by CAP1391. No other transmission or reception equipment is needed in order to operate in an ADS-B environment. The ADS-B-IN capability is suitable to receive all 1090MHz ADS-B transmissions and does not reject data because of low value Quality Indicators. The types of equipment flown are FAV PlaneSight (based on the LPAT device used in Project EVA [1]) and uAvionix SkyEcho (both SkyEcho1 and SkyEcho2) which are production equipment available for purchase. PlaneSight has its own integral display, whereas SkyEcho uses a wifi link to a tablet based navigation application such as SkyEcho or Easy VFR for the display. References to more detailed descriptions are in Appendix I.

A.6.2.5. Installed certified ADS-B-IN and ADS-B-OUT on 1090MHz Several aircraft were equipped with permanently installed equipment, both 1090MHz ADS-B-IN and 1090MHz ADS-B-OUT.

A.6.2.6. Separate ADS-B-IN and ADS-B-OUT devices: Some aircraft used Pilot Aware for 1090MHz ADS-B-IN but had no 1090MHz ADS-B-OUT capability For these, a loan 1090MHz ADS-B-OUT equipment was provided.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

The cockpit equipment configurations used (details in the separate appendices) were as below. The colour coding is as follows. Note that, for privacy purposes, each aircraft registrations has been replaced by an anonymised registration of the form G[2 character aerodrome identifier][2 character sequential identifier]. Colour coding ADS-B-OUT via ADS-B-IN via Display Plane Sight Plane Sight Plane Sight Sky Echo Sky Echo Transponder Transponder Pilot Aware Sky Demon + tablet Other

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Aircraft and demo 1090MHz ADS-B-OUT ADS-B-IN 1090MHz Demo Coordinates Dedicated EC Pressure Pressure Aircraft Aircraft Transpond ADS-B-OUT ADS-B out GPS Locatio (Lat, Lon, Device (if altitude GPS source EC Device altitude ADS-B-IN ADS-B-IN antenna Software Display registration type er standard (if Antenna source n Alt) used) source source known) (52.06056; Grumman EGSU GSUEE 0.13139; PlaneSight Integral Integral CAP1391 Procom PlaneSight Integral Integral 1090MHz Procom PlaneSight PlaneSight AA-1 Duxford 126+50) DHC-1 (52.06056; Trig 21 Trig TA50 EGSU Trig TN72 GSUFF CHIPMUN 0.13139; Mode S Compact GPS PlaneSight Integral Integral 1090MHz Procom PlaneSight PlaneSight Duxford GPS K 22 126+50) xponder Antenna Trig SKYRANG (52.3061; - Transponder Pilot EGBK Transpond MGL Explorer 1090MHz, Tablet GBKAA ER NYNJA 0.79222; SIL=1, SDA=1 antenna Aware Integral SkyDemon Sywell er TT21 EFIS Lite PAW ipad mini 912S(1) 155+50) (external) Rosetta Mode S SKYRANG (52.3061; - Pilot Tablet EGBK 1090MHz, GBKBB ER SWIFT 0.79222; PlaneSight Integral Integral CAP1391 Procom Aware Integral Integral SkyDemon panel Sywell PAW 912S(1) 155+50) Classic mounted (52.3061; - Cessna- EGBK GBKCC 0.79222; PlaneSight Integral Integral CAP1391 Procom PlaneSight Integral Integral 1090MHz Procom PlaneSight PlaneSight 182P Sywell 155+50) Trig TY91 Pilot SKYRANG (52.3061; - Mode S Internal to EGBK Aware Derived from USB 1090MHz, Android GBKDD ER 0.79222; transpond transpond GPS 'mouse' Permanent Integral SkyDemon Sywell (2018- GPS 'dongle' PAW tablet 912S(1) 155+50) er with er 0129) ADS-B (52.3061; - Groppo EGBK GBKEE 0.79222; PlaneSight Integral Integral CAP1391 Procom PlaneSight Integral Integral 1090MHz Procom PlaneSight PlaneSight Trail Sywell 155+50) Integrity set Pilot (52.3061; - Certified Transponder Pilot Dipole (internal) PIPER PA- EGBK Garmin Garmin 1E-3 in Aware 1090MHz, Tablet GBKFF 0.79222; altitude antenna Aware N/A behind SkyDemon 28R-200-2 Sywell GTX330ES GNS430W accordance internal PAW ipad mini 155+50) encoder (external) Rosetta windscreen with CS-STAN GPS (52.3061; - Piper PA- EGBK Blind Blind Avidyne Integral GBKGG 0.79222; GTX330ES GTN750 SIL=3 GTN external GTX330ES GTN GTN external 6.51 31 Sywell encoder encoder TAS605A display 155+50) NANO portable whip Tablet + (52.3061; - Pilot PA28R- EGBK Encoder Avidyne GPS 1090MHz, antenna velcroed audio GSUAA 0.79222; Trig TT31 transponder Aware Integral SkyDemon 180 Sywell SSD120- IFD440 GPS mouse PAW onto the window alerts via 155+50) Classic 30N frame intercom Trig TT21 (56.4525; - Garmin Aera Pilot VANS RV- EGPN Mode S 1090MHz, Tablet GPNAA 3.0258; 660 panel Permanent Aware Integral SkyDemon 7A Dundee Transpond PAW ipad 15+50) mounted Classic er

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Aircraft and demo 1090MHz ADS-B-OUT ADS-B-IN 1090MHz Demo Coordinates Dedicated EC Pressure Pressure Aircraft Aircraft Transpond ADS-B-OUT ADS-B out GPS Locatio (Lat, Lon, Device (if altitude GPS source EC Device altitude ADS-B-IN ADS-B-IN antenna Software Display registration type er standard (if Antenna source n Alt) used) source source known) Avidyne (56.4525; - Trig TT31 CESSNA EGPN IFD540 GPNBB 3.0258; transpond Permanent ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? F172H Dundee (FAR91.227 15+50) er compliant) (56.4525; - Mode C- PIPER PA- EGPN GPNCC 3.0258; SkyEcho2 only Narco Integral Integral CAP1391 Integral SkyEcho2 Integral Integral 1090MHz Integral SkyDemon Tablet 28-160 Dundee 15+50) AT150 TSO Mode S Pilot ROTORSP (56.4525; - Pilot EGPN non-ES Aware 1090MHz, Tablet GPNDD ORT UK 3.0258; SkyEcho1 Integral Integral CAP1391 Integral Aware Integral SkyDemon Dundee transpond internal PAW ipad mini MT-03 15+50) Rosetta er GPS Pilot (56.4525; - Pilot Pegasus EGPN Aware 1090MHz, GPNEE 3.0258; SkyEcho1 Integral Integral CAP1391 Integral Aware Integral SkyDemon Tablet Quik Dundee internal PAW 15+50) Rosetta GPS (56.4525; - Pegasus EGPN TT21 GPNFF 3.0258; Trig TN72 PlaneSight Integral Integral 1090MHz Procom PlaneSight PlaneSight Quik Dundee Mode S 15+50) (56.4525; - Garmin PIPER PA- EGPN GPNGG 3.0258; GTX 328 PlaneSight Integral Integral 1090MHz Procom PlaneSight PlaneSight 28-181 Dundee 15+50) Mode S (56.4525; - EGPN GPNHH 3.0258; PlaneSight Integral Integral CAP1391 Procom Dundee 15+50) Robin EGLK (51.3210, - GLKAA DR400/18 Blackbu 0.84183, PlaneSight Trig TT31 Integral Integral CAP1391 Procom PlaneSight Integral Integral 1090MHz Procom PlaneSight PlaneSight 0R she 325+50) GTN 750 + GTN 750 + EGLK (51.3210, - Bonanza Garmin Garmin Garmin Garmin Garmin Garmin Garmin Garmin Garmin Garmin GLKBB Blackbu 0.84183, Installed Installed B36TC GTX345 GTX345 GTX345 GTN750 GTX345 GTX345 GTX345 GTX345 Pilot in Pilot on she 325+50) ipad iPad Pilot EGLK (51.3210, - Pilot Aware 1090MHz, Bristell Pilot Aware Integral SkyDemon Tablet GLKCC Blackbu 0.84183, PlaneSight Trig TT31 Integral Integral CAP1391 Procom Aware internal PAW NG5 she 325+50) GPS PlaneSight Integral Integral 1090MHz Procom PlaneSight PlaneSight

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

A.7 Acknowledgements Grateful acknowledgements are made to all participants in the GAINS Project.

This is principally to the volunteer pilots and observers, who flew the demonstrations and whose experiences with the various equipment types during the flights have provided the detailed feedback on what it is like from the cockpit point of view to fly in a busy aerodrome environment, when all or nearly all other aircraft are visible on Electronic Conspicuity (EC) devices. The project believes this is a unique experience for GA pilots in the UK and possibly more widely.

Also very important are the participating aerodromes and their technical and management staff who both allowed the demonstrations to take place at their locations and provided technical and operational support during the demonstrations to safely manage the very busy flying environment as well as to evaluate the ADS-B displays.

Finally, very knowledgeable colleagues within the GAINS project have helped set up the portable CAP1391 equipment in the cockpits of aircraft who were encountering the use of EC for the first time. As well as this, they managed the debrief sessions and made sense out of the questionnaire responses and the debrief sessions held after every flying event. This raw subjective data (questionnaire responses and debrief notes) is contained in several of the appendices of this Report.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Appendix B Preparation visits B.1 Introduction This section provides more information about the systems and operational environment at three locations visited during the preparation for the formal demonstrations. B.2 Dundee visit (2018-11-06) B.2.1 Introduction. GAINS, NATS and CAA visited Dundee aerodrome to see the operation of the Avionix surveillance system that is currently being trialled there for Highlands and Islands Airports (HIAL). HIAL operates eleven airports in Scotland. This section describes the Avionix system. The information below was provided by Tim Gulson, SATCO at Dundee.

At the end of July 2017, installation of AVIONIX ADS-B/FLARM/Multilateration situational awareness system took place at and around Dundee airport.

B.2.2 Avionix system summary. The Avionix system consists of Integrated ADS-B/MLAT/FLARM receivers feeding data to an AVIONIX central processing unit providing visual display (ATCO Situational Awareness Display – ASAD). Plot and track processing via a local processor or hosted web-link to remote site, providing some resilience. • 1090 MHz ADS-B • 1090 MHz mode S (via multilateration) • FLARM • Pilot Aware Plot and track recording capability via screen shot for short term recording. Longer term recording can be done but not locally at present

B.2.2.1. Display Target labels are colour coded and captioned according to the EC equipment carried:

Orange = MODE S only therefore MLAT. Light Blue = ADS-B Green = FLARM

The altitude displayed within each label is based on the Dundee QNH which is automatically updated whenever there is a change in the METAR.

Figure 12. Dundee. ATCO Situational Awareness Display (ASAD)

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

B.2.2.2. Tracks with history plots. By highlighting a particular target its previous track can be displayed.

Figure 13. Dundee. History plots. Left: from MLAT. Right: from ADS-B. Aircraft carrying Sky Echo.

B.2.2.3. Background maps. The display can be adjusted to give differing background maps to suit the operator. All of the maps have an overlay (akin to a conventional PSR video map) which displays significant IFR and VFR features; VFR/IFR reporting points (black circle with white triangle), Aerodrome Traffic Zone boundary (not just Dundee but other local airfields; Perth, Leuchars, etc.), ILS let-down area, NDB locator and RNAV approach paths for both runways.

The elements of these overlays can be deselected to suit the operator and to declutter the screen when needed.

Figure 14. Dundee. Example of background map used

B.2.2.4. Circuit pattern(s). There is no specific overlay for the Dundee circuit, as it was not deemed necessary. The activity of an aircraft within the circuit can be monitored however as indicated by the broad white track shown on the image above.

B.2.2.5. No-fly areas, noise sensitive areas, other restricted areas. As can be seen above, the map overlay shows the boundaries of all restricted areas; the Leuchars MATZ/ATZ, Errol Parachute zone, Danger Areas D604 and D612 as well as the boundaries of CAS in the surrounding area.

B.2.2.6. Terrain.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

The background map ‘Stamen Terrain’ when selected gives a graphical overview of the local terrain.

Figure 15. Dundee. Terrain background map.

B.2.2.7. Runway and taxiway display, including holding points. Each of the background maps can be zoomed-in to see the mapped outline of the runway and taxiways.

B.2.3 Control room display position The ASAD, black screen to the left of the ATCO, in situ in the VCR at Dundee. The runway can be seen in the background with the RWY27 threshold in the upper left of the image.

Screen shots can be created, on the spot and printed to the adjacent printer. More detailed analysis can also be obtained from the Avionix system.

Figure 16. Dundee Visual Control Room display position

B.2.4 Assessment of use.

B.2.4.1. General The ASAD has proved to be a very functional piece of equipment and significantly improved the safe and efficient operation at Dundee. The ability to ‘see’ aircraft on the display ahead of them being transferred to the unit is of great importance as it provides ATCOs with information that cannot be gained only by a verbal estimated time of arrival. It permits ATCOs to evaluate the de-confliction measures they have put in place to

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

permit the integration of arriving and departing aircraft into the traffic pattern and make adjustments when necessary.

Whilst it cannot be used to provide specific traffic information, it does assist in reducing RT workload, as ATCOs can target their generic traffic information in a more productive fashion.

In the past ATCOs could only go by what they were being told by the local traffic and had to issue traffic information based on that (i.e. ‘five aircraft operating to the Northeast’ because that is where they said they would be). Now ATCOs can look at the display and see that those five aircraft are in fact now operating to the Northwest and do not present traffic to a departure going to the Northeast, negating the need to provide the traffic information call.

B.2.4.2. Surveillance accuracy MLAT display accuracy had been an issue at the start of the trial phase (time lag on MLAT targets was in the region of 1 minute at times) however this has been addressed by Avionix and, whilst there remains a small lag (approximately 10 seconds), it is not considered detrimental to providing ATCOs with improved situational awareness.

ADS-B has been accurate throughout, aircraft can been seen both in the air and on the ground with their positions pinpointed exactly on the ASAD maps (this includes Dundee, Perth, Leuchars and Errol).

FLARM has been equally accurate however targets only show when above approximately 200ft. The ability to see FLARM targets has raised unit awareness of the number of gliders frequenting the local airspace beyond the normal areas around Portmoak and Aboyne.

The trial also tested the use of ADS-B units in vehicles on the aerodrome and this showed that they could be accurately tracked across the whole of the airfield.

B.2.4.3. Example The display photo shows the activity of a SkyEcho equipped flexwing microlight (GDTAR) at Perth during one sortie. The aircraft can be seen to taxi out from the hangar area (a white zig-zag line centre of the map) get airborne from RWY03 and fly in the local area (long continuous yellow line) before returning to Perth, via an overhead join, to conduct several ‘touch and go’s’ again on RWY03 (the intermittent white line).

Figure 17. Dundee. Surveillance display example. B.2.5 Reasons for the Dundee trial

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

B.2.5.1. Fatal accident One of the main reasons for the ASAD trial was in response to the AAIB report on the fatal accident at Dundee involving BE55 GRICK. One of the observations made by the AAIB indicated that the provision of some form of surveillance method might have allowed the Duty ATCO to have identified the pilot’s navigational error (which was identified as the root cause) and the accident could have been averted. Certainly our experience with the ASAD to date would support that hypothesis.

B.2.5.2. Recent example of use to prevent an accident In August 2018, an inbound C182 attempting an RNAV procedure to RWY09 looked to be incorrectly positioned to make a successful landing in the poor weather conditions. North of the extended centreline maintaining a descending track towards rapidly rising terrain, the ATCO became concerned (as did the Leuchars LARS ATCO who was also monitoring the approach on their PSR) and directed the pilot to go around. They complied and, obviously becoming aware that they were not suitably trained or equipped to continue with an IFR approach into Dundee, opted to divert to Humberside.

The photo shows plotted MLAT data extracted by Avionix on that particular aircraft. The ‘X’ indicates the position the aircraft was in at the point that the go-around instruction was given. Though height information is not shown on the plot the aircraft was indicating 600ft at that point with a less than 500ft cloud base; directly ahead of the aircraft is Ninewells Hospital with adjacent buildings (518ft amsl) and just beyond Dundee Law with masts to 635ft. The ASAD provided the required additional situational awareness to prevent a potentially serious or even fatal occurrence.

Figure 18. Dundee. Recent example of ASAD use to prevent an accident.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

B.3 Barton visit (2018-12-16) B.3.1 Introduction. GAINS and A4A visited Manchester Barton aerodrome in December 2018 to see the operation of the uAvionix surveillance system that is currently being trialled there for Airspace4All (A4A)16. There was a further visit in June 2019 when there was an attempt to hold a formal GAINS demo at Barton. Unfortunately, this was prevented by bad weather.

This section summarises the uAvionix system which is described in detail in the A4A Trials Safety Plan.17, together with the display capability.

B.3.1.1. Context The aim of the A4A trial is to gather evidence to enable the CAA to assess the capability of the low cost ADS-B traffic display technology as deployed at Barton and to give consideration to policy change authorising use of ADS-B real-time traffic displays by GA ATS units. Additionally, it is hoped this trial will encourage further development of technology to support ATS provision at UK GA airfields.

B.3.1.2. Location and service The Barton ATZ abuts the Manchester CTR, and is wholly in Class G under the Manchester CTA (2000ft). Barton ATS is licensed to provide an Aerodrome Flight Information Service (AFIS). The ADS-B service will be provided in the vicinity of the aerodrome, where vicinity is defined as being coincident with the unit's Designated Operational Coverage for RT purposes (typically 10nm radius and up to 3000ft or the base of controlled airspace, whichever is lower). The trials equipment provides a situational awareness tool (which is not to be used to provide any form of Air Traffic Control service).

Figure 19. Barton FISO position and Control Tower

B.3.2 uAvionix system summary.

16 https://airspace4all.org/projects/ec/ec-detail/ 17https://airspace4all.org/wp-content/docs/20181012-Airspace4All-GA-Airfields-ATS-ADS-B-Traffic-Display- Trial-Safety-Plan-V1.0.pdf

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

The Barton system consists of a standalone uAvionix PingStation receiver plus Virtual Radar Server display software. This provides real time traffic position data, including altitude, based on aircraft ADS- B broadcasts with no built-in delay. The system does not support MLAT, and does not provide a view of Mode A, C or S traffic. The data is presented to ATS staff on a conventional Microsoft Windows PC running Virtual Radar Server. Filters can be set in the VRS software to deactivate the display of aircraft overflying at high level that do not affect the airfield traffic. A track recording facility has been implemented, that allows playback in real time of the display picture.

B.3.3 Barton Display The map background is based on Google Maps. Airspace boundaries and VRPs are shown on the display. The circuit pattern is not shown on the display, as this is not deemed necessary.

The display can be zoomed-in to focus on a smaller area, e.g. just the airfield to aid situational awareness of aircraft ground movements.

Figure 20. Barton display capabilities.

Figure 21. Barton dual display recently implemented. Left: designated coverage. Right: ATZ.

To the display has been

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

• added Visual Reference Point locations • added 10 nautical mile range ring to give an appreciation of scale. • added trails (history tracks) to better emphasise aircraft track. • added split screen providing focused ATZ view and reduce ‘clutter’ • Filtered out overflying aircraft above 5500ft to further reduce ‘clutter’.

B.3.4 Assessment of use. Assessment of use is a continuous process with reports prepared on a regular basis. Surveillance positional accuracy is very good.

B.3.5 Motivations for the Barton trial

B.3.5.1. Motivation The motivation for the trial was that:

• there is higher risk of GA MAC at/around airfields [5]. • ADS-B Traffic Displays are now available at a price point that is affordable to GA airfields • an ADS-B Traffic Display could likely, safely, enhance ATS situational awareness that could increase safety for GA pilots • yet, current regulations do not allow GA airfield ATS to use an ADS-B Traffic Display

B.3.5.2. Recent example of use to prevent an ATZ infringement (Identities changed to protect privacy.) Infringement of EG** ATZ prevented by warning ADS-B equipped aircraft (GEFGH), that it was approaching the ATZ. This aircraft had transited the CTR, exiting the CTR in the vicinity of *(town), and began tracking towards the ATZ with no communications established. As the aircraft reached * I proactively called GEFGH, advised that it was about to enter the ATZ and asked if he was inbound. G-EFGH entered an orbit whilst aerodrome information and traffic information was passed. Had this aircraft not had ADS-B then it would have likely entered the ATZ without aerodrome information. B.4 Lee-on-Solent. Eye Tracking Equipment – Familiarisation (30-03-2019) (See also Appendix K ) Four training aircraft at Lee-on-Solent were equipped with PlaneSight units so as to be visible to the GAINS aircraft. A GAINS ground surveillance receiver and display was also placed at the airfield. Trial fitment to the pilots of the eye tracking equipment was done, to judge the wearability during trial flights. A short familiarisation flight was made with the human factors experts on-board, so they could better understand the aircraft environment for the eye tracking measurements. This was in preparation for use of the equipment at subsequent GAINS demos. However, due to personnel changes at Bournemouth University, it became no longer possible to carry out these investigations.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Appendix C Stapleford Demo (4th December 2018) C.1 General The Stapleford demo was originally planned for 3rd December. However, bad weather prevented flying on that day.

An attempt was made to run the demo on 4th December but, due to the change of date, several of the volunteer pilots were unable to take part. In the end only two aircraft were available. This was not enough for a demonstration as originally planned but, instead, the pilots were invited to carry out a limited flight, to assess the visibility that each aircraft had of the other. There was, in addition, a Stapleford Flying School a/c equipped with CAP1391 ADS-B-OUT flying for some of the time and a Cirrus (N223KB) that was visible on SkyEcho.

There were also problems with the GAINS ground equipment. Although overflying commercial a/c were visible, CAP1391 a/c were not visible. However, a ground based SkyEcho was receiving and displaying traffic on a tablet running SkyDemon. (Post demo note. The problem was traced to an incorrect setting in the RTH80 device, which was subsequently corrected.) C.2 Demonstration Environment C.2.1 Weather A formal record of the Stapleford weather was not made. It is sufficient to note heavy rain on 3rd December that totally prevented GA VFR flying.

C.2.2 Control service Stapleford has an AGC Service, with an operations room that overlooks the apron and the main runway. A Flight Radar24 display was in use, with direct reception and display (not via the FR24 server). C.3 Debrief summary Most comments were about the cockpit equipment and its capability instead of operational usage, which could not be exercised as intended due to the low number of ADS-B equipped aircraft flying. PlaneSight was the only CAP1391 EC equipment flying, however, participants had some knowledge of other EC equipment.

C.3.1 General comments CAA should encourage ADS-B on 1090MHz and discourage other forms of ADS-B. The opinion was expressed that there are too many ADS-B standards.

C.3.2 PlaneSight comments • Display too small • Transmit default should be to “on”. o GAINS comment. The PlaneSight unit is designed such that if there is a loss of power, the default transmission status for ADS-B-OUT is “off”. This was a NATS requirement for the preceding LPAT equipment. This means that when power is interrupted or

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

switched off for engine start, the ADS-B transmission must be re-enabled. It is easy to omit the re-enabling step. • Position on coaming was OK. • Wifi connection rather than cabled connection should be used. (As SkyDemon does). o GAINS comment. Although the unit is fairly compact, it partially blocks the pilot’s view outside when placed on the coaming. The position is acceptable but not ideal. If the device were to be connected by wifi to a separate tablet display device (as is the case for e.g. Sky Echo providing data to SkyDemon) the PlaneSight box could be placed more unobtrusively.

C.3.3 Other equipment comments Garmin costs are excessive.

C.3.4 Comments and Recommendations to manufacturers. • The size of the PlaneSight display is too small. A wifi or other connection to a separate display might solve this problem. • Transmit default of PlaneSight should be to “on”. C.4 Ground equipment data recordings Due to the problems with the ground surveillance equipment, as noted above, no data recordings were made. C.5 Aircraft Equipage The table below summarises the ADS-B equipage of all participant aircraft. CAP1391 equipment provided by GAINS is shaded green. Other lower cost EC specific equipment is also shaded. Colour coding is explained in A.6.2.6 above.

Aircraft 1090MHz ADS-B-OUT ADS-B-IN Pressure Aircraft Aircraft Equipment Transponder GPS altitude EC Device Software Display reg type name if used source source

PA28R- GSGAA PlaneSight Integral Integral PlaneSight PlaneSight PlaneSight 180

PA28R- GSGBB PlaneSight Integral Integral PlaneSight PlaneSight PlaneSight 200 Table 5. Stapleford aircraft EC equipage

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

C.6 Pilots Questionnaires Questionnaires were completed by the flight crews of the two aircraft that flew.

C.6.1 GSGAA

C.6.1.1. Equipage ADS-B-IN and ADS-B-OUT by means of PlaneSight.

C.6.1.2. Questionnaire

Demo date Demo airfield Aircraft registration Pilot/Observer name 04.12.2018 Stapleford GSGAA

Time Comments 1036 Taxi out. Saw a/c on L base across in front of us. 1040 Mode C beep, inc @ 200ft (BYYO?) Tecnam. 1053 Tecnam visible in ccton final. Other downwind a/c not on screen. GK sees us, we can see him on take-off. Then (1056) he disappeared, came back, intermittent. 1103 Visible once detected immediate.. GK downwind. 1110 Next approach he disappeared from screen and landed. Nothing seen. No aircraft in test. Giving up.

ABOUT YOU NAME EMAIL mailto:[email protected] PHONE Mobile preferred AIRCRAFT GSGAA Registration & type PA28R 180 ROLE Pilot Observer Pilot flying / Observer

PILOTS AND OBSERVERS Overall Did the cockpit traffic information help your operation for the following? Please explain. Approach to the aerodrome zone; Not enough traffic. Only 1 a/c around, one showed intermittently (GK; the other GAINS aircraft). Awareness of other a/c in the circuit; Gives idea of which way to look. Integration into the circuit traffic flow None shown. ADS-B out is a rare animal.

Did cockpit traffic info help you do the following? Explain how. more easily or rapidly acquire other circuit traffic visually?

know about traffic you would not otherwise have seen?

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Pilot & Observer Workload. Was there a noticeable difference in workload when using the EC device, compared to your previous experience without use of the device? In what way? Without EC device Not a sensible test with only one other a/c. With EC device. Head-up and Head-down? (Display distraction?) Not a sensible test with only one other a/c. ADS-B display device characteristics. Please comment on any or all of the following characteristics. Device type (GAINS Plane Sight, Sky Echo + tablet application, Pilot Aware, Garmin, Trig, etc) GAINS PlaneSight. Display: size, clarity, readability, information displayed, colours used, symbology, more … Display is FAR TOO SMALL. Transmitter ON needs to be the default at power-up. Control of device in flight: Just changing range is OK. If adjustable, range scale used for : Approach to the zone Circuit integration Base and Final

General comments Forward thoughts ().

South East UK and Aberdeen are the only ones with capacity to use ADSB. All airfields could use a PlaneSight ADSB receiver to determine a/c location if all a/c had to have ADSB, which is true of airliners anyway.

There are too many different standards. The worldwide universal standard is ADSB. The UK should be progressing towards use of ADSB exclusively, in jets and GA. Other formats should be discouraged by making ADSB cheap and easy to install.

Powers have to decide whether to mandate one, or multiple, formats. Multi will always be messy.

However, a rethink and redesign of the PlaneSight would be a very useful device.

ADSB-IN receiver. Output via wifi, Bluetooth and wired connections capability in several formats (Garmin, NMEA, etc) Input GPS (Certified to SIL=1?) or could take a feed from another GPS. Static port connection (as I believe ES transponders use pressure altitude, not GPS altitude).

Remote box, portable (battery) or plumbed-in (fixed to a/c) options, no screen.

This box would provide the traffic data for any ATC/FISO/AG unit to be displayed on a standard PC/tablet screen. 80%-90% of pilots use them for aviation navigation applications.

For £300-£400 there would be a huge take up. In fact this is what the PlaneSight should have been designed as in the first place, or certainly after a couple of year’s development, this progression should have been thought through and implemented.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

More sophisticated options (PlaneSight2 with options) • With ADSB out transmitter • With FLARM receiver • With UAT receiver • With PAW receiver.

With ADSB receiving universal perhaps the radar heads could all be turned off. I think this is the way the US are going. Is there a box as I am describing in the US? As ADSB provides a more accurate position and needs no expensive radar heads the need for transponders (Mode A, C, S (non ES)) is reduced. Then a simple ADSB box could be used in place of the transponder (or this could be incorporated in PlaneSight2).

Garmin want $1500 for the 330ES upgrade. Trig provides ES capability as standard, and their cheapest transponder is little more than the Garmin upgrade price. Thus anyone with a non-ES 330 would go for an ADSB-OUT transmitter option in the PlaneSight2. This could be put to Garmin with a request to “reduce their price to $400 and we will recommend it to everyone. Otherwise a standalone box will be available for £250 which will make your non-ES transponders obsolete.”

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

C.6.2 GSGBB

C.6.2.1. Equipage ADS-B-IN and ADS-B-OUT by means of PlaneSight

C.6.2.2. Questionnaire

Demo date Demo airfield Aircraft registration Pilot/Observer name 04.12.2018 Stapleford GSGBB

ABOUT YOU NAME EMAIL PHONE Mobile preferred AIRCRAFT Registration & type ROLE Pilot flying / Observer Pilot

PILOTS AND OBSERVERS Overall Pre demo day. The Project and ADS-B in general 1. Were the objectives of the GAINS Electronic Conspicuity project sufficiently explained? Totally 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Fully understandable unclear Comments

2. Are the objectives useful to General Aviation? Not at all 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Very much so Comments

3. Was ADS-B technology and its usage sufficiently explained? Totally 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Fully understandable unclear Comments Discussion of currently available hardware and technology would have been useful, plus uture (roadmap). Your prior knowledge of ADS-B 4. Do you have prior knowledge of ADS-B for General Aviation usage? (Circle all applicable) a. CAA and NATS web sites and publications. Which ones? b. AOPA web site. c. From magazine and journal articles. Please list. IEEE d. From aviation forums. Which ones? Flyer Forum e. Other sources. Please list. I have messed with RTL-SDR in the past.

GAINS Cockpit equipment (Funke Avionics “Plane Sight”) 5. You have been loaned PlaneSight equipment for use before and during the Demo Day. Please give your first impressions of the equipment. (Please note this is prototype equipment developed for Project use, NOT production quality equipment.) a. Ease of placement in your aircraft. Not easy on PA28 coaming due to windscreen slope.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

b. Setting up (parameter entry etc). OK c. Facilities. OK d. Capability. OK. But could do with audio feed to cockpit audio panel and integration into SkyDemon e. Other comments. Display too small. Poor resolution. ADS-B flying experience 6. Do you have prior experience of ADS-B usage in a GA aircraft? a. Which equipment? No N/A b. As pilot flying / P2 / passenger (circle all applicable). NA c. Comment on general impression of usefulness and performance. NA 7. Have you yet flown with the GAINS PlaneSight equipment? If so, first impressions: a. Ease of operation in flight? Rate 1=Useless to 10=Dead easy. 5 Comments. Tx (1090MH) should switch on automatically rather than via menus. b. Usefulness / performance (to guide visual acquisition) Rate 1=Useless to 10=Very good. 4 Comments. OK with ADSB targets but did not always show Mode S only targets. c. Usefulness / performance (to understand traffic situation) Rate 1=Useless to 10=Very good Comments. Integration with SkyDemon would be better. Also there is audio interference when 1090Tx is on.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Appendix D Brimpton Ground Reception Tests (28th January 2019) D.1 General Because of difficulties with the GAINS ground surveillance equipment at the Stapleford demo on 4th December, a day of ground reception tests was carried out at Brimpton. Several airborne devices (PlaneSight 20W, PlaneSight 5W, SkyEcho1 and SkyEcho2) were flown on brief sorties to examine the reception range at all aspects of the aircraft to the ground station. This showed that all the devices flown were detected at a similar range, suitable for operations in and near the aerodrome, which is the operating scenario of the GAINS surveillance demonstrations. The results of the tests are comprehensively described in “Surveillance Data Recordings and Analysis”. GAINS Deliverable D4.5 [10]. D.2 Demonstration Environment D.2.1 Weather Clear and dry with a moderate cross wind at Brimpton (06/24).

D.2.2 Control service Brimpton is an unlicensed aerodrome with an Air-Ground Radio Communication (AGCS) service, when manned. The aerodrome may be used even when the radio is unmanned. On this occasion the only aircraft flying was Europa GLPFF, so no AGCS was needed. D.3 Ground equipment data recordings D.3.1 Ground Antenna installation The ground antenna was installed with a good view to the north and west of the aerodrome, the area where the test aircraft would fly.

Figure 22. Brimpton antenna installation.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

D.3.2 Trajectory recordings The main purpose of this test was to make recordings of the trajectory data, to establish • Proper operation of the receiver after rectification of the fault at Stapleford; • Range of reception of the CAP1391 devices tested; • The degree to which the orientation of the aircraft relative to the receiver affected the range performance.

Four devices were tested, all of which were used later in the demonstration programme. • PlaneSight 20W transmission power. • PlaneSight 5W transmission power. • SkyEcho1. • SkyEcho2.

Trajectory recordings plotted from the ADS-B data received are shown in Figure 23. They are all fairly similar, showing that, in the particular aircraft used, the combined transmission and reception performance of the devices with the GAINS ground receiver was suitable for the test scenarios.

Figure 23. Chart of trajectories recorded at Brimpton.

Further descriptions of the Brimpton trials are in D3.1, (Ground Equipment Validation Report) section 5 and a detailed analysis in D4.5 (Surveillance Data Recordings and Analysis) para 3.4, which also compares the reception by the GAINS ground receiver to that achieved by the NATS CRISTAL infrastructure. D.4 Airborne installation To minimise differences in performance caused by different installation position in the aircraft, all devices were installed against the rear wall of the baggage compartment, as shown in the following photographs.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Figure 24. SkyEcho1, SkyEcho2 and PlaneSight cockpit installation in GLPFF. D.5 Discussion It is recognised that a single set of measurements made with one aircraft and one ground antenna installation is at best a rough indication of the combined transmission-reception performance. Nevertheless, it gives a baseline performance indication that should be broadly achievable with the same equipment in other aircraft, so long as reasonable care is taken with the airborne installation. The most important factor is the antenna installation. Guidelines from antenna experts are that • The antenna should be placed externally if possible and oriented vertically. • If not possible to be placed externally, the antenna should be placed to have a reasonable forward view. • The antenna should, as far as possible, not be placed so that it is close behind pilot or passenger, or so that it is too close to metallic parts of the aircraft, principally the engine.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Appendix E Duxford Demo (7th April 2019) E.1 General The Duxford demo took place in early April, with the hope of getting better weather than at Stapleford and more flexibility in timing due to a longer period of daylight. The ground equipment was set up the day before the demo and checked out against local ADS-B equipped GA aircraft. It should be noted that the GAINS ground equipment was NOT used operationally, because the approval mechanism for this was too onerous and lengthy. However, the equipment was set up so that FISOs not operating were able to assess the display information and presentation. A total of 5 fixed wing aircraft and one helicopter took part. E.2 Demonstration Environment E.2.1 Weather Although the weather was not suitable in the morning, the forecast was accurate and the weather improved sufficiently for the demo to start in the early afternoon. The detailed information collected and analysis is given below.

E.2.2 Control Service Duxford operates with a Flight Information Service. E.3 Debrief summary E.3.1 General comments The visibility during the flying period was fairly poor, although it gradually improved. Both pilots and FISO observers agreed that the ADS-B indications in the cockpit display and ground display were helpful in locating other aircraft visually. Despite the frequent use of the display to help locate other aircraft, the general feeling was that this did not induce too much “head down” flying.

The general opinion was that 99% of pilots will balance attention inside and outside the cockpit properly; although a few will not do so. Focus of attention inside and outside should be included in operational guidelines and instructions for using EC devices in the cockpit.

There was an unexpected effect of additional situation awareness as provided by the cockpit equipment. Although the ADS-B data usually helped to locate the other aircraft, there was also additional tension/concern if the other aircraft was not found visually yet was indicated to be fairly close.

A valuable example of the use of cockpit EC in poor visibility was reported below (Error! Reference source not found.) by the pilot of GSUAA.

In the poor VMC during the demo, pilots felt that when it was not possible to see other aircraft visually, the positional indication on the device display was helpful when a tablet was being used, but less helpful with the PlaneSight integral display, because of its small screen size.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

The equipment flown has various types of audio alert. PlaneSight gives a warning tone (not an effective attention getter in a noisy cockpit); other devices such as Pilot Aware provide a synthesised traffic call- out. Although the traffic call-out is useful en-route, it was felt this is not true in the circuit, because the call-out is triggered too frequently, creating audio confusion/overload instead of assistance.

In a similar vein, it was felt that EC information was more distracting than useful when on base and especially when on final, when concentration should be entirely on speed and runway ahead to ensure a stable approach.

A couple of pilots provided additional information a few days after the Duxford demo, based on further reflection. These additional comments (some quite lengthy) are included in the Pilot Questionnaires section below (E.6).

The display of aircraft on the ground should be inhibited in some way. This comment came from the FISOs but may better be addressed by the equipment manufacturers.

E.3.2 PlaneSight comments • The most frequent comment was that the PlaneSight screen is too small. Some of the other comments stem from the screen size. • The grey font used occasionally is problematic – difficult to read. • Even with the use of 0.5 mile range scale: the display is still too cluttered in the busy circuit environment. • It was usually not possible to understand the direction of aircraft from the PlaneSight display. • Traffic awareness was possible in the conventional (non EC) environment through RT and visual acquisition. However, it was difficult to correlate with the EC display as ID (call sign) information was missing from the PlaneSight display – and would have cluttered the display too much if it had been provided.

E.3.3 SkyDemon comments • Sky Demon has good online support to understand its capabilities and options. However, it can be difficult to know how to enable some facilities without rather extensive exploration on the ground. • Specifically, the option to show call-signs should have the default to “on”, as this facility is very useful in the circuit environment to correlate the traffic display with RT calls.

E.3.4 Pilot Aware comments • PAW audio alerts are too distracting in the aerodrome environment, because they are too frequent.

E.3.5 ADS-B Ground display equipment comments • Set up: display should be oriented to align with the Out-The-Window view, to make correlation of display and visual observation easier. • The display of aircraft on the ground should be inhibited in some way. (This comment may better be addressed to the ADS-B-OUT transmission devices).

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

E.3.6 Comments and Recommendations to manufacturers. All devices: consider ways of reducing audio alerts when in the aerodrome circuit. E.g. • a simple way to cancel audio alerts manually before joining the aerodrome traffic circuit; • auto detection of being in an ATZ at circuit operational height to cause auto reduction of alerts, for example by adjustment of the alerting parameters. SkyDemon: • the option to show call-signs should have the default to “on”, as this facility is very useful in the circuit environment to correlate the traffic display with RT calls. All devices: • Ensure that operational instructions and guidelines that accompany the EC equipment emphasise the that “eyes outside” should remain the normal flying mode and that the equipment functional purpose is “directed visual acquisition” • Inhibit transmission from aircraft on the ground, as it potentially can cause confusion and unnecessary alerts. E.4 Ground equipment data recordings The GAINS equipment was installed in the back of the VCR, not visible by the FISOs operating but within easy earshot of the voice communications. Off-duty FISOs observed the display and completed questionnaires. See below. The trajectories recorded for the event as a whole are shown below.. Good coverage of the local area and Duxford ATZ was achieved. Individual aircraft trajectories are given in [10].

Figure 25. Duxford - all trajectories recorded. E.5 Aircraft equipage The table below summarises the ADS-B equipage of all participant aircraft. CAP1391 equipment provided by GAINS is shaded green. Other lower cost EC specific equipment is also shaded. Colour coding is explained in A.6.2.6 above.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Aircraft 1090MHz ADS-B-OUT ADS-B-IN Aircraft Pressure Aircraft Equipment Transponder GPS Equipment registrat altitude Software Display type name if used source name ion source NANO Avidyne Tablet + audio PA28R- Encoder Pilot Aware GSUAA Trig TT31 IFD440 SkyDemon alerts via 180 SSD120- Classic GPS intercom 30N Cessna GSUBB PlaneSight Integral Integral PlaneSight PlaneSight PlaneSight 172L G500H Air Data Hughes GTN750 and GSUCC GTX 345 Computer GTN750 GTX 345 500 G500H (Serial data) GSUDD PA28-161 PlaneSight Integral Integral PlaneSight PlaneSight PlaneSight Grumman GSUEE PlaneSight Integral Integral PlaneSight PlaneSight PlaneSight AA-1 DHC-1 Trig Trig 21 Mode GSUFF CHIPMUN TN72 PlaneSight PlaneSight PlaneSight S xponder K 22 GPS Table 6. Duxford aircraft EC equipage.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

E.6 Pilot Questionnaires E.6.1 GSUAA Equipage is given in E.5 above.

E.6.1.1. Questionnaire Demo date Demo airfield Aircraft registration Pilot/Observer name 08.04.2019 Duxford GSUAA

Time Comments 1345 Departure. Close to GSUBB (based on ADSB, negative visual) 4nm final join. Negative visual on other traffic but could see downwind a/c on ADSB T+G. Head on (according to ADSB) with GSUDD on crosswind leg. Take avoiding action (climbing left turn) then required visual contact – would have been close if no avoiding action taken.

ABOUT YOU NAME EMAIL PHONE Mobile preferred AIRCRAFT Registration & type GSUAA P28R 180 ROLE Pilot flying / Observer Pilot flying

PILOTS AND OBSERVERS Overall Did the cockpit traffic information help your operation for the following? Please explain. Approach to the aerodrome zone; Yes. In the poor visibility it was invaluable having an idea where at least some of the a/c were. Awareness of other a/c in the circuit;

Integration into the circuit traffic flow

Did cockpit traffic info help you do the following? Explain how. more easily or rapidly acquire other circuit traffic visually? Difficult to say. I have limited experience of flying in such visibility. know about traffic you would not otherwise have seen? Absolutely.

Pilot & Observer Workload. Was there a noticeable difference in workload when using the EC device, compared to your previous experience without use of the device? In what way? Without EC device

With EC device. Head-up and Head-down? (Display distraction?) Again, difficult to compare – fairly large amount of head downtime but I believe that was due to the poor visibility more than anything else. ADS-B display device characteristics. Please comment on any or all of the following characteristics. Device type (GAINS Plane Sight, Sky Echo + tablet application, Pilot Aware, Garmin, Trig, etc)

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Display: size, clarity, readability, information displayed, colours used, symbology, more … SkyDemon could show last 2 letters of call sign. Easier to correlate with RT calls. Control of device in flight:

If adjustable, range scale used for : Approach to the zone Circuit integration Base and Final

Additional comment I also wanted to mention, I'd said in my notes that it would be helpful if SkyDemon showed call-signs - it turns out from some fiddling that it does, but in a previous update they've made it an option that defaults to off, which I hadn't noticed, thus they were hidden for me. As such I suppose my feedback should be that the option should default to on ;)

E.6.1.2. GSUAA close encounter

On 08/04/2019 17:07, Pilot wrote: I thought while it was fresh in my head I'd give you a narrative of my 'close encounter' earlier today in GSUAA to expand on what was on the form. I'll see what my GoPro captured and send over anything that could be of use later on in the week.

I had initially departed to the West, and then rejoined on a 4nm final. From there, I did a touch and go, intending to remain in the circuit for another T&G to then depart further.

During the climb out, I heard from the RT that GSUDD would be joining downwind from the East. As I levelled off at 1000' on crosswind, I noticed from the SkyDemon display (fed by PilotAware) that GSUDD was pretty much dead ahead of me, routing straight towards me (i.e. opposite the crosswind leg, which wasn't where I was expecting an aircraft joining downwind to be). After a further visual lookout I couldn't see it, so decided based on the indicated proximity to take avoiding action (non- standard to the left given I expected GSUDD to be turning downwind thus a right turn would potentially bring us closer). After an ~45 degree turn, I realised we still appeared on the display to be closing, so decided to initiate a full power climb.

As I began to climb, I then saw visually out the right window GSUDD turning downwind, so stopped the climb, and positioned myself behind. At this point I decided to make it a full stop as I was a little rattled.

I would be interested to see from your ground replay how close we actually got, as had the other aircraft not had ADS-B, I suspect I’d have been filing an airprox at best, and at the worst...

Analysis of encounter Data of GSUAA and GSUDD was put into an Excel sheet. Positions were synchronized by clock time. Lateral distances of the two were calculated to find the smallest value. In the air the closest distance was 1065 metres at 12:56:11 at a very similar level (148ft difference). The manoeuvre of GSUAA as yellow track in relation to the blue track of GSUDD is shown.

With both aircraft flying at about 100kt, the closing speed would be roughly 100m/sec, giving a time to closest point of approach of about 10-11 seconds, if neither aircraft had manoeuvred.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Figure 26. Duxford demonstration. Encounter of GSUAA and GSUDD.

Pilot follow-up comment. I think the incident does show the value of EC, in that if you look at my original track before the left turn it appears we would have got significantly closer had I not been aware they were there and just continued my normal crosswind leg. With the poor visibility that day I do wonder when (or perhaps even if!) I would have seen them otherwise (particularly as it was somewhere I would not normally be expecting to encounter another aircraft - I'd be looking left for aircraft joining downwind, and right for aircraft already in the circuit, but not expecting anybody straight ahead against the crosswind leg).

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

E.6.2 GSUBB

E.6.2.1. Equipage Equipage is given in E.5 above.

E.6.2.2. Questionnaire Demo date Demo airfield Aircraft registration Pilot/Observer name 08.04.2019 Duxford GSUBB

Time Comments 1155Z to EGMA to EGSU 06. Rwy not visible at 2nm. 1205 GSUCC seen at 1nm. Pilot workload=5. 1235 Useful deconfliction 2nm. Pilot workload=5. 1256 T&G. 1300 Inbound Chipmunk (GSUFF) not shown. Pilot workload=5 1315 Acquisition of other a/c preceded request. General Above 1500 ft was IMC. Marginal VMC at 1000ft but no other aircraft visual at any time. P1 comment: not very helpful in marginal vis solo but an order of magnitude better with a P2 – screen too small. Obs comment. Need to set height filters. Too much traffic from Stansted and Luton approaches. Range setting not intuitive – turn clockwise to reduce range. Could we use auto range? Reduce range of GPS when terrain clearance < 2000ft? “Ground clutter” adds confirmation on approach and departure.

ABOUT YOU NAME

PHONE Mobile preferred AIRCRAFT GSUBB C172 Registration & type ROLE Pilot Observer Pilot flying / Observer

PILOTS AND OBSERVERS Overall Did the cockpit traffic information help your operation for the following? Please explain. Approach to the aerodrome zone; (Pilot) No. Focus on flying and listening out due to poor vis (3km). (Obs) Awareness and integration helpful but only with observer in very poor vis. Occasionally lost other a/c in final. Antenna compromised? Awareness of other a/c in the circuit;

Integration into the circuit traffic flow

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Did cockpit traffic info help you do the following? Explain how. more easily or rapidly acquire other circuit traffic visually? (Pilot) No (Obs) Other traffic not seen in marginal visibility. know about traffic you would not otherwise have seen? (Both) Yes

Pilot & Observer Workload. Was there a noticeable difference in workload when using the EC device, compared to your previous experience without use of the device? In what way? Without EC device No P1 was effectively IMC for most of the flight. With EC device. Head-up and Head-down? (Display distraction?) (Pilot) EC device increased workload. Screen is too small. (Obs) P1 too busy. Observer able to warn of conflict + circuit traffic.

ADS-B display device characteristics. Please comment on any or all of the following characteristics. Device type (GAINS Plane Sight, Sky Echo + tablet application, Pilot Aware, Garmin, Trig, etc) Planesight. Display: size, clarity, readability, information displayed, colours used, symbology, more … Display is too small. Needs to be mapped to another device such as tablet/Skydemon. Control of device in flight: Observer comment. Need to set height filters. Too much traffic from Stansted and Luton approaches. Range setting not intuitive – turn clockwise to reduce range. Could we use auto range? Reduce range of GPS when terrain clearance < 2000ft? If adjustable, range scale used for : Approach to the zone Circuit integration Base and Final OK OK OK eventually turned knob the right way!

Additional comments. (observer) Many thanks for an interesting day! It became more interesting when we had a partial ignition failure on the way home, so I spent today on trains. Fortunately the time wasn't wasted as I digested yesterday's experience and I hope I have regurgitated something useful - diagrams attached.

Chief problem was an awful lot of information of varying relevance in a small space. As observer I found I was interpreting and translating into the sort of commentary that you would get from a traffic service. I don't think we made visual contact with any of the targets even though the vis was marginal VMC and certainly within IR(R) limits in the circuit, so the kit is potentially much more useful than just "where to look" in scud or haze.

(pilot) commented that threat proximity should be calculable in terms of time to conflict rather than just distance and range as the kit is tracking targets in 4 dimensions every second or so from 16 miles. A 152 a mile behind in the circuit isn't a threat, but a 737 at 10 miles level and crossing, is.

So I've proposed a greatly simplified display suitable for P1 use. The key is that we are only concerned with potential convergence, so anything more than, say , 1000 ft vertically is ignored unless it is climbing or descending towards our track, and we take speed into account so a descending balloon or thermalling glider at 1 mile has the same threat level as a jet at 16 miles.

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Next is to display on a clock face, with just 12 angle positions, threats identified as 3 minutes (blue) , 1 minute (yellow) or 20 seconds (red), with ascending or descending triangles, or rectangles for "level" (say +/- 150 ft). I've also included a possible "imminent" flash.

Final idea occurred on the train home: if we reduce the data to threat only, it would very easy to replace me entirely with a voice synthesiser, into the intercom circuit.

Diagrams attached, criticism or dismissal welcome!

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

100

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Observer additional comments. Index

• Introduction • Scope • GAINS Project Trial 8th April 2019 @ Duxford • Internal (Cockpit mounted) Aerials • Situational Awareness • Bearingless Targets • Wireless Connectivity • Pilot Interface • Acoustic Alerts • External Aerials • The Use Of License Free Spectrum • 1090 MHz Spectrum Capacity • 1090 MHz Transmitter

Introduction This document was written by Pilot for Bob Darby of A.O.P.A The author Pilot was the pilot of G AZUM a C172 that took part in the GAINS trial at Duxford on the 8th April 2019. Observer was the observer on the flights.

GSUBB departed Duxford on runway 06 and flew 4 to 5 miles North East of Duxford at a height of up to 1500ft and then returned to the circuit for a touch and go landing before departing to the north east again at a maximum range of five miles at a height up to 1500 ft before returning to Duxford for a full stop landing.

Scope The scope of the document is to: a)Provide feedback on the GAINS trial at Duxford that took place on the 8th April 2019 b)To provide feedback on the equipment used during the GAINS Trial. c)Provide general comments and thoughts on: i) ADS B In/Out ii)Associated equipment iii)Pilot Interface iv)Perceived Issues/Concerns

GAINS Project Trial 8th April 2019 @ Duxford GSUBB departed from it home base at Fowlmere for the flight to Duxford with the trial equipment (ADS B In/Out) fitted and working (flight time < 7 minutes).

As GSUBB approached runway 06 at Duxford there was helicopter traffic in bound which was also taking part in the GAINS trial and equipped with ADS B In/Out.

GSUBB did not detect the helicopter and the author understands that the helicopter did not detect GSUBB: reason unknown.

101

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

During the trial GSUBB did detect other traffic but the author is not aware if other traffic detected GSUBB or if GSUBB was detected by equipment on the ground.

Feedback on the device used: a)The display is too small to have much value for single crew operation. The author feels that It would take too long to read and interpret in VFR conditions and in IMC it would not really be possible to allocate the necessary time to read and interpret the display.

Head down time needs to be at a minimum. b)The height of the device above the instrument panel is too great from the perspective of obstructing the forward view. The author believes that anything on top of the instrument panel should have a maximum height of 10 mm or less. c)The author comments that the use of colour on the display would be of little value to colour blind pilots. d)The equipment did not appear to be able to detect bearing less targets (Mode C). The author feels that if ADS B out is not to be mandated this must be a requirement. e)The equipment did not appear to provide acoustic warnings. A useful feature to have in the view of the author. f)The equipment did not wirelessly connect to other devices and the author feels that this is a serious limitation and prevents the data being shared. The authors view is that it should be possible to integrate traffic data on products like Skydemon and be able to provide a remote “radar display” would also be useful allowing other crew members (perhaps in the back seat) to monitor traffic and provide the pilot with additional situational awareness particularly at times of high pilot work load. g)The equipment uses 10 watts of power and employs cockpit mounted aerials please see cockpit aerial comments below. The author believes the optimum performance would be obtained by the use of an external aerial.

It may be the use of internal aerials that precluded the detection of traffic on Uniform Mike’s arrival at Duxford noted above. h)If internal aerials are to be used it might be useful to have a method of disabling ADS B out see internal aerials below. i)The author did not like the controls on the unit a felt that the User interface could be improved.

Internal (Cockpit mounted) Aerials The author has a number of observations to make as regards the use of cockpit mounted aerials. The use of internal aerials for the use of transmitting creates particular concerns. The author asks are there any health risks having 10 watts of power being radiated in close proximity to the front seat occupants of an aircraft? This radiation is in close proximity to the eyes and heads of the front seat occupants. Would prolonged exposure that might be experienced by instructors increase any health risks?

102

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Some aircraft have a cockpit mounted glide slope aerial ( G AZUM does). Can these glide slope systems operate without issue in the presence of 10 watts of ADS B out? It might be advisable to selects one of the following options if internal ADS B Out aerials are to be used in the presence of cockpit mounted glide slope aerials. a)Seek a declaration of the glide slope receiver manufacture that operating a 10 watt 1090 MHz transmitter in close proximity to the glide slope receiver aerial will have no effect on the glide slope system. b)Switch the ADS B In/Out device off whilst flying a ILS. This would deprive the pilot of ADS B In information. c)Allow ADS B Out to be switched off whilst flying a ILS this would allow the pilot to have access to ADS In information but prevent ADS B Out from adversely affecting the glide slope receiver. d)Fit an external glide slope aerial. e)Fit an external ADS B In/Out aerial (This is the authors preferred option.) It is also worth considering the other effects of cockpit mounted ADS B In/Out aerials and these are: a)The skin of a metal aircraft will tend to act like a Faraday cage and degrade the performance of the aerials and hence the ADS B In/Out system. b)Some non metallic materials are not totally transmissive to RF energy and hence may attenuate the signal and degrade the ADS B In/Out system performance. c)The bags of water (Pilots & Passengers) carried by aircraft are likely to degrade cockpit mounted ADS B In/Out aerial performance (Polar diagrams) and as a result will degrade the ADS B In/Out system performance.

Situational Awareness The traffic within the selected area will be displayed. There should also be a THREAT detection system. Threats are based on how long it will take conflicting traffic to arrive. For example: Case 1: traffic 11 nm away closing at 500 kts will arrive In 79.2 seconds. Case 2: traffic 1 nm away closing at 5 kts will arrive in 12 minutes. Clearly case1 is a greater threat despite being 11 times as far away. Consider if range filters have been applied at 10 miles the traffic coming at 500 kts closure would not be showing intially. This suggest that threat detection should not be constrained by USER defined filters. If the threat is beyond the current user defined range then perhaps an arrow pointing in the direction that the threat is coming from would be useful.

Bearingless Targets If ADS B Out is not to be mandated the detection of transponder Mode C transmissions would be a good “string” to have on the“safety bow”. This would provide a bearing less target. It is possible to detect the bearing of such a transmission but the process is complex. However an estimate of range can be made based on signal strength. If range is to be estimated on signal strength then an external aerial would be the best option as it would eliminate the variables associated with cockpit mounted aerials which would introduce variability into the range estimation process.

103

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Wireless Connectivity The ADS B In/Out system should in the authors view be capable of wirelessly connecting with at least four other devices as a minimum.

Pilot Interface The author envisages three ways for the ADS B In/Out to interface with the pilot. a)Acoustically b)Display Screen c)LED annunciator panel.

The acoustic interface is described below. Display screen would be on a tablet or similar device. The data would be displayed as an overlay on third party software such as SkyDemon or as a pseudo “Radar Display” The LED annunciator panel would be placed in the pilot’s eye line so she/he could have a heads up view of the threats to the aircraft. Consideration should be given to the presentation of information to a pilot flying at night. A useful feature for club and group aircraft would be if the USER configuration could be down loaded from the pilot’s device so the User configuration for a specific pilot can be setup at the touch of a button. This means that each pilot would get what the pilot is expecting in terms of system behaviour.

Acoustic Alerts The author believes that any audio should be “mixed” at the headphone(s). Any audio that is fed into the aircraft system is likely to be lost if the tx key is pressed or receiver squelch lifts. The author believes that audio notifications should be USER defined in terms of if they are present or not. a)Ping Pong attention grabbing on selected messages. b)Ping Pong plus verbal alert message on selected message c)No Ping Pong just a Verbal alert message on selected messages

On the highest level of threat to the aircraft perhaps the acoustic alert should not be USER maskable?

External Aerials External aerials should be installed by engineers with the required skills and authorisation. Aerials should be located at least half a wave length at 1090 MHz from any aircraft structure. If aerials are to be mounted in the proximity of other aerials the distance between aerials needs to be half a wavelength of the lowest frequency. For example a comm aerial does not operate below 118 MHz so the spacing would be half wavelength at 118 MHz. Some aerials require a ground plane. This might be an issue for non metallic aircraft. It might be possible to use a aerial that does not require a ground plane. Polar diagram: whatever the performance of an external aerial will be superior to cockpit mounted aerials. The Use Of License Free Spectrum The author has a number of concerns associated with the use of licence free spectrum for aviation safety use.

104

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

It is low power less than one watt. This coupled with cockpit mounted aerials will limit the system performance. . It is possible that other Users might also be using the spectrum which could result in interference and prevent detection of other aviation traffic. The radio horizon increases dramatically as an aircraft climbs exposing airborne systems to even greater risk of interference from other Users of the spectrum. 1090 MHz Spectrum Capacity The author asks has any consideration been given to the number of USERS sending AFS B out there can be in given unit of “physical space”? The number of USERS is finite and as saturation is approached there are likely to be “collisions” between ADS B Out and Mode A/C/S broadcasts.

1090 MHz Transmitter It is possible to purchase a 1090 MHz receiver as a COTS (Commercial Off the Shelf) product. At the present time the author believes that there is no such COTS device for 1090 MHz transmitter that the CAA will accept and this is a hazard in the view of the author for the development of cost effective ADS B In/Out systems. The author believes that this should be addressed as a matter of urgency so there is a 1090 MHz “block” available for all innovators to use.

105

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

E.6.3 GSUDD

E.6.3.1. Equipage Equipage is given in E.5 above.

E.6.3.2. Questionnaire

Demo date Demo airfield Aircraft registration Pilot/Observer name 08.04.2019 Duxford GBCHO

Time Comments Didn’t see any other a/c while in the air. Downwind, I could see a/c on the ground. It was helpful that when I couldn’t see an a/c ahead of me, ATC were able to tell me where he was. I eventually saw him and went around.

A similar trial in better weather would have proved more helpful. Otherwise, very useful.

ABOUT YOU NAME EMAIL PHONE Mobile preferred AIRCRAFT Registration & type ROLE Pilot flying / Observer Pilot

PILOTS AND OBSERVERS Overall Did the cockpit traffic information help your operation for the following? Please explain. Approach to the aerodrome zone; Yes. But with poor visibility I found myself looking out rather than at the Planesight. Awareness of other a/c in the circuit;

Integration into the circuit traffic flow

Did cockpit traffic info help you do the following? Explain how. more easily or rapidly acquire other circuit traffic visually? No (see above) know about traffic you would not otherwise have seen? No (see above)

106

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

ADS-B display device characteristics. Please comment on any or all of the following characteristics. Device type (GAINS Plane Sight, Sky Echo + tablet application, Pilot Aware, Garmin, Trig, etc) Planesight. Display: size, clarity, readability, information displayed, colours used, symbology, more … Slightly difficult as the screen is very small and distance from pilot made it difficult (plus looking out re visibility). Control of device in flight: Did not make any changes If adjustable, range scale used for : Approach to the zone Circuit integration Base and Final Not known Not known Not known

107

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

E.6.4 GSUEE

E.6.4.1. Equipage Equipage is given in E.5 above.

E.6.4.2. Questionnaire

Demo date Demo airfield Aircraft registration Pilot/Observer name 08.04.2019 Duxford GSUEE

Time Comments 1330 Off blocks. 1335 airborne, climb 2000ft. 1344 Ohead ?? 1500ft. descent 500ft to maintain VMC 1347 Other a/c in circuit not seen visual. 1352 Other a/c in circuit not seen visual. 1356 Acq HO, acq UM when below. 1405 No traffic seen visually but acquired on ADSB 1419 Missed approach, other traffic finishing. 1424 T+G grass followed by bad weather circuit. 1427 Full stop General Estimated visual contact only about 10% of the time. Usually traffic was above or on finals when I was on base (sun behind me). Overall I found it to be a useful aid. Unsure of how much value it would be when integrated with ModeA, C, non-transponder traffic, even if it advised if they were ADSB or not. The display would definitely benefit from either being larger, or integrated into a current NAV program such as SkyDemon.

ABOUT YOU NAME EMAIL PHONE Mobile preferred AIRCRAFT Registration & type GSUEE ROLE Pilot flying / Observer Solo pilot

PILOTS AND OBSERVERS Overall Did the cockpit traffic information help your operation for the following? Please explain. Approach to the aerodrome zone; Yes – once I got used to setting the range sale. Awareness of other a/c in the circuit;

Integration into the circuit traffic flow

Did cockpit traffic info help you do the following? Explain how. more easily or rapidly acquire other circuit traffic visually? Probably due to the poor visibility, most of the time I was not able to see other a/c unless they were above me. know about traffic you would not otherwise have seen?

108

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Combined with ATC it was useful.

Pilot & Observer Workload. Was there a noticeable difference in workload when using the EC device, compared to your previous experience without use of the device? In what way? Without EC device Workload increased only while making notes. With EC device. Head-up and Head-down? (Display distraction?) Display distraction negligible. It was very useful to identify traffic with the poor visibility.

ADS-B display device characteristics. Please comment on any or all of the following characteristics. Device type (GAINS Plane Sight, Sky Echo + tablet application, Pilot Aware, Garmin, Trig, etc) Plane Sight Display: size, clarity, readability, information displayed, colours used, symbology, more … Need to be much brighter and larger. Audio could be louder. Superimposition on SkyDemon would help Control of device in flight: OK, just changing range. If adjustable, range scale used for : Approach to the zone Circuit integration Base and Final 4nm 2nm 1nm

109

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

E.6.5 GSUFF

E.6.5.1. Equipage Equipage is given in E.5 above.

E.6.5.2. Questionnaire

Demo date Demo Aircraft Pilot/Observer name 08.04.2019 airfield registration ] Duxford GSUFF

Time Comments 1055t 1st departure. Unit showed a/c ahead on late crosswind. Quickly saw it turn. Returning it added to concern as was set on 2nm or greater when we were joining downwind as other a/c was flying out. It got quite cluttered & really had to be ignored. Grey setting. Just could not be seen – distracting. Well worth it! Selecting distance helped to find other a/c. It adds concern as turning final when only 1 of 2 could be seen on unit or visually.

ABOUT YOU NAME EMAIL PHONE Mobile preferred AIRCRAFT Registration & type GSUFF Chipmunk ROLE Pilot flying / Observer Observer

PILOTS AND OBSERVERS Overall Did the cockpit traffic information help your operation for the following? Please explain. Approach to the aerodrome zone; Yes. It helped to know where other circuit traffic was. Awareness of other a/c in the circuit;

Integration into the circuit traffic flow

Did cockpit traffic info help you do the following? Explain how. more easily or rapidly acquire other circuit traffic visually? Yes. To know the direction and also if above or below. know about traffic you would not otherwise have seen? It helped know the general location of airfield by the collection of aircraft. Pilot & Observer Workload. Was there a noticeable difference in workload when using the EC device, compared to your previous experience without use of the device? In what way? Without EC device

With EC device. Head-up and Head-down? (Display distraction?) I found it quite good. ADS-B display device characteristics. Please comment on any or all of the following characteristics.

110

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Device type (GAINS Plane Sight, Sky Echo + tablet application, Pilot Aware, Garmin, Trig, etc) Planesight. It was quite good but the grey text was distracting & though the range selection is good, having the wrong setting can be concerning. Just select range: simple and good. Display: size, clarity, readability, information displayed, colours used, symbology, more …

Control of device in flight:

If adjustable, range scale used for : Approach to the zone Circuit integration Base and Final 0.5 to 1nm 2nm to 1nm 0.5nm cluttered and distracting.

111

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

E.6.6 GSUCC

E.6.6.1. Equipage Equipage is given in E.5 above.

E.6.6.2. Questionnaire Demo date Demo airfield Aircraft registration Pilot/Observer name 08.04.2019 Duxford GSUCC

ABOUT YOU NAME EMAIL mailto:[email protected] PHONE Mobile preferred AIRCRAFT Registration & type GSUCC Hughes 500 ROLE Pilot flying / Observer Solo pilot

PILOTS AND OBSERVERS Overall Did the cockpit traffic information help your operation for the following? Please explain. Approach to the aerodrome zone; I could clearly see where other a/c were in the circuit. Awareness of other a/c in the circuit;

Integration into the circuit traffic flow

Did cockpit traffic info help you do the following? Explain how. more easily or rapidly acquire other circuit traffic visually? Easily see other a/c relative to air traffic coordination know about traffic you would not otherwise have seen? Yes as visibility was awful the only way of seeing aircraft was TCAS. Pilot & Observer Workload. Was there a noticeable difference in workload when using the EC device, compared to your previous experience without use of the device? In what way? Without EC device A lot easier to know where a/c are. With EC device. Head-up and Head-down? (Display distraction?) A lot at first but as time goes on no distraction, only benefit. ADS-B display device characteristics. Please comment on any or all of the following characteristics. Device type (GAINS Plane Sight, Sky Echo + tablet application, Pilot Aware, Garmin, Trig, etc) Garmin Display: size, clarity, readability, information displayed, colours used, symbology, more … Garmin display is very good and zoom is great. Control of device in flight: Easy If adjustable, range scale used for : Approach to the zone Circuit integration Base and Final 6 – 2 nm 2nm Auto zoom

112

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

E.7 FISO questionnaires E.7.1 Duxford 1 NAME EMAIL PHONE mobile preferred ROLE FISO Observer

Was the installation / placement of the ground equipment easy or difficult? difficult Not applicable. Equipment was already set up. Easy Did you customize the local overlays delivered with the GAINS equipment to your local aerodrome? no of overlays added or 0 Not applicable. Equipment was already set up. modified If yes, was it difficult to modify the given overlays (add, change the items)? difficult Not applicable. Equipment was already set up. easy Do you have the impression that your traffic situational awareness is improved by the GAINS display? not at all 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 very much Did you use the traffic display to spot nearby aircraft? yes x no Did you use the traffic display to better understand the traffic situation in the traffic pattern or around the aerodrome (to check what was going on)? How many times? more than 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 10 Does the equipment make you look less out the window? yes no x please tick box Did you feel more comfortable when receiving position information of the aircraft in your vicinity? not very 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 relevant supportive If operating equipment live, would you have made calls to aircraft based on the traffic display? more than 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 10 Do you think that update rate and data precision is good enough to assess the traffic situation? not at all 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 perfect Did you notice any major problems with the data depiction on the traffic display? yes no x please tick box if yes, please describe kind of problem Do you have any function or any other recommendation that to improve the GAINS Ground Equipment? Comments: • As FISO operating, I did not have direct access to the display. Information passed by others who had access to display information passed was very useful to my situational awareness of where a/c were (so as) to provide a better traffic information service. Other comments on any of the EC devices and recommendations for further.

113

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Comments: Narrative on any events noted during the demonstration and use of the display to understand the situation and potentially to resolve it. (Continue on next page if necessary.) Comments

114

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

E.7.2 Duxford 2

NAME

EMAIL PHONE mobile preferred ROLE FISO Observer X

Time a/c reg Comments 1242 GSUCC Routed out 06 (to wide circuit to Royston). Disappeared from display. 1245 GSUCC Reappeared at 4nm. 3nm 06, final. 1247 HWKW Lost, reappeared. 1250 Good example: few a/c to join 4nm final. Situation awareness enhanced. 1253 GSUDD Visible to south. 1307 GSUDD+GSUBB GSUDD downwind close in (GSUBB called downwind first). GSUBB downwind outside (probably behind) 1303 GSUBB Wide downwind. Not sure if field in sight. Could say something – e.g. “field in sight”? 1300 GSUAA + GWT avoided with ADSB, then visual with GSUDD. GSUDD 1317 GSUBB + Both final at same time but UM stopped showing until after touchdown, GSUDD GSUDD went around. ADSB showed situation which was not visible from tower.

Post Demonstration Briefing Ground Equipment Was the installation / placement of the ground equipment easy or difficult? difficult Not applicable. Display was already set up. Easy Did you customize the local overlays delivered with the GAINS equipment to your local aerodrome? no of overlays 0 Not applicable. Display was already set up. added or modified If yes, was it difficult to modify the given overlays (add, change the items)? difficult Not applicable. Display was already set up. easy Do you have the impression that your traffic situational awareness is improved by the GAINS display? not at all 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 very much

Did you use the traffic display to spot nearby aircraft? yes X no

Did you use the traffic display to better understand the traffic situation in the traffic pattern or around the aerodrome (to check what was going on)? How many times? 0 Not applicable. Not using display operationally. more than 10

Does the equipment make you look less out the window? yes no X please tick box

Did you feel more comfortable when receiving position information of the aircraft in your vicinity?

115

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

not very 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 relevant supportive

If operating equipment live, would you have made calls to aircraft based on the traffic display? more than 0 This would be dependent on rules laid down by CAA. 10

Do you think that update rate and data precision is good enough to assess the traffic situation? not at all 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 perfect

Did you notice any major problems with the data depiction on the traffic display? yes X no please tick box

if yes, please describe Some aircraft did not appear on the display. kind of problem (GAINS post demo note: This traced to poor equipment fit e.g. GSUCC.)

Do you have any function or any other recommendation that to improve the GAINS Ground Equipment? Comments: • Orientation of display to show South at the top, to align with the Out The Window view from the tower. • Shorter history trails. • Height filter for traffic above 5000ft. • Customisable topographical display. Trial display too confusing. Other comments on any of the EC devices and recommendations for further. Comments: • Don’t need background – need a few more reference points (but not too many). • Reduce trail to about one third. • Need Westside Farm (?). Smaller circle. • Remove Little Shelford or replace with smaller circle. • Prefer not to see a/c on ground. Don’t want to see too far or too high (15nm/5000ft). labels in white and adjustable size. • Can see if a/c land on grass or mail. • EC definitely enhanced situation awareness especially when a/c difficult to see from Tower. • Orientation of display to show South up, to reflect orientation of tower position. • At least two of us found the display background too cluttered. Instead of Google Earth it would be more useful if Google Maps could be used. (I appreciate that there might be a copyright issue involved). However the map display is much less cluttered and should we have an aircraft force land away from the airfield I believe that we could provide much more accurate position information to the emergency services. Narrative on any events noted during the demonstration and use of the display to understand the situation and potentially to resolve it. (Continue on next page if necessary.) Comments

116

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

E.7.3 Duxford 3 NAME EMAIL PHONE mobile preferred

ROLE FISO Observer X

Was the installation / placement of the ground equipment easy or difficult? difficult Not applicable. Equipment was already set up. Easy Did you customize the local overlays delivered with the GAINS equipment to your local aerodrome? no of overlays 0 Not applicable. Equipment was already set up. added or modified If yes, was it difficult to modify the given overlays (add, change the items)? difficult Not applicable. Equipment was already set up. easy Do you have the impression that your traffic situational awareness is improved by the GAINS display? not at all 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 very much Did you use the traffic display to spot nearby aircraft? yes x no Did you use the traffic display to better understand the traffic situation in the traffic pattern or around the aerodrome (to check what was going on)? How many times? more than 0 10 Does the equipment make you look less out the window? yes no x please tick box Did you feel more comfortable when receiving position information of the aircraft in your vicinity? not very 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 relevant supportive If operating equipment live, would you have made calls to aircraft based on the traffic display? more than 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 10 Do you think that update rate and data precision is good enough to assess the traffic situation? not at all 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 perfect Did you notice any major problems with the data depiction on the traffic display? yes no x please tick box if yes, please describe

kind of problem Do you have any function or any other recommendation that to improve the GAINS Ground Equipment? Comments: • Display to be oriented with tower view. • Customisable to topo display (map). • Prefer to NOT see a/c on ground.

117

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Other comments on any of the EC devices and recommendations for further. Comments: • Several occasions when display helped. E.g. a/c reports crosswind when actually base. 2 a/c on final – cannot see both from tower. • A/c on wide circuit may not have field in sight. • When introduced, FISO will need to ensure that they do not use display as primary source. I.e. must use strips and lookout as primary and display as secondary. Narrative on any events noted during the demonstration and use of the display to understand the situation and potentially to resolve it. (Continue on next page if necessary.) Comments

118

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

E.7.4 Duxford 4 NAME (Observer) (Senior FISO) EMAIL PHONE mobile preferred Duxford ATC ROLE FISO () Observer

Was the installation / placement of the ground equipment easy or difficult? difficult Not applicable. Equipment was already set up. Easy Did you customize the local overlays delivered with the GAINS equipment to your local aerodrome? no of overlays 0 Not applicable. Equipment was already set up. added or modified If yes, was it difficult to modify the given overlays (add, change the items)? difficult Not applicable. Equipment was already set up. easy Do you have the impression that your traffic situational awareness would be improved by the GAINS display? not at all 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 very much Did you use the traffic display to spot nearby aircraft? yes x no Did you use the traffic display to better understand the traffic situation in the traffic pattern or around the aerodrome (to check what was going on)? How many times? more than 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 10 Does the equipment make you look less out the window? yes no x please tick box Did you feel more comfortable when receiving position information of the aircraft in your vicinity? not very 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 relevant supportive If operating equipment live, would you have made calls to aircraft based on the traffic display? more than 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 10 Do you think that update rate and data precision is good enough to assess the traffic situation? not at all 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 perfect Did you notice any major problems with the data depiction on the traffic display? yes no x please tick box • ATC: GAINS display oriented south-north, not north-south the correct aspect when looking out of window. if yes, please describe • Altitude displayed when a/c on ground was 325 ft. Should be zero QFE on kind of problem 125-126 QNH • A/c NOT to display when on ground.

119

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Do you have any function or any other recommendation that to improve the GAINS Ground Equipment? Comments: • As FISO operating, I did not have direct access to the display. Information passed by others who had access to display information passed was very useful to my situational awareness of where a/c were (so as) to provide a better traffic information service. Other comments on any of the EC devices and recommendations for further. Comments: Narrative on any events noted during the demonstration and use of the display to understand the situation and potentially to resolve it. (Continue on next page if necessary.) Comments

120

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Appendix F Sywell Demo (15th April 2019) F.1 General The demo at Sywell was held 8 days after Duxford. Some modifications to the GAINS ground display were made from the Duxford experience, to improve the background presentation of runways, VRPs, and noise sensitive areas. This is facilitated by the use of Google Earth. The presentation of ADS-B track data was also slightly modified. An example screen shot is in [10]. As for Duxford, the GAINS ground equipment was NOT used operationally. The equipment was set up in the room immediately below the visual control room (VCR), together with an audio feed from the VCR. FISOs not operating were able to assess the display information and presentation. The GAINS ground equipment was set up the day before the demo and checked out successfully against local GA aircraft and against the same helicopter that had taken part at Duxford. However, that aircraft was not available to take part in the demo. Several of the participating aircraft at Sywell were already fitted with 1090MHz ADS-B-IN and ADS-B- OUT, so only 3 aircraft used the GAINS PlaneSight equipment. The aircraft types ranged from a large and relatively fast twin to small and slow microlights, so this turned out to be a valuable interoperability test of mixed traffic performance as well as mixed equipment. The detailed information collected and analysis is given in [10]. F.2 Demonstration Environment F.2.1 Weather Weather was hazy VFR with light winds.

F.2.2 Control service Sywell operates a Flight Information Service. F.3 Debrief summary F.3.1 General comments • Visibility of aircraft registrations is very helpful. • Traffic often visible electronically before visible by eye. • Even with a good EC display, RT is most important. • Difficult to compare EC vs visual. In visual you are more dependent on RT. • Nav and traffic information together is good. • Visibility and ID of traffic behind is very good. • Voice warnings relatively useless. • Greatest value of device is outside the circuit (en-route). • First circuit with device was confusing. Got easier. • Moving map representation helps correlation of a/c display with RT and OTW view.

F.3.2 PlaneSight comments • Traffic info useful but screen too small. On some occasions traffic not seen. • Not possible to glance at instrument – needed to be studied.

121

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

• Can PlaneSight connect (to tablet) by Wi-Fi? • Device showing images causes you to read rather than glance and absorb. Slow. • Many a/c on screen made it too cluttered (Planesight) • Display not easy to read in bright cockpit. • Was confident about data on screen. • Screen size too small. Flickering icons don’t help. • Display flickering not good.

F.3.3 SkyEcho + SkyDemon comments • Callsign info on display is useful. Helps correlate with RT. • Cockpit surveillance picture too confusing if I had not had call sign info. I knew it was busy because of the RT. • Extra workload to close traffic window. • Traffic window useless in circuit. • Frequently saw ghost aircraft.

F.3.4 Pilot Aware comments • Sky Demon and PAW. Useful to be able to see traffic behind. • Audio warnings when on ground and in circuit useless in busy environment.

F.3.5 Other • Didn’t work very well with TAS. But EC enabled. Moving map overlaid with traffic better than just relative information.

F.3.6 FISO • Today’s traffic was too busy to see all traffic visually, therefore difficult to give traffic info. Ground display could be very beneficial for that purpose – within the limits of allowed phraseology. Example is Wellesbourne, where virtual radar gives good traffic awareness on ground. • By comparison,”360 radar” update rate is not good enough. • Equipment would be very useful if a GNSS approach is ever approved. • Equipment is useful to see direction of joining traffic as not all a/c report that.

F.3.7 Comments and Recommendations to manufacturers. All devices. • Voice warnings are relatively useless in the busy circuit environment, because of the intensity of RT traffic. PlaneSight. • Display screen is too small. • Display easily becomes too cluttered. • Is a wifi connection to a larger screen/tablet possible? • Display not bright enough. Sky demon. • Call sign information on display is important. Should be default. • Traffic window is not helpful in circuit.

122

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

F.4 Ground equipment data recordings The trajectories recorded for the event as a whole are shown below. This demonstrates that good coverage of the local area and Sywell ATZ was achieved. Individual aircraft trajectories are shown in the relevant sections of [10]. F.5 Aircraft equipage The table below summarises the ADS-B equipage of all participant aircraft. CAP1391 equipment provided by GAINS is shaded green. Other lower cost EC specific equipment is also shaded. Colour coding is explained in A.6.2.6 above.

Aircraft 1090MHz ADS-B-OUT ADS-B-IN Pressure Aircraft Aircraft Equipment Transponde GPS altitude EC Device Software Display reg type name r if used source source Trig SKYRANGER MGL Transponde Pilot Aware Tablet ipad GBKAA NYNJA Explorer SkyDemon r TT21 Rosetta mini 912S(1) EFIS Lite Mode S SKYRANGER Pilot Aware Tablet panel GBKBB SWIFT PlaneSight Integral Integral SkyDemon Classic mounted 912S(1) Cessna- GBKCC PlaneSight Integral Integral PlaneSight PlaneSight PlaneSight 182P Trig TY91 Internal to SKYRANGER Mode S GPS Pilot Aware Android GBKDD transpond SkyDemon 912S(1) transponder 'mouse' (2018-0129) tablet er with ADS-B GBKEE Groppo Trail PlaneSight Integral Integral PlaneSight PlaneSight PlaneSight Certified Garmin PIPER PA- Garmin Pilot Aware Tablet ipad GBKFF altitude GNS430 SkyDemon 28R-200-2 GTX330ES Rosetta mini encoder W Blind Integral GBKGG Piper PA-31 GTX330ES GTN750 GTX330ES 6.51 encoder display NANO Avidyne Tablet + Encoder Pilot Aware GSUAA PA28R-180 Trig TT31 IFD440 SkyDemon audio alerts SSD120- Classic GPS via intercom 30N Table 7. Sywell aircraft EC equipage.

123

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

F.6 Pilot Questionnaires F.6.1 GBKAA

F.6.1.1. Equipage See table in section F.5 above.

F.6.1.2. Questionnaire

Demo date Demo airfield Aircraft registration Pilot/Observer name 16.04.19 Sywell GBKAA

Time Comments 1140 Final 1141 Downwind 1143 One ahead 1147 GBKDD 1149 One ahead 1151 One ahead 1152 Taking off 1153 One on final 1153 One ahead 1158 One overhead 1202 One overhead 1210 GSUAA downwind 1213 GBKDD taking off 1214 One ahead/downwind. GBKCC. 1219 Go around 1220 One ahead GBKEE 1221 On finals GBKEE 1229 Extended downwind

ABOUT YOU NAME (Pilot) (Observer) EMAIL mailto:[email protected] PHONE Mobile preferred AIRCRAFT Registration & type GBKAA Skyranger Nynja ROLEPilot flying / Observer

PILOTS AND OBSERVERS Overall Did the cockpit traffic information help your operation for the following? Please explain. Approach to the aerodrome zone; Found it very useful for seeing traffic in the local area and within circuit, seeing a/c registrations. Awareness of other a/c in the circuit; Very helpful seeing the position of other a/c. Definitely when visibility wasn’t great. Integration into the circuit traffic flow Great for seeing other positions in the circuit.

124

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Did cockpit traffic info help you do the following? Explain how. more easily or rapidly acquire other circuit traffic visually? I was hearing traffic position before seeing the traffic as a pilot, seeing on SkyDemon before seeing in the sky. know about traffic you would not otherwise have seen? You can definitely see traffic before seeing it visually. Pilot & Observer Workload. Was there a noticeable difference in workload when using the EC device, compared to your previous experience without use of the device? In what way? Without EC device I have always used EC devices so unable to comment. With EC device. Head-up and Head-down? (Display distraction?) Takes the pressure off as you are being notified of other traffic. ADS-B display device characteristics. Please comment on any or all of the following characteristics. Device type (GAINS Plane Sight, Sky Echo + tablet application, Pilot Aware, Garmin, Trig, etc) Trig is installed ADSB out. Skydemon seeing traffic via PAW. Display: size, clarity, readability, information displayed, colours used, symbology, more … Skydemon great visual display but as a pilot I use voice traffic first Control of device in flight: Once on, never touched. If adjustable, range scale used for : Approach to the zone Circuit integration Base and Final Auto zoom in Auto via SkyDemon Auto via SkyDemon

125

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

F.6.2 GSUAA

F.6.2.1. Equipage See table in section F.5 above.

F.6.2.2. Questionnaire Demo date Demo airfield Aircraft registration Pilot/Observer name 16.04.19 Sywell GSUAA

Time Comments 1120 Audio alerts on ground. 1132 Alert – very useful. Audio off. 1135 Circuit. Excellent, especially behind. 1140 Dead side descending. ?? 1143 Return – see circuit. 1145 Non visual in turn until alongside. 1149 Visual contact in circuit, lookout useful, ?? and position. 1154 Downwind dead side descending. Late visual. 1155 No gear / downwind checks due to looking for traffic. Non EC (or now EC?) 1209 Call downwind missed due to E. 1210 Downwind a/c not visual. 1215 Downwind call missed (not traffic) 1218 ??, aircraft on grass below. 1225 Crosswind (us) downwind (them). Traffic contact only. 1228 G-FL displayed only as “G”

ABOUT YOU NAME EMAIL PHONE Mobile preferred AIRCRAFT Registration & type GSUAA PA28R ROLE Pilot flying / Observer Observer

PILOTS AND OBSERVERS Overall Did the cockpit traffic information help your operation for the following? Please explain. Approach to the aerodrome zone; Approach to ATZ, provides useful picture of traffic in circuit and those arriving from wider area. Awareness of other a/c in the circuit; Very useful or identifying spacing, regaining visual contact and knowing traffic type. Also provides information on following traffic (so you know that the big twin behind you won’t conflict). Integration into the circuit traffic flow Extremely useful for crosswind to downwind (via upwind and dead side). Provides much better picture of location at a/c in downwind leg. Knowledge of positions of a/c ahead when non-visual useful for situation awareness and speed decisions.

Did cockpit traffic info help you do the following? Explain how. more easily or rapidly acquire other circuit traffic visually?

126

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Helps target where to look, laterally and vertically. Moving map allows location relative to ground features. know about traffic you would not otherwise have seen? Yes. Much better identification, especially 3 o’clock, 10 o’clock (behind).

Pilot & Observer Workload. Was there a noticeable difference in workload when using the EC device, compared to your previous experience without use of the device? In what way? Without EC device

With EC device. Head-up and Head-down? (Display distraction?) Workload slightly higher but much better awareness of all traffic in the area.

If adjustable, range scale used for : Approach to the zone Circuit integration Base and Final

127

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

F.6.3 GBKBB

F.6.3.1. Equipage See table in section F.5 above.

F.6.3.2. Questionnaire

Demo date Demo airfield Aircraft registration Pilot/Observer name 16.04.19 Sywell GBKBB

Time Comments 1133 Tracking SW. A/c left and below, instrument, not visual. 1137 Overhead join. GBKFF left to right very close. Visual and instrument. 1139 GSUAA below visual and instrument. 1142 Base 800ft. GBKGG left and/or above. Visual and instrument. 1150 GBKFF downwind behind, instrument only. (ZV went around) 1155 We landed.

ABOUT YOU NAME EMAIL PHONE Mobile preferred AIRCRAFT Registration & type GBKBB Sky Ranger ROLE Pilot flying / Observer Pilot

PILOTS AND OBSERVERS Overall We aborted after 30 minutes. Did the cockpit traffic information help your operation for the following? Please explain. Approach to the aerodrome zone; It showed traffic but image was poor: contrast poor for numbers i.e. red on black, green on black, light from overhead transparency, numbers too small. It was not possible to glance at instrument – it needed to be studied. Awareness of other a/c in the circuit; As above but poor VMC restricted ability to compare actual with image. When traffic was visible, image was realistic. But multiple arrows was confusing. Integration into the circuit traffic flow The instrument display would not assist integration IMHO. Display of a/c intermittent. A map style display e.g. PAW and SkyDemon is quicker to read and understand. We had this running in parallel and my observer focused on this not the instrument, due to poor VMC and volume of traffic.

128

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

know about traffic you would not otherwise have seen? You can definitely see traffic before seeing it visually. Pilot & Observer Workload. Was there a noticeable difference in workload when using the EC device, compared to your previous experience without use of the device? In what way? Without EC device

With EC device. Head-up and Head-down? (Display distraction?)

ADS-B display device characteristics. Please comment on any or all of the following characteristics. Device type (GAINS Plane Sight, Sky Echo + tablet application, Pilot Aware, Garmin, Trig, etc)

Display: size, clarity, readability, information displayed, colours used, symbology, more …

Control of device in flight:

If adjustable, range scale used for : Approach to the zone Circuit integration Base and Final

129

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

F.6.4 GBKCC

F.6.4.1. Equipage See table in section F.5 above.

F.6.4.2. Questionnaire

Demo date Demo Aircraft Pilot/Observer name 16.04.19 airfield registration Sywell GBKCC

Time Comments 1028 Take off. Circuits. 1031 Confusing. Symbols at 4nm. At 2nm nil. 1034 3 downwind and 3 directly behind. 1035 Joining a/c not spotted. 1039 Very confusing. Some a/c wrong directions. Some not seen low level. Visual difficult. 1044 Out to south-west 8 miles. Display too small. 1049 ?? not seen from overhead 1058 1100 landed (?) 1110 Take off 1120 Intermittent view. Arrows inconsistent. Note. Have to remember to switch on. Can’t do that until GPS OK.

ABOUT YOU NAME EMAIL PHONE Mobile preferred AIRCRAFT Registration & type GBKCC C182 ROLE Pilot flying / Observer Observer

PILOTS AND OBSERVERS Overall Did the cockpit traffic information help your operation for the following? Please explain. Approach to the aerodrome zone; Not a great deal. Awareness of other traffic joining particularly in such poor visibility. Awareness of other a/c in the circuit; Yes but the arrows fluctuated in direction a lot. Not sure that all the a/c in the trial were seen on the screen (G-IT) Integration into the circuit traffic flow Some help but confusing. A/c dropped out at low level.

Did cockpit traffic info help you do the following? Explain how. more easily or rapidly acquire other circuit traffic visually? No – very difficult to see other aircraft in the circuit. know about traffic you would not otherwise have seen? See above.

130

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Pilot & Observer Workload. Was there a noticeable difference in workload when using the EC device, compared to your previous experience without use of the device? In what way? Without EC device Busy circuit – high workload With EC device. Head-up and Head-down? (Display distraction?) Yes, display distraction when heads-out required.

ADS-B display device characteristics. Please comment on any or all of the following characteristics. Device type (GAINS Plane Sight, Sky Echo + tablet application, Pilot Aware, Garmin, Trig, etc) PlaneSight screen too small. Display on tablet would have been far better. Display: size, clarity, readability, information displayed, colours used, symbology, more … See above. Symbols varied in direction & inconsistent. Control of device in flight: Learned that you can’t select transmit until GPS stabilised. We managed to change screen orientation at one point. If adjustable, range scale used for : Approach to the zone Circuit integration Base and Final 8nm 4nm 2nm (seemed to lose aircraft)

131

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

F.6.5 GBKDD

F.6.5.1. Equipage See table in section F.5 above.

F.6.5.2. Questionnaire

Demo date Demo airfield Aircraft registration Pilot/Observer name 16.04.19 Sywell GBKDD

ABOUT YOU NAME EMAIL PHONE Mobile preferred AIRCRAFT Registration & type GBKDD SKYRANGER 912S(1) ROLE Pilot flying / Observer Pilot

PILOTS AND OBSERVERS Overall Did the cockpit traffic information help your operation for the following? Please explain. Approach to the aerodrome zone; Really useful to identify other a/c by callsign & heights & positions & coordinated RT. All joined up. Awareness of other a/c in the circuit; Excellent situation awareness – giving way to faster traffic. Integration into the circuit traffic flow Situational awareness very clear. Especially overhead join, cross-wind traffic joining into pattern and departing traffic.

Did cockpit traffic info help you do the following? Explain how. more easily or rapidly acquire other circuit traffic visually? Definitely. Visually first and then confirmed. know about traffic you would not otherwise have seen? Yes

Pilot & Observer Workload. Was there a noticeable difference in workload when using the EC device, compared to your previous experience without use of the device? In what way? Without EC device It took 3 circuits to get used to reading traffic on EC device. With EC device. Head-up and Head-down? (Display distraction?) Glancing at device was all that was needed to verify traffic.

ADS-B display device characteristics. Please comment on any or all of the following characteristics. Device type (GAINS Plane Sight, Sky Echo + tablet application, Pilot Aware, Garmin, Trig, etc) Pilot Aware + SkyDemon (audio off). Observer had to assimilate traffic that pilot did not have time to. Display: size, clarity, readability, information displayed, colours used, symbology, more … Good.

132

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Control of device in flight: Simple intuitive. If adjustable, range scale used for : Approach to the zone Circuit integration Base and Final N/A N/A N/A

133

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

F.6.6 GBKEE

F.6.6.1. Equipage See table in section F.5 above.

F.6.6.2. Questionnaire

Demo date Demo airfield Aircraft registration Pilot/Observer name 16.04.19 Sywell GBKEE

Time Comments 1140 Heli. No ADSB. 1207 a/c on finals – no ADSB 1208 a/c to right – no ADSB

ABOUT YOU NAME EMAIL PHONE Mobile preferred AIRCRAFT Registration & type GBKEE Groppo trail ROLE Pilot flying / Observer Pilot flying

PILOTS AND OBSERVERS Overall Did the cockpit traffic information help your operation for the following? Please explain. Approach to the aerodrome zone; Yes. Prompted lookout in required direction. Awareness of other a/c in the circuit; Yes. As above. Integration into the circuit traffic flow No so much – more visual lookout. Did cockpit traffic info help you do the following? Explain how. more easily or rapidly acquire other circuit traffic visually? Yes. know about traffic you would not otherwise have seen? Possibly. Pilot & Observer Workload. Was there a noticeable difference in workload when using the EC device, compared to your previous experience without use of the device? In what way? Without EC device

With EC device. Head-up and Head-down? (Display distraction?) Yes. Attention split. One more instrument to monitor. ADS-B display device characteristics. Please comment on any or all of the following characteristics. Device type (GAINS Plane Sight, Sky Echo + tablet application, Pilot Aware, Garmin, Trig, etc) GAINS PlaneSight Display: size, clarity, readability, information displayed, colours used, symbology, more … Display too small – difficult to see. Control of device in flight:

134

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

OK but would improve with familiarity. If adjustable, range scale used for : Approach to the zone Circuit integration Base and Final Yes Yes Yes

135

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

F.6.7 GBKFF

F.6.7.1. Equipage See table in section F.5 above.

F.6.7.2. Questionnaire

Demo date Demo airfield Aircraft registration Pilot/Observer name 16.04.19 Sywell GBKFF Flight overall. Take off: 1130. Landing: 1231. T+G: 1141. 1151. 1204. 1209. 1219. 6k visibility, a bit hazy.

Time Comments 1135 Display not too overwhelming. 1136 Overhead join call. Accurate so far. 3 a/c seen. 1138 Altitude indication useful during circuits. Accurate. 1140 T+G. Display indications useful to stay behind other a/c in circuit. 1143 Display still very manageable and good aid. A/c appear to be showing “G” rather than call sign. 1145 Contacts above or below, no position info, may not be active in trial. 1146 Often spot a/c on display before visual. 1147 Exception to comment at 46. 1152 Register a/c on crosshair, then disappear. No visual. 1156 Nearly bird strike. 2500ft distracted by display. 1157 Still failing to show call signs (GBKEE) but location accurate. 1201 Visual tracking YO on final. Display accurate. GYO still no call sign. 1205 Ccts start. WT on. WT ccts with gear down. 1207 T&G. 1210 Live cct to NW. WT down. 1215 One dead side about to turn away south. Not visible. 1220 Display records 4 overhead on take-off again. 1223 Return to land from NW. Visibility deteriorating. 1225 WH ahead, not visual. 1226 1100 below at 2000 about to collide turn right to avoid, no visual contact made. 1500 below, visual made coming in to land. 1227 Time out. (End of exercise). 1229 Visible at 12o’c of WT. Final approach. 1231 Follow ZZ.

ABOUT YOU NAME EMAIL PHONE Mobile preferred AIRCRAFT Registration & type GBKFF PA28R ROLE Pilot flying / Observer Observer

PILOTS AND OBSERVERS Overall Did the cockpit traffic information help your operation for the following? Please explain.

136

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Approach to the aerodrome zone; Observer. Pilot. On all accounts, not overwhelming with PAW. Yes. Gave good indications of the positions of Accurate details. other a/c joining. Awareness of other a/c in the circuit; Observer. Pilot. Accurate details. Useful for spotting and Good indications although some aircraft following a/c in circuit. displaying only as “G” on the PAW. Without a GBKEE no call sign shown but accurate location call sign, difficult to know relative speed but for and alt. normal flying you wouldn’t necessarily know the type. Integration into the circuit traffic flow Observer. Pilot. Useful and accurate. As for approach to ATZ. Manoeuvres made at 1226 to avoid collision with no visual contact 100ft below. Visual contact made on passing. Did cockpit traffic info help you do the following? Explain how. more easily or rapidly acquire other circuit traffic visually? Observer. Pilot. Very frequent useful id. On one occasion visual Gives excellent indication of other aircraft and contact was made first. One PAW. very useful in hazy conditions such as today’s. Note: 1126. Actions made successfully on visual. (?) know about traffic you would not otherwise have seen? Observer. Pilot. On multiple occasions. However, can be Targets often acquired visually but EC gave confusing when no callsign shows. excellent prompting. (Unfortunately under Nevertheless, alt and heading is worth a lot. normal conditions very few a/c are displayed with position info and some appear not to be transponding at all.) Pilot & Observer Workload. Was there a noticeable difference in workload when using the EC device, compared to your previous experience without use of the device? In what way? Without EC device Observer Pilot. Not flown without EC. With EC device. Head-up and Head-down? (Display distraction?) Pilot. Very important to use the EC display for indication ONLY but to maintain a good lookout: not all a/c may be displayed! ADS-B display device characteristics. Please comment on any or all of the following characteristics. Device type (GAINS Plane Sight, Sky Echo + tablet application, Pilot Aware, Garmin, Trig, etc) Observer. Pilot. No helis seen. They were heard on one SkyDemon with input from PAW. occasion. Display: size, clarity, readability, information displayed, colours used, symbology, more …

137

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Observer. Pilot. On 2 occasions display showed an a/c on Very clear with good symbology gives good SkyDemon predicted track. No visual contact situational awareness. Understandably made. A/c disappeared from display within 5 cluttered today. seconds. Both occasions (0.4K on predicted path) 1220 and 1152. Control of device in flight: Observer. Pilot. Simple, efficient, easy to read, on one occasion Only changes that were made to the display were distracting & decrease in looking out. Near miss range. birdstrike at 2500ft as a result. If adjustable, range scale used for : Approach to the zone Circuit integration Base and Final 10nm 5nm 5nm

138

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

F.6.8 GBKGG

F.6.8.1. Equipage See table in section F.5 above.

F.6.8.2. Questionnaire

Demo date Demo airfield Aircraft registration Pilot/Observer name 16.04.19 Sywell GBKGG

ABOUT YOU NAME EMAIL PHONE Mobile preferred AIRCRAFT Registration & type GBKGG PA31-310 ROLE Pilot flying / Observer Pilot

PILOTS AND OBSERVERS Overall Did the cockpit traffic information help your operation for the following? Please explain. Approach to the aerodrome zone; Yes. Excellent situational awareness. We were able to look in exactly the right place. Able to spot aircraft in poor visibility. Awareness of other a/c in the circuit; Initially it was very confusing – I went wholly visual. However, on subsequent circuits I had it worked out and it was really helpful. A couple of times we would not have spotted circuit traffic without ADSB. Integration into the circuit traffic flow Again, very helpful. I took the decision whether to go behind or in front almost totally on ADS-B-IN. A/c were often too far away to see in poor visibility. Did cockpit traffic info help you do the following? Explain how. more easily or rapidly acquire other circuit traffic visually? Yes. Generally we saw traffic on the screen before visual acquisition. It took a little while to get used to. Such intensity is rare and we only got used to it after a couple of exposures. know about traffic you would not otherwise have seen? Yes, very often. Pilot & Observer Workload. Was there a noticeable difference in workload when using the EC device, compared to your previous experience without use of the device? In what way? Without EC device

With EC device. Head-up and Head-down? (Display distraction?) My eyes were constantly flicking between IN and OUTSIDE. It was hugely effective. ADS-B display device characteristics. Please comment on any or all of the following characteristics. Device type (GAINS Plane Sight, Sky Echo + tablet application, Pilot Aware, Garmin, Trig, etc) GTN + Aspen displaying Avidyne TASA (Integrated TAS+ADSB with no differentiation). Display: size, clarity, readability, information displayed, colours used, symbology, more … Excellent

139

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Control of device in flight: I was changing range in different circumstances (departure, approach, circuit) and that was important. If adjustable, range scale used for : Approach to the zone Circuit integration Base and Final 5nm 2nm 2nm

140

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

F.7 FISO Questionnaire

Demo date Demo airfield Ground FISO Observer name 16.04.19 Sywell FISO Observer

Time A/c reg Comments 0835Z GBKGG First seen about 8nm out. 0835Z GBKBB Seen checking out on ground. 0842Z GSUAA Vis at 2nm Seen: IT, FL, V, ZZ, WT, AM, ZV, YO 1030Z GBKGG Not visible on way out from zone 1035Z GBKAA Not visible on landing 1048Z FISO says 360 radar has a lag on positions 1050Z Reduce history tracks by 50% 1054Z GBKBB Landing 1057Z GBKAA Not showing on display 1107 GBKAA Showing again 1122 Reverse track presentation to be call sign then alt 1132Z GBKGG Anomalous altitude when on ground 1138Z GBKAA Anomalous altitude when on ground

POST DEMONSTRATION DEBRIEFING Ground Equipment ABOUT YOU NAME EMAIL PHONE mobile preferred ROLE FISO Yes FISO Observer

1. Do you have the impression that your traffic situational awareness is improved by the GAINS display? not at all 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 very much 2. Did you use the traffic display to spot nearby aircraft? yes no please tick box 3. Did you use the traffic display to better understand the traffic situation in the traffic pattern or around the aerodrome (to check what was going on)? How many times? more than 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 10 Comment on 2 and 3. Equipment not used operationally but under the marginal weather conditions it would have helped. 4. Does the equipment make you look less out the window? yes no please tick box Comment on 4. The equipment would have given a more precise area to look for an aircraft. 5. Did you feel more comfortable when receiving position information of the aircraft in your vicinity? Not very 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 relevant supportive

141

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

6. If operating equipment live, would you have made calls to aircraft based on the traffic display? more than 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 10 Comment on 6. Not in this instance but I could see where I could potentially. 7. Do you think that update rate and data precision is good enough to assess the traffic situation? not at all 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 perfect 8. Did you notice any major problems with the data depiction on the traffic display? yes no please tick box if yes, please describe

kind of problem 9. Do you have any function or any other recommendation that to improve the GAINS Ground Equipment? Comments: Small changes only i.e. • Data display: registration then height (or height under registration) • Trails slightly shorter, at least by half. • Use of colours good. • Equipment would be very useful if a GNSS approach is ever approved. 10. Narrative on any events noted during the demonstration and use of the display to understand the situation and potentially to resolve it. Comments Equipment is useful to see direction of joining traffic as not all a/c report that.

142

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Appendix G Dundee Demo (10th May 2019) G.1 General As noted above Dundee has authorisation to use the Avionix ADS-B, WAM and FLARM surveillance system installed. The GAINS ground surveillance equipment was also put in place to ensure that ADS-B data recordings could be made as for all other sites. The ground display presentation of runways, advised circuits, approach routes, VRPs, and noise sensitive areas was set up appropriately. Screen shots are in [10] As for Sywell, there was a variety of aircraft and 1090MHz ADS-B equipment installed on participating aircraft, again providing a useful interoperability test. An autogyro took part in the demonstration. G.2 Demonstration Environment G.2.1 Weather Good visibility. Cloud base 3500ft or greater.

G.2.2 Control service Dundee operates an Air Traffic Control Service G.3 Debrief summary The debrief was organised around the sequence of operational questions in the questionnaires, presented below as subheadings in “General Comments”.

G.3.1 General comments (1) Did the cockpit traffic information help your operation for approach to the aerodrome zone; • Sequencing was useful at Broughty Castle VRP. Early sequencing was helpful. • ATC feedback from tower based display was useful. I.e. usage by ATC of the display info. • Relative altitude the most useful info.

(2) Did the cockpit traffic information help your operation for Awareness of other a/c in the circuit; • Device much less useful in circuit because of RT traffic awareness.

(3) Did the cockpit traffic information help your operation for Integration into the circuit traffic flow • At Dundee the situation didn’t really apply. Traffic flow was very regulated (ATC service) and only one option was available.

(4) Did cockpit traffic info help you more easily or rapidly acquire other circuit traffic visually? • Sometimes, when aware of other traffic.

(5) Did cockpit traffic info help you know about traffic you would not otherwise have seen? • Visibility of traffic flow in circuit was helpful.

(6a) Pilot & Observer Workload. Was there a noticeable difference in workload when using the EC device, compared to your previous experience - without use of the device?

143

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

• Traffic RT was more useful than EC info. • EC was useful further out to appreciate the situation. • In local flying area and planning to approach, presentation on screen is useful. Closer in, use the RT. • Info from a/c on the ground not helpful. Deactivation of transmission when on ground would be helpful

(6b) Pilot & Observer Workload. Was there a noticeable difference in workload when using the EC device, compared to your previous experience - With EC device. Head-up and Head-down?

(7) ADS-B display device characteristics.

Device type: General • Switch off ADS-B-OUT equipment automatically for a/c on the ground. Possibility of A/G switch? • Training. Can offer benefit but the difficulty is when best to undertake training. Training during PPL could be of value. • Selective alerting is rather important. Selective alerting refers to the implementation of a conflict detection algorithm which identifies (and highlights on the display) specific aircraft whose trajectory does present a risk of MAC. • Chart orientation background is much better than small screen without chart info. • Remember that situation awareness is not the same as collision alerting. Clear understanding of the distinction and different usage strategies of EC devices for the separate functions is important. • Map orientation is not useful for collision alerting and avoidance. • Compare philosophy of alerting to that of FLARM. • Strong comments against multiple systems – i.e. a single system is better (interoperability is important)

G.3.2 Sky Demon comments • Selective verbal warning switch is important. (select “off” in busy situations) • Audible and visual clues both good. • SkyDemon alerts better than PAW. • SkyEcho2+SkyDemon: icon and a/c registration on display is useful for planning approach - allowing spacing, avoiding catch-up, … • Small traffic window in Sky Demon not useful. • Chart background is useful on SkyDemon.

G.3.3 PlaneSight comments • Should be better if permanently fitted – integrated in panel. • Screen too small and no chart background for orientation. • When out of the local flying area, fewer a/c detected, Planesight was useful. • Planesight not helpful in circuit • Range scale used 2-4 nm in circuit • PlaneSight display can be too distracting in the circuit environment. Less capability to reconcile screen to OTW.

144

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

G.3.4 Pilot Aware Comments • Audio warnings too verbose.

G.3.5 Comments and Recommendations to manufacturers All devices: • Deactivation of ADS-B-OUT when a/c is on the ground would be helpful. • Manufacturers should cooperate so that all GA EC equipment is fully interoperable.

SkyDemon+PAW: • audio warnings in the circuit are too verbose. Devise mechanism to reduce this.

PlaneSight: • A larger screen or connection to a device with a larger screen would be beneficial. • If that can be achieved, then display against a chart background would also be useful. G.4 Ground equipment data recordings

Figure 27. Dundee, all aircraft EC trajectories.

145

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

G.5 Aircraft equipage The table below summarises the ADS-B equipage of all participant aircraft. CAP1391 equipment provided by GAINS is shaded green. Other lower cost EC specific equipment is also shaded. Colour coding is explained in A.6.2.6 above.

Aircraft and demo 1090MHz ADS-B-OUT ADS-B-IN Pressure Aircraft Aircraft Equipment Transponder Equipment altitude GPS source Software Display reg type name if used name source

Trig TT21 Garmin Aera VANS RV- Pilot Aware Tablet GPNAA Mode S 660 panel SkyDemon 7A Classic ipad Transponder mounted

Avidyne CESSNA Trig TT31 IFD540 GPNBB ?? ?? ?? F172H transponder (FAR91.227 compliant)

Mode C-only PIPER PA- GPNCC SkyEcho2 Narco AT150 Integral Integral SkyEcho2 SkyDemon Tablet 28-160 TSO

ROTORSP Mode S non- Pilot Aware Tablet GPNDD ORT UK SkyEcho1 ES Integral Integral SkyDemon Rosetta ipad mini MT-03 transponder

Pegasus Pilot Aware GPNEE SkyEcho1 Integral Integral SkyDemon Tablet Quik Rosetta

Pegasus PlaneSigh GPNFF TT21 Mode S Trig TN72 PlaneSight PlaneSight Quik t

PIPER PA- Garmin GTX PlaneSigh GPNGG PlaneSight PlaneSight 28-181 328 Mode S t

GPNHH PlaneSight Integral Integral Table 8. Dundee all aircraft EC equipage

146

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

G.6 Pilot Questionnaires G.6.1 GPNAA

G.6.1.1. Equipage See table in section G.5 above.

G.6.1.2. Questionnaire Demo date Demo airfield Aircraft registration Pilot/Observer name 11.05.19 Dundee GVREM

Time Comments 1151 In circuit helped spot aircraft ahead. 1157 Turn Lonforgan (turning pt for rwy 27 departure) – extended as catching up a/c ahead. 1158 A/c ahead not followed pattern. Turned as if x path 1214 One aircraft came and went v close but not visual. I just got range – not in trial? 1220 Aircraft join at same time. (BC). Easy to locate visually. 1227 4 on final. 1235 One not appearing on screen (VT). Signal coming and going.

POST DEMONSTRATION DEBRIEFING ABOUT YOU NAME EMAIL PHONE mobile preferred AIRCRAFT RV7A GVREM ROLE Pilot flying PILOTS AND OBSERVERS Overall Did the cockpit traffic information help your operation for the following? Please explain. Approach to the aerodrome zone; Early indication of traffic intensity & position in circuit. Awareness of other a/c in the circuit; As above, assisted in forming “picture” gave indication when other a/c not closely following pattern. Integration into the circuit traffic flow Allowed to maintain spacing with other traffic. Did cockpit traffic info help you do the following? Explain how. more easily or rapidly acquire other circuit traffic visually? Gave indication of where to look. (*) Not all a/c visual on screen all the time. One in particular “VT” dropped in and out. know about traffic you would not otherwise have seen? Definitely. Could acquire traffic on screen long before being visual. Would we have been looking at right place at right time – doubtful.

147

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Pilot & Observer Workload. Was there a noticeable difference in workload when using the EC device, compared to your previous experience without use of the device? In what way? Without EC device More workload. No indication of any traffic in area if not on VHF radio. No guidance on where close-in traffic may be – more constant vigilance needed. With EC device. Head-up and Head-down? (Display distraction?) Easy to combine head-out and head-in for early indication of traffic. Need to manage time head-in. ADS-B display device characteristics. Please comment on any or all of the following characteristics. Device type (GAINS Plane Sight, Sky Echo + tablet application, Pilot Aware, Garmin, Trig, etc) Pilot Aware+SkyDemon. Aera660+Trig ADSB-OUT. Display: size, clarity, readability, information displayed, colours used, symbology, more … Ipad mini. Very clear. Easy to zoom in/out. Control of device in flight: Very easy. Very little adjustment needed once suitable range set. If adjustable, range scale used for : Approach to the zone Circuit integration Base and Final 130K 130K 75K

148

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

G.6.2 GPNBB

G.6.2.1. Equipage See table in section G.5 above.

G.6.2.2. Questionnaire

Demo date Dundee Aircraft Pilot/Observer name 11.05.19 EGPN registration GPNBB

Time Comments

ABOUT YOU NAME (pilot) (observer) EMAIL PHONE Mobile preferred AIRCRAFT Registration & type GPNBB C172 ROLE Pilot flying / Observer See above

PILOTS AND OBSERVERS Overall Did the cockpit traffic information help your operation for the following? Please explain. Approach to the aerodrome zone; Yes. It helped a bit in spacing arrival over the VRP. Awareness of other a/c in the circuit; Not really. We knew someone was there but couldn’t visually acquire, so it was frustrating. Integration into the circuit traffic flow Somewhat helpful. Useful for slow a/c. Did cockpit traffic info help you do the following? Explain how. more easily or rapidly acquire other circuit traffic visually? No – and since ATC wants a visual acknowledgement that is not much help. know about traffic you would not otherwise have seen? Yes – there were targets on screen that we never got visually. Pilot & Observer Workload. Was there a noticeable difference in workload when using the EC device, compared to your previous experience without use of the device? In what way? Without EC device

With EC device. Head-up and Head-down? (Display distraction?) Workload increased. Observer visual scan reduced. ADS-B display device characteristics. Please comment on any or all of the following characteristics. Device type (GAINS Plane Sight, Sky Echo + tablet application, Pilot Aware, Garmin, Trig, etc) SkyEcho1+Trig. Displayed on 3 screens. Display: size, clarity, readability, information displayed, colours used, symbology, more … SkyDemon quite nice.

149

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Control of device in flight: Impossible in the circuit. Observer was needed to make changes. If adjustable, range scale used for : Approach to the zone Circuit integration Base and Final

150

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

G.6.3 GPNCC

G.6.3.1. Equipage See table in section G.5 above.

G.6.3.2. Questionnaire

Demo date Demo airfield Aircraft registration Pilot/Observer name 11.05.19 Dundee EGPN GPNCC

Time Comments 1200 Take off 1206 GPNBB go around 1229 EW converged on us. SkyDemon alerted. 1246 GPNGG disappeared and came back. 1252 Tayside a/c not shown. 1258 GPNDD aircraft at Broughty not shown.

ABOUT YOU NAME EMAIL PHONE Mobile preferred AIRCRAFT Registration & type GPNCC PA28 Cherokee 160 ROLE Pilot flying / Observer Observer

PILOTS AND OBSERVERS Overall Did the cockpit traffic information help your operation for the following? Please explain. Approach to the aerodrome zone; SkyEcho2 and SkyDemon used. Display on SkyDemon screen really helped show where traffic was. Awareness of other a/c in the circuit; Really helped visualise where other aircraft were. Showed where to look for a/c. Integration into the circuit traffic flow Helped with spacing. On one occasion on catching up microlight (hard to see) it was obvious we needed to go around. Did cockpit traffic info help you do the following? Explain how. more easily or rapidly acquire other circuit traffic visually? Yes. We knew where to look. know about traffic you would not otherwise have seen? Yes. Absolutely it helped. Pilot & Observer Workload. Was there a noticeable difference in workload when using the EC device, compared to your previous experience without use of the device? In what way? Without EC device Workload higher but looking more for a/c. With EC device. Head-up and Head-down? (Display distraction?) Spending more time head-down but could visually find a/c more easily on SkyDemon. ADS-B display device characteristics. Please comment on any or all of the following characteristics. Device type (GAINS Plane Sight, Sky Echo + tablet application, Pilot Aware, Garmin, Trig, etc)

151

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

SkyEcho2+SkyDemon (pilot and observer).

Display: size, clarity, readability, information displayed, colours used, symbology, more … SkyDemon integration very good. Information very good on large display.

Control of device in flight: Easy as on 9.7 inch tablet. Ipad pinch and zoom.

If adjustable, range scale used for : Approach to the zone Circuit integration Base and Final Zoomed-in. More zoomed in. Zoomed in.

G.6.3.3. GPNCC Demo narrative with SkyDemon screen grab images The following images and narrative are an example of the EC information received by SkyEcho and displayed on SkyDemon.

Note the traffic window at the bottom right. This displays a heading up indication of nearby traffic (within 2 nm), with relative altitude indicated. Aircraft symbols are coloured according to increasing conflict threat level (green, yellow, red). If the trajectory assessment (by SkyDemon) is that a high level conflict threat exists, a “red sector” is shown as well as the aircraft symbol, indicating the relative direction of the threat. 1. Trip to Dundee showing another aircraft that was also attending the Project GAINS ADS-B Demo

152

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

2. On the ground. This was not long after start-up and before taking-off. Our aircraft can be seen (green) with a microlight behind.

SkyEcho 2 does not transmit ADS-B until a certain speed (stall speed) is set. This is user-configurable and was set to be 40 knots for us. So, although we could ‘see’ the microlight while on the ground, the microlight would not have been alerted to us on their device. This is good as it removes clutter and also prevents landing aircraft being alerted to an aircraft that is not in flight.

3. Still on the ground. This was not long after start- up and before taking-off. Own aircraft can be seen (green) with two microlights behind.

153

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

4. Take-off. Helicopter icon is shown on base leg 1200 feet above. It was actually an autogyro.

On the expanded display on the right hand side the aircraft is also shown. It is in green as it isn’t a threat.

5. After take-off turned left into the circuit. Currently left-hand downwind. A microlight is shown on the runway and the other Glasgow Flying Club aircraft GPNGG (a Piper Archer) is on final.

154

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

6. Turning base. Warning of other aircraft, on final, in our 3 o’clock. We both knew other aircraft were there, with Skydemon, and visually.

7. On final. Other aircraft (Cessna) behind us. They were 300 feet above and descending. A microlight can also be ‘seen’ in our 11 o’clock, some distance away.

155

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

8. On ground. We were asked to make a full stop landing, vacate runway and hold at runway holding point.

There was a Tayside Aviation Warrior on the ground (GPNHH), a microlight on long final, and the Cessna GPNBB holding at the end of the downwind leg.

9. Still on ground at holding point. Waiting to take- off. Microlight on final, Cessna orbiting at end of downwind leg. Another aircraft (GPNAA) to the west of the airport.

156

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

10. Still on ground at holding point. Waiting to take- off.

Cessna on short final, shown in red (not a threat as we were on the ground). Microlight in circuit.

11. Still on ground at holding point. Waiting to take- off.

Cessna doing touch ‘n’ go, shown in red (not a threat as we were on the ground). Microlight in circuit. A microlight on long final and another one just about to turn onto long final.

157

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

12. Now in the air and going to turn north and complete a course around the turn, to the north. Our aircraft is not shown but the green arrow points at it and the screen will automatically show the aircraft again in 11 seconds.

2 microlights and an aircraft shown.

13. Zoomed out view. 6 other aircraft shown (3 at Dundee airport).

158

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

14. Autogyro on runway. Microlight in circuit.

Interesting point here is that GPNEE is in our 4 o’clock. We can’t visually see them as they’re small and lower. However, they are doing a smaller circuit, closer to the town of Dundee. So, although they are slower, they are travelling less distance. We monitored them on SkyDemon all the way round our circle to the north of Dundee.

15. GPNEE is in our 4 o’clock. We still can’t visually see them but we know that they’re there, thanks to SkyEcho 2 and Skydemon.We still have an understanding where the other aircraft are. There is one at Broughty castle, one on base leg, and one on the runway.

159

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

16. Aircraft that we were monitoring all the way round our circle of Dundee has now gotten in front of us, due to their smaller circuit. However, we had known where they were for some time and were following them. We could visually see them at this point.

Yellow banner on Skydemon alerts us to an ‘Aircraft Ahead’.

As we could see aircraft we were expecting a go- around and sure enough ATC advised to go-around, not less than 400 feet.

Cessna orbiting on base leg.

17. On climb-out. Checking the view behind us, so own aircraft is off screen.

160

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

18. To north of Dundee again, off-screen. Checking the whereabouts of other traffic (4 aircraft shown).

19. Again, our aircraft is off-screen. Checking where other aircraft are. 2 aircraft are shown (nearing the end of the demo).

161

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

20. Again, our aircraft is off-screen. Checking where other aircraft are. 2 aircraft are shown (nearing the end of the demo).

21. Again, our aircraft is off-screen. Checking where other aircraft are. 1 aircraft is shown (nearing the end of the demo).

162

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

22. Again, our aircraft is off-screen. Checking where other aircraft are. 1 aircraft is shown (nearing the end of the demo).

163

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

G.6.4 GPNDD

G.6.4.1. Equipage See table in section G.5 above.

G.6.4.2. Questionnaire ABOUT YOU NAME EMAIL mailto:[email protected] PHONE Mobile preferred AIRCRAFT Registration & type GPNDD - Gyrocopter ROLE Pilot flying / Observer Pilot - single crew

Approach to the aerodrome zone; I think this is one of the main benefits as it allows you a view ahead of time of what it might be like in terms of how busy it is and where other aircraft may be joining from other directions (or indeed the same). It can quickly show that it may be prudent to take an extended route for example or to call up earlier than you might otherwise if you see it’s very busy. Awareness of other a/c in the circuit; Not sure Dundee was the best/true test of this as the “circuit” was somewhat convoluted trip around the North with varying aircraft speeds. Add to that it was ATC controlled, so you probably got more information from the radio although you could get an idea what was going on. However there is a clear danger that this could be distraction at this point so once established it’s not the most relevant and a potential distraction.

This is slightly different at home field where it can give you an idea where to look in the circuit for someone that just announced their position as these calls can vary widely, the situational awareness can help you know where to actually look as not always where they say they are. Integration into the circuit traffic flow Much the same as the approach comments, helps get an idea of how you might make an approach but it can’t really be relied on for this as not all AC are going to show on it and this could be a danger if users don’t realise this and think they can join how they like if they don’t see anyone. Did cockpit traffic info help you do the following? Explain how. more easily or rapidly acquire other circuit traffic visually? Yes - This is one of the main things it helps in general as it obviously very hard to spot ac in the air but having some kind of map reference to where the a/c is helps you at least look in roughly the right direction know about traffic you would not otherwise have seen? Yes - many times today and in the past someone shows up that you simply have no idea exists without the system or very very good eyesight. Pilot & Observer Workload. Was there a noticeable difference in workload when using the EC device, compared to your previous experience without use of the device? In what way? Without EC device

With EC device. Head-up and Head-down? (Display distraction?)

164

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Mine is set up with Audio which is key - the potential for excessive alerts however can make this a pointless feature so it needs to work, Sky Demon seems to be a lot better at this than the default PAW audio output. When working it’s no different to using your GPS for nav anyway - but there is a danger that it can pull you into have your head in the office too much looking at a/c and working out where they are when really it might not affect you. Today was made worse by virtue that we were in effect a very large circuit outside the ATZ, so the map would zoom out but then it was so busy you had planes and text labels on top of each other almost so you had to zoom in to make use of it - generally my experience says this is not normally the issue but the temptation to be looking at the tablet too much remains.

I don’t fly without as it’s a much better option than going blind, kind of like sticking to a road atlas instead of using your cars satnav! ADS-B display device characteristics. Please comment on any or all of the following characteristics. Device type (GAINS Plane Sight, Sky Echo + tablet application, Pilot Aware, Garmin, Trig, etc) SkyDemon running either Sky Echo or PAW - think the output is much the same. Display: size, clarity, readability, information displayed, colours used, symbology, more … SkyDemon running either Sky Echo or PAW - think the output is much the same but without the map display it would be a lot less valuable as it needs to be something you can glance at and understand roughly which way to look. Key piece of information for me is the altitude difference as clearly something with a big number is a lot less of a concern than something on the same level as me.

From what I heard of non-tablet devices they sound like limited value and a distraction to make use of at least in our environment.

I don’t see different symbols, only planes - but I note that some see a gyro symbol for me and flexwing for others. That’s useful to understand why someone may be taking a smaller circuit or should be expected to take a while to complete finals for example but is more a nice to have feature. Control of device in flight:

If adjustable, range scale used for : Approach to the zone Circuit integration Base and Final

Additional comments I attach a screen shot that shows how it’s not always clear to work out what you are seeing so likely some scope for improvements in that space.

Here someone is turning at the castle in front of me, I had visual as spotted them flying inside my circuit earlier so was able to keep eye on them, but at this point I had a transponder hit and actually thought there was another AC over Broughty Castle as saw the writing at the top of the circle next to the other writing of an a/c - neither of which I could actually make out due to VRP name.

I think they were actually on base - this is a PAW feature showing any transponder traffic and after today I am inclined to disable it, however when away from the field it’s a hint someone is around and back to my above comments about level - extra caution if on same height as me - I might not know where they are but can change altitude if needed. As such will likely retain it and hope their 3D stuff works out as that would be a game changer!

165

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Additional comments General point on aerials. My Sky Echo is not well fitted as with the integrated aerial and nowhere to mount the unit other than sitting in a map pocket it’s clearly not got the best range as someone only reported being in top of me at the last moment. I had seen them on my PAW so was watching them (interesting point that I was told they were 300ft above me so where did the 200ft go?) Hard to estimate as they were behind and above me but I would think closer to 300 than 100.) I no doubt saw them as my PAW aerials are better mounted and picked them up, but my ADSB out is clearly pretty poor with the Sky Echo device and reflects the experience EW had in not seeing traffic with their unit previously. Screen shot from FR24 shows my track today with some odd parts where its clearly nonsense - not sure if this was derived from ADSB or Transponder though. I have circled the area where we were close as mentioned above to help you check the logs for this.

166

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

167

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

G.6.5 GPNEE

G.6.5.1. Equipage See table in section G.5 above.

G.6.5.2. Questionnaire

Demo date Demo airfield Dundee Aircraft registration Pilot/Observer name 11.05.19 EGPN GPNEE

Time Comments

ABOUT YOU NAME EMAIL PHONE Mobile preferred AIRCRAFT Registration & type GPNEE Flexwing ROLE Pilot flying / Observer Pilot flying

PILOTS AND OBSERVERS Overall Did the cockpit traffic information help your operation for the following? Please explain. Approach to the aerodrome zone; My a/c is slow and so I found myself looking behind me on SkyDemon rather than what was in front. I was aware that I was holding other aircraft up. Awareness of other a/c in the circuit; To be honest when I did the first circuit I found myself looking at the screen and not where I should be. I found I was 700ft too high on downwind and made a conscious effort to stop looking at it. Integration into the circuit traffic flow This was helpful as I could see where other a/c were. On the 3 approaches that I did there was nothing in front of me. Did cockpit traffic info help you do the following? Explain how. more easily or rapidly acquire other circuit traffic visually? I found it helpful for a/c that were further away. I preferred to rely on sight rather than screen for a/c close by. But I never had any a/c close at all. know about traffic you would not otherwise have seen?

Pilot & Observer Workload. Was there a noticeable difference in workload when using the EC device, compared to your previous experience without use of the device? In what way? Without EC device

With EC device. Head-up and Head-down? (Display distraction?) When it got busy, I stopped looking to be honest. I preferred to look for myself. ADS-B display device characteristics. Please comment on any or all of the following characteristics. Device type (GAINS Plane Sight, Sky Echo + tablet application, Pilot Aware, Garmin, Trig, etc)

168

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Display: size, clarity, readability, information displayed, colours used, symbology, more …

Control of device in flight: I need more practice on that. If adjustable, range scale used for : Approach to the zone Circuit integration Base and Final

169

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

G.6.6 GPNFF

G.6.6.1. Equipage See table in section G.5 above.

G.6.6.2. Questionnaire Demo date Demo airfield Aircraft registration Pilot/Observer name 11.05.19 Dundee GBYO

Time Comments

General narrative. I flew a mix of circuits to the north and in 27LH tighter circuit. Main observations: • Tried to primarily focus on eyeball throughout. • The best user case was when EC device prompted scan in a certain part of sky on an adhoc scan of device. • It was tough to spot a/c across city even when painted on screen. • Danger of looking at EC device to try to spot a/c. This ca become distracting and takes too much focus, other airmanship suffers. • Too many times the device was confusing – with a small screen and no chart to reference distance the 2 mile distance was hard to use. • I think I spotted only 20% of traffic painted. • Would I fly with EC? Yes but prefer through ipad or chart. • Bigger screen required. Target appeared and then vanished on a couple of occasions. • I was unsure what actions to take when target went red – the symbology was hard to interpret. Voice guidance is preferred to help understand the threat. 1200 As the trial commenced I departed to the north. On this departure leg I had warning of an aircraft approx. 2-3 miles crossing L-R. This was perhaps the single most convincing warning that helped sharpen my lookout. 1215 On arriving over reporting point Broughty castle, I found the GAINS PlaneSight gave prompts but I failed to see other a/c. The ATC was more useful in building awareness. 1225 Following arrival and departure I spent some time in the local circuit (LH27) doing orbits and touch and goes. I found little benefit; in fact I felt the PlaneSight was distracting. Orientation of potential ‘threats’ were hard to discern as there is no chart data background. I was aware of being too focused on the screen so decided to try to focus instead on lookout. The screen is too small and the symbology ambiguous. 1240 I flew back up to the north. During this phase I was followed by another aircraft in my 6 o’clock, with a red 2 mile warning (I think). This proved very distracting. I made no visual contact during this time. I spoke to the pilot afterwards – he said he was 1600ft below. In reality this presented no threat but again caused unnecessary distraction. 1250 On approach there was a cluster of aircraft. Again I found ATC helpful and ignored the display. I relied upon Mk1 eyeball to stay safe, as my ability to discern and spot threats on the display was not reliable enough to prove of value. 1300 I made a further flight to the north extended leg. Again, I tended to use the screen less. I would say that it has merit in spotting a single contact in open airspace, which verified the lookout. The tendency is then to become too focused and this can compromise the overall awareness of non-ADS-B traffic.

ABOUT YOU NAME Jon ROPER EMAIL

170

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

PHONE Mobile preferred AIRCRAFT Registration & type GPNFF Pegasus Quik ROLE Pilot flying / Observer Pilot flying (solo) PILOTS AND OBSERVERS Overall Did the cockpit traffic information help your operation for the following? Please explain. Approach to the aerodrome zone; We experienced busy skies on the approach. I found the PlaneSight difficult in the approach phase; it was too demanding to aviate, communicate and keep visual lookout and check the display. The PlaneSight has no chart background, so orientation is slower than it could be. Awareness of other a/c in the circuit; The both these scenarios ATC calls were the most helpful. Seeing a/c on the approach was often impossible against the city (background) and the use of the device in this phase should be around collision alerts. A traffic device can compromise lookout in the circuit. Integration into the circuit traffic flow It might be that in a quiet circuit a device could usefully flag an a/c in the pattern that has not been seen. I would imagine that many pilots would say that Pilot Aware and an iPad is the best way to see this threat – using a chart. Did cockpit traffic info help you do the following? Explain how. more easily or rapidly acquire other circuit traffic visually? • In one case (L to R cross) yes very clearly. • In other occasions the report of the a/c was then very hard to acquire – a 5 mile range or even a 2 mile range meant that seeing the other a/c was not possible. know about traffic you would not otherwise have seen? Interesting point. The PlaneSight raised awareness but in my view about a/c that were no threat. In the meantime I may have been distracted from looking out for a proper threat that would not been ADS-B-OUT. Pilot & Observer Workload. Was there a noticeable difference in workload when using the EC device, compared to your previous experience without use of the device? In what way? Without EC device Rely upon Mk1 eyeball scanning – ignorance is bliss? With EC device. Head-up and Head-down? (Display distraction?) A useful ‘comfort blanket’ but too much time was spent at first staring at this tiny screen. It was a distraction. ADS-B display device characteristics. Please comment on any or all of the following characteristics. Device type (GAINS Plane Sight, Sky Echo + tablet application, Pilot Aware, Garmin, Trig, etc) I flew with the PlaneSight. Display: size, clarity, readability, information displayed, colours used, symbology, more … As stated, sadly the biggest problems were screen size, no orientation prompts (chart). I found the symbology small and obscure. Control of device in flight: The only adjustment was range, which I did not alter very much. If adjustable, range scale used for : Approach to the zone Circuit integration Base and Final 2 miles / 5 miles 2 miles 2 miles

171

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

G.6.7 GPNGG

G.6.7.1. Equipage See table in section G.5 above.

G.6.7.2. Questionnaire Demo date Demo airfield Aircraft registration Pilot/Observer name 11.05.09 Dundee EGPN GPNGG

Time Comments 1150 T/O north of T/O in front not seen. 1157 A/c overhead PA28 not seen on unit. 1205(?) Red warning 1230 A/c low – 300-400 ft below not seen. 1238 GOWAP in front not seen on unit.

ABOUT YOU NAME pilot. Observer EMAIL PHONE Mobile preferred AIRCRAFT Registration & type PA28 GPNGG ROLE Pilot flying / Observer

PILOTS AND OBSERVERS Overall Did the cockpit traffic information help your operation for the following? Please explain. Approach to the aerodrome zone; Yes but RT provided better positions of other traffic. Awareness of other a/c in the circuit; Yes but RT as above. Integration into the circuit traffic flow Only at very early stages. RT very busy – lots of people holding and orbiting outwith zone. Did cockpit traffic info help you do the following? Explain how. more easily or rapidly acquire other circuit traffic visually? Notification did enable the direction to look and assisted in early identification relatively early on. Unit picked up a/c we didn’t see and vice versa. know about traffic you would not otherwise have seen? Yes. Visual gaze generally focused forward but this device showed 360 traffic. Pilot & Observer Workload. Was there a noticeable difference in workload when using the EC device, compared to your previous experience without use of the device? In what way? Without EC device Visual only – reliance on ATC and a/c R/T. With EC device. Head-up and Head-down? (Display distraction?) Yes. Display distraction could be an issue. More time spent looking inside the cockpit. ADS-B display device characteristics. Please comment on any or all of the following characteristics. Device type (GAINS Plane Sight, Sky Echo + tablet application, Pilot Aware, Garmin, Trig, etc)

172

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

GAINS Plane Sight Display: size, clarity, readability, information displayed, colours used, symbology, more … Too small display. Control of device in flight: Easy If adjustable, range scale used for : Approach to the zone Circuit integration Base and Final Constantly Constantly No. ATC RT took precedence at this point.

Additional comments

Flight Radar 24. I note on flight radar, if you live in a suitable area, you can apply to them for an ADSB unit at your house that picks up aircraft info and sends via a web link to their server, which is then displayed on their app. I know it’s not considered dynamic, but I have personally found this a tremendous tool when I hear another aircraft RT and it lets me know where to look out. Integration into SkyDemon would help too. I flew to IOM two weeks past and my passenger had SkyEcho with his SkyDemon. Was good to see this in operation, but in reality and perhaps the most interesting factor was that it didn’t tell me anything, nor did I react any different to the information received on FR24. Food for thought, the psychological analysis of how the PPL pilot reacts to such info is a whole other Pavlov experiment waiting to happen.

Also attached is a FR24 plot of my Dundee loops that day. We had two almost reportable near misses. The microlight over Longforgan and a Tayside warrior at Monekie reservoir. We didn’t see either and the microlight who was on the trial disappeared from the screen when we were on top of him.

173

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Appendix H Blackbushe Demo (16th August 2019) H.1 General The demo at Blackbushe was held on 16th August 2019. A particular effort was made to ensure that helicopters would be able to take part in this demonstration, by hiring two helicopters with pilots from Phoenix Helicopters, based at Blackbushe. By this means the project hoped to ensure that the helicopters would be able to operate. There was the possibility of up to ten fixed wing participants as well. The GAINS ground equipment was set up in the tower, but was not used by the FISO on duty. Being in the tower enabled the non-operating FISO observer to listen to the RT and correlate that with the displayed information. H.2 Demonstration Environment H.2.1 Weather The early morning weather at Blackbushe gave good visibility with a cloud-base of about 1500 ft AGL. The forecast was that it would deteriorate from about midday, which it did. Several of the fixed wing pilots would have had difficulty getting back home after the flying and therefore they withdrew. Three fixed wing took part, all coming from very close to Blackbushe.

H.2.2 Control service and adjacent airspace Blackbushe operates under a Flight Information Service. The maximum number of aircraft allowed in the circuit at any one time is four. The Blackbushe ATZ abuts that of Farnborough. There is a direct coordination telephone link between Farnborough and Blackbushe. H.3 Debrief summary The debrief was handled in three separate sessions because of availability of pilots and ground staff. The notes below are a synthesis of all three sessions.

H.3.1 Ground display, Blackbushe Tower • The ground display was good for the a/c that it showed. However, not all equipped a/c showed up. In the case of GLKCC this was because the PlaneSight transmitter was not re-enabled after engine start. • Post demo note. Andrew BIRRELL, pilot of GLKBB that was not visible was surprised that his a/c did not show up. Nor did he see the other participants. He will investigate with his avionics engineer. • A/c visible were the two R22 helicopters (GLKDD and GLKEE) together with GLKAA. All these aircraft painted solidly throughout the demo. • Blackbushe staff have pointed out the legislative barriers to using the surveillance display. This topic is being considered by the CAA. Use of similar equipment is now permitted at Dundee (ATC service), Barton (FIS service), and is on the way to approval at a couple of other small aerodromes (Goodwood and North Weald).

174

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

• Although the ground display can be customised, settings can be lost if the equipment is switched off abruptly (as had happened the day before the demo). The preservation of settings needs to be more robust. This is one difference between trials equipment and production equipment.

H.3.2 Pilot display and usage in the cockpit • The helicopter pilots (both flight instructors) from Phoenix helicopters were encountering cockpit traffic information for the first time. Very briefly, they liked it but were very aware of the risk of distraction from keeping a good OTW view. The traffic display in the cockpit should therefore be used with caution. Helicopter pilots were using SkyEcho with SkyDemon tablet display. • PlaneSight equipment. The PlaneSight was used by GLKAA and GLKCC . The pilots and pilot observers found that the display was too small and lacked useful information such as call-signs, because of the small size. • PlaneSight equipment could not be securely placed on the fairly small coaming space in the helicopters. Instead, they used SkyEcho devices with tablet displays. • Update rate and accuracy. Both types of display were assessed as accurate by comparison to the OTW view and both had a good update rate with no noticeable latency. • Comparison of displays. GLKAA had both PlaneSight equipment using its integral display and Pilot Aware information displayed on a tablet. Therefore they were able to make a direct comparison. The main comment was again that the PlaneSight display is too small. This is reported in the individual pilot questionnaires. • Use of GPS display during PPL training. One Helicopter Instructor was concerned about introduction of a GPS display in the cockpit when he is trying to ensure that basic navigation is taught first and then GPS as a tool introduced later. He may have been more receptive if the display was traffic information only. Unfortunately, due to lack of time, he was not shown the traffic only display of SkyDemon. • SkyDemon “radar” display. There were positive comments about the radar type display that appeared on SkyDemon in the bottom right as that provided orientation of targets. • Label clutter. Some opinions are that labels clutter the display, especially in the circuit, unless the display range is changed for a map display. In the radar type display they just overlap. Then again a call sign does allow easier correlation of the radio calls etc. • Audio alerts. Contrary to previous demos, one positive comment was made about the audio alerts. However, there was less circuit traffic and fewer radio calls being made than in other demos.

Specific comments • Aircraft on the ground. Aircraft parked or stationary on the ground with their ADSB transmitters still operating are an unnecessary distraction to both the FISO and particularly to the pilots, because unnecessary threat warning indications are made against such aircraft. • GLKCC, Bristell NG5. GLKCC was using a FAV PlaneSite, 20 watt version with antenna taped to the Perspex. On talking to them afterward they had forgotten about enabling the transmitter after startup hence not visible to ground and others. They also were the crew that had a problem with their Trig Transponder being stuck in ground mode. Alan Burrill (GAINS project) resolved this. However, it indicates their technical knowledge was limited and possibly a factor in understanding of the kit and possible reinforcing the need to have portable kit fool proof. • uAvionix comment. The uAvionix (SkyEcho) representative, who took part in the debrief, was keen to emphasise that SkyEcho was designed for electronic conspicuity between aircraft and not for ground monitoring. He also remarked that, as CAP1391 does not have any statements about ground reception of CAP1391 signals, there is no specific guidance available.

175

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

• NATS, CAA and other organisations see the possibility of ADS-B ground reception on 1090MHz equipment as valuable for ground traffic situation awareness and infringement management, although NOT for control. . • uAvionix “Ping station”. It should also be noted in this context that uAvionix have developed a “Ping Station” for ground reception of SkyEcho data transmissions. This equipment is being used for live trials at Manchester Barton and planned trials at Goodwood and North Weald. That development somewhat contradicts the previous uAvionix comment. It seems self-contradictory for uAvionix to minimise or exclude capability for ground ADS-B reception in their design criteria.

H.3.3 Comments and recommendations to manufacturers Recommendation. Ground display equipment should be more robust, so that display configuration settings are retained after power failures or abrupt switch-off. Recommendation. SkyDemon in particular has very flexible display options. In order for pilots to use the display facilities optimally for their flying, training in the use of the display options should be made available by SkyDemon. Recommendation. An automatic mechanism to stop transmissions from a/c on the ground should be explored further by the EC equipment manufacturers. Almost no light GA aircraft have a “weight on wheels” sensor that can be used to suppress transmissions from a/c on the ground although this is common on commercial aircraft. Recommendation. Facilities of PlaneSight equipment in particular (and all portable EC equipment in general) should be reviewed for avoidance of unexpected default settings and for guidance on optimal set-up arrangements. See [8].

H.3.4 Recommendation to UK CAA Recommendation. CAP1391. To resolve the uAvionix comment above in H.3.2 (that CAP1391 does not have any specific guidance about ground reception of CAP1391 signals) and to make it clear that ground based reception and use of the signal is expected, the CAA should consider issuing an amendment to CAP1391 to include mention of ground use of the ADS-B-OUT signal, with appropriate guidance on transmission characteristics to facilitate this usage. H.4 Ground equipment data recordings

176

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Figure 28. Track plots observed from aircraft operating at Blackbushe. H.5 Aircraft equipage Aircraft and demo 1090MHz ADS-B-OUT ADS-B-IN Dedicated Pressure Aircraft Aircraft GPS EC Device Transponder altitude EC Device Software Display registration type source (if used) source Robin GLKAA PlaneSight Trig TT31 Integral Integral PlaneSight PlaneSight PlaneSight DR400/180R GTN 750 + GTN 750 + Bonanza Garmin Garmin Garmin Garmin Garmin Garmin Garmin GLKBB B36TC GTX345 GTX345 GTX345 GTN750 GTX345 Pilot in Pilot on ipad iPad Pilot SkyDemon Tablet GLKCC Bristell NG5 PlaneSight Trig TT31 Integral Integral Aware PlaneSight PlaneSight PlaneSight R22 GLKDD SkyEcho1 Integral Integral SkyEcho1 SkyDemon Tablet helicopter R22 GLKEE SkyEcho2 Integral Integral SkyEcho2 SkyDemon Tablet helicopter Table 9. Blackbushe aircraft EC equipage.

177

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

H.6 Pilot Questionnaires H.6.1 GLKAA

H.6.1.1. Equipage See table in section H.5 above.

H.6.1.2. Questionnaire

Demo date Demo airfield Aircraft registration Pilot/Observer name 16.08.19 Blackbushe GLKAA pilot EGLK observer

Time (local) Comments 10:10 Aircraft reg GGLKBB spotted on long final, detected from the downwind leg. 10:21 Helicopter detected from dead side of circuit. 10:26 Helicopter on downwind – not detected. Phase climb out. Eventually detected at 1nm 10:31 Commercial jet detected at touchdown at EGLF (Farnborough) about 4nm distant. Phase downwind leg. 10:37 Aircraft detected on dead side of circuit. Phase climb out. 10:43 Helicopter detected after orbit on downwind. 10:49 Aircraft detected climbing out from go-round. Phase joining overhead from dead side.

ABOUT YOU NAME EMAIL PHONE Mobile preferred AIRCRAFT Registration & type GLKAA DR400/180R ROLE Pilot flying / Observer Pilot flying

PILOTS AND OBSERVERS Overall Did the cockpit traffic information help your operation for the following? Please explain. Approach to the aerodrome zone; Helped to enhance situation awareness in this phase. Supplemented radio situation awareness. Awareness of other a/c in the circuit; In all cases, traffic was acquired visually prior to electronic acquisition. Integration into the circuit traffic flow Assisted in ensuring correct spacing from other traffic on downwind and when joining dead side. Did cockpit traffic info help you do the following? Explain how. more easily or rapidly acquire other circuit traffic visually? Not really any more rapidly – but did assist in focus of scan. know about traffic you would not otherwise have seen? Possibly – I never know what I don’t know! In 40,000 flight hours I suspect that I miss 30% of possible traffic.

178

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Pilot & Observer Workload. Was there a noticeable difference in workload when using the EC device, compared to your previous experience without use of the device? In what way? Without EC device No, as a crew, but yes if flown single pilot. With EC device. Head-up and Head-down? (Display distraction?) Not a factor. ADS-B display device characteristics. Please comment on any or all of the following characteristics. Device type (GAINS Plane Sight, Sky Echo + tablet application, Pilot Aware, Garmin, Trig, etc) Funke Plane Sight. Display: size, clarity, readability, information displayed, colours used, symbology, more … A/c symbol didn’t always appear at the same time as side-bar menu. Control of device in flight: Very intuitive. If adjustable, range scale used for : Approach to the zone Circuit integration Base and Final 2nm 1nm 1nm – 0.5nm

179

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

H.6.2 GLKDD

H.6.2.1. Equipage See table in section H.5 above.

H.6.2.2. Questionnaire

Demo date Demo airfield Aircraft Pilot/Observer name 16.08.19 Blackbushe registration EGLK GLKDD

Time Comments 10:10 Start-up 10:25 Traffic ahead. Not seen on system. Visual. 10:30 GLKAA – good help. 10:34 Helped with traffic coming from behind. 10:40 Not using – quite a late spot. 10:46 Heli – all good but then disappeared. 10:47 GLKCC not on screen – in circuit. 10:47 GYO not on screen – in circuit. 10:50 Heli – good warning. 10:54 GLKAA – good help, awareness all the time. 10:56 GLKEE – changed course, gave good warning. 10:58 Landing gave 2 warnings: heli landing, a/c taxiing • GLKAA – good coverage throughout, always knew where he was on ipad. • GLKCC and GYO did not appear on display at all. • GLKEE. Again good coverage all the time. • SkyDemon interface good. Good use of colours & height info for avoidance. • Radar on SkyDemon helpful along with alerts. • Overall, happy with the system, but would never just rely on it. Helps to fill in the blanks where exactly aircraft are when they report position. • Hard to distinguish between a/c on the ground and airborne – may create confusion. • Some a/c may not be using the system and therefore be invisible, if the pilot relies too much on the screen and stops looking outside.

ABOUT YOU NAME (Pilot) (Observer) EMAIL PHONE Mobile preferred AIRCRAFT Registration & type GLKDD R22 ROLE Pilot flying / Observer Pilot Observer

PILOTS AND OBSERVERS Overall Did the cockpit traffic information help your operation for the following? Please explain. Approach to the aerodrome zone; Helped with location of some joining traffic & aircraft in circuit, but not all. Awareness of other a/c in the circuit;

180

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Good awareness of aircraft in circuit. Not all aircraft shown however, but one that were shown very helpful. Integration into the circuit traffic flow Helped to know where to look for traffic but once seen visually then I used eyesight rather than SkyDemon.

Did cockpit traffic info help you do the following? Explain how. more easily or rapidly acquire other circuit traffic visually? Yes. Helped to know where to look on downwind / base etc. know about traffic you would not otherwise have seen? No. Saw some traffic visually that weren’t displayed on SkyDemon. Visibility was quite good today which helped. Pilot & Observer Workload. Was there a noticeable difference in workload when using the EC device, compared to your previous experience without use of the device? In what way? Without EC device Always looking outside & not focusing on ipad. With EC device. Head-up and Head-down? (Display distraction?) Slight tendency to look at ipad for too long to see if traffic is displayed. ADS-B display device characteristics. Please comment on any or all of the following characteristics. Device type (GAINS Plane Sight, Sky Echo + tablet application, Pilot Aware, Garmin, Trig, etc) SkyEcho+SkyDemon Display: size, clarity, readability, information displayed, colours used, symbology, more … Aircraft display good with good relevant information. Colour change helpful and radar screen very helpful. Control of device in flight: Easy to navigate with fingers and select button etc. However, we had it on observer’s lap. Would be better to mount on windscreen. If adjustable, range scale used for : Approach to the zone Circuit integration Base and Final 5nm 5nm 1nm

181

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

H.6.3 GLKEE

H.6.3.1. Equipage See table in section H.5 above.

H.6.3.2. Questionnaire

Demo date Demo Aircraft Pilot/Observer name 16/08/2019 airfield registration (Pilot) EGLK GLKEE (Observer),

Time Comments 10:13 Aircraft spotted on final by the SkyEcho 2/Skydemon before visual confirmation 10:15 Aircraft spotted by the SkyEcho 2 before visual confirmation Radar in the way 10:18 Aircraft without EC, visual confirmation only 10:21 Aircraft spotted by the SkyEcho 2 before visual confirmation Pressing notification cross to close it. 10:23 2nd loop of the circuit, Aircraft without EC, visual confirmation only 10:25 More comfortable to look at the screen once far from the airport Pressing notification cross to close it. Notice on SkyEcho2 someone behind without visual confirmation. Maybe disturbing to need to check the presence? 10:29 Comment of Toby (pilot): as he is aware earlier of the presence of an aircraft, more concern (during parallel approach) 10:29 Other rotorcraft inbound (green line of its trajectory) and visual confirmation 10:31 The aircraft seen on the SkyDemon app are visually confirmed accurately 10:31 The need to arbitrate between the time looking in and out need some awareness 10:33 Visual confirmation without Sky Echo 2 Pressing notification cross to close it 10:35 Visual confirmation and after confirmation by App. Radar in the way 10:37 Aircraft higher and behind spotted by Sky Echo 2 10:38 Fixed wing going around us to check proximity alert, SkyEcho 2/SkyDemon response time/latency is good. Aircraft behind us for a long minute 10:40 Parallel approach: visual and Sky Echo confirmation 10:43 Same. 10:44 Approach of a fixed wing Good update of the other aircraft trajectory 10:47 Pilot comment: Have to be very careful to not forget other aircraft that do not have EC Pressing notification cross to close it 10:50 2 Pressing notification cross to close it 10:55 Warning aircraft below.

ABOUT YOU

182

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

NAME EMAIL mailto:[email protected] PHONE Mobile preferred AIRCRAFT Registration & type GLKEE R22 Helicopter ROLE Pilot flying / Observer Observer

PILOTS AND OBSERVERS Overall Did the cockpit traffic information help your operation for the following? Please explain. Approach to the aerodrome zone; Ground and short final evaluation is good Awareness of other a/c in the circuit; 3D awareness even if not visible Integration into the circuit traffic flow Ability to know where to look to see the incoming traffic Did cockpit traffic info help you do the following? Explain how. more easily or rapidly acquire other circuit traffic visually? Yes know about traffic you would not otherwise have seen? Yes especially in the blindspots. Pilot & Observer Workload. Was there a noticeable difference in workload when using the EC device, compared to your previous experience without use of the device? In what way? Without EC device

With EC device. Head-up and Head-down? (Display distraction?) There is more workload as to be head-down, but the head-up performance is increased. ADS-B display device characteristics. Please comment on any or all of the following characteristics. Device type (GAINS Plane Sight, Sky Echo + tablet application, Pilot Aware, Garmin, Trig, etc) Sky Echo 2 and Tablet (Ipad mini type) Display: size, clarity, readability, information displayed, colours used, symbology, more … Useful, Clear. *pseudo radar can be hiding maybe too much of the screen (need to resize) *Notification cross was hidden behind the radar (took some time to Toby to press it) Control of device in flight: *Having to remove a notification (6 times) one handed *Rescale once or twice, not an issue If adjustable, range scale used for : Approach to the zone Circuit integration Base and Final

183

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

H.6.4 GLKCC

H.6.4.1. Equipage See table in section H.5 above. Note that GLKCC carried two types of AD-B-IN equipment.

H.6.4.2. Questionnaire Demo date Demo airfield Aircraft Pilot/Observer name 16.08.19 Blackbushe registration EGLK GLKCC

Time Comments Outside A Cessna 5nm north of Hook within 0.5 miles and 100ft did not appear on either loan device demo period or Pilot Aware.

ABOUT YOU NAME EMAIL PHONE Mobile preferred AIRCRAFT Registration & type GLKCC Bristell NG5 ROLE Pilot flying / Observer Pilot

PILOTS AND OBSERVERS Overall Did the cockpit traffic information help your operation for the following? Please explain. Approach to the aerodrome zone; Yes. Gave good awareness of aircraft in circuit. Awareness of other a/c in the circuit; The loan equipment (PlaneSight) showed traffic albeit in a tiny screen which made it difficult to accurately position aircraft. The Pilot Aware linked to SkyDemon gave a better position display. Integration into the circuit traffic flow SkyDemon + Pilot Aware – good. PlaneSight – poor due to small display. Did cockpit traffic info help you do the following? Explain how. more easily or rapidly acquire other circuit traffic visually? Yes. Gave position for us to look in specific direction. know about traffic you would not otherwise have seen? Yes. We were alerted to traffic by the system well before we could see the traffic. Pilot & Observer Workload. Was there a noticeable difference in workload when using the EC device, compared to your previous experience without use of the device? In what way? Without EC device

With EC device. Head-up and Head-down? (Display distraction?) Slightly higher workload in setting up the equipment on start-up and then during flight e.g. changing range scale. ADS-B display device characteristics. Please comment on any or all of the following characteristics. Device type (GAINS Plane Sight, Sky Echo + tablet application, Pilot Aware, Garmin, Trig, etc) Pilot Aware worked well and displays meaningfully on SkyDemon ipad.

184

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Display: size, clarity, readability, information displayed, colours used, symbology, more … Plane Sight. Poor due to small display. Control of device in flight: Difficult due to turbulent conditions. If mounted on top of instrument panel, difficult to reach arms outstretched. If adjustable, range scale used for : Approach to the zone Circuit integration Base and Final 2nm ½ nm 2nm – ½ nm

185

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

H.6.5 GLKBB

H.6.5.1. Equipage See table in section H.5 above.

H.6.5.2. Questionnaire There were problems with the equipment on GLKBB. The following narrative was provided by the pilot after the event, instead of completing a questionnaire. At the time of preparation of this Report, no further technical investigation has been carried out. I am somewhat flummoxed about the flying on Friday. My equipment picked up all the commercial traffic flying around Farnborough and Heathrow, but I did not pick up any of the aircraft at Blackbushe. I could see traffic at a range of up to 24nm above and below, and zoom in to see a picture that was closer to me, on the GTN750 display in my aircraft. I could also see aircraft in a radius of around 50nm (all Commercial Air Traffic), whether they were above me, below me or on the ground, using ADSB-In on 1090, but I did not see any of the aircraft at Blackbushe, whether they were on the ground or in the air.

I was hoping that EGLK Tower would see us when we first departed, and that we would be helpful as an experiment as the first aircraft in the circuit with ADSB-Out transmitting, but as you have advised, they told me they could not see us. I do not understand why this is, since my GTX345 is set to transmit the Extended Squitter on 1090, and I have previously experimented by sitting in another aircraft with the right equipment, and seeing my aircraft with the avionics on. I will follow up with my avionics technician as to what could be going on.

I confirmed the location of my antenna is on the underside of the aircraft, so the tower should have seen it.

I did 3 circuits at EGLK with missed approach go-arounds in each instance. On the second circuit the tower advised they could not see us on their equipment and since we found that we could not see the other Project GAIN aircraft, and the EGLK circuit had become too busy for EGLK to accept visiting traffic (they cannot have more than 4 in the circuit), I thought it best to break off to EGTF and regroup there.

I am going to follow up on my side as to why I was not seen even though I was making a 1090 Extended Squitter transmission. I found it very strange that I did not see any of the Project GAINS aircraft at all, however I saw the call signs of other aircraft very clearly and had full information of their relative location, direction of travel and speed - an example being my King Air, which is operated on an AOC, which flew nearby en route to Dublin Weston at 10h12L, where we clearly picked up the call sign - SYG717. We also picked up a number of other Commercial call signs (whether on the GTN750 or iPad), but did not see GLKCC, GLKAA, GLKEE or GLKDD at any stage in the exercise.

As a working hypothesis, is it possible that the equipment used is not fully interoperable with the equipment I have ? It is a bit mysterious. Since I saw none of the aircraft at EGLK, but only some CAT, I have a very limited questionnaire to return.

186

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

H.7 FISO Questionnaire Demo date Demo airfield Ground Observer/Operator name 16th August 2019 Blackbushe (EGLK)

Time (UTC) A/c reg Comments 07:33 Various No a/c arrived for the trial with functional ADS-B, or in some cases Mode A,C or S transponder. - N/A ADS-B ground equipment did not show a/c data but was reset and subsequently showed necessary detail. NOTE: Did not show callsigns but was advised that this is a function that can be enabled in the aircraft equipment. Option was not used during the trial. 08:58 GLKBB Transponder off during ATZ join and initial circuits. ADS-B Transponder initially inoperable during circuits but became operable during last circuit and during departure to Fairoaks (EGTF). 09:10 GLKAA DR400 arrived from Lasham for trial. Took off at 09:10 to fly circuits plus a departure and re-join to the circuit. Aircraft was visible at all times during flight, transitions and while taxying and parking. On parking engine was shut down but aircraft was clearly visible until the stand-alone unit was shut down. 09:16 BPH-02 Clearly visible at all times. GLKEE 09:16 BPH-04 Visible during most phases of flight but lost contact around 4NM. GLKDD 09:27 GLKCC Operated in the circuit but no ADS-B signal detected. Aircraft then departed into the local area before re-joining for additional circuits. PIC was requested to recycle transponder and ensure ADS-B out was enabled. Unfortunately, no signal received by the ground station or other aircraft. 09:51 GLKAA Aircraft was visible at all times during flight, transitions and while taxying and parking. On parking engine was shut down but aircraft was clearly visible until the stand-alone unit was shut down. 09:56 BPH-02 Landed and Shut Down – Signal visibility good at all times. GLKEE 09:56 BPH-04 Landed and Shut Down – Signal visibility good at all times. GLKDD

ABOUT YOU NAME EMAIL PHONEmobile

preferred ROLE FISO op Observer

Which equipment did you use or observe? Desk mounted display linked to external aerial mounted above the tower balcony. Do you have the impression that your traffic situational awareness is improved by the traffic display? not at all 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 very much Did you use the traffic display to spot nearby aircraft?

187

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

yes no please tick box Did you use the traffic display to better understand the traffic situation in the traffic pattern or around the aerodrome (to check what was going on)? How many times? more than 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 10 Does the equipment make you look less out the window? yes no please tick box Did you feel more comfortable when receiving position information of the aircraft in your vicinity? not very 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 relevant supportive If operating equipment live, did you make calls to aircraft based on the traffic display? How many? Or if observing GAINS equipment, would you have made calls? more than 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 10 Do you think that update rate and data precision is good enough to assess the traffic situation? not at all 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 perfect Did you notice any major problems with the data depiction on the traffic display? yes no please tick box if yes, please describe kind of problem Do you have any function or any other recommendation that to improve the GAINS Ground Equipment? Comments: The FISO function is very much dependent upon the operator’s ability to view the outside world in real time. Utilising the ADS-B system, as it stands, necessitates the operator to look inside the VCR for extended periods of time. This is contrary to the primary role as defined by the CAA. It may be possible to utilise Augmented Reality technology to overlay ADS-B data on real time external imaging viewed by the naked eye such that the regulators requirements are met. If a desk mounted option is the preferred route then there is little doubt that FISO’s would need additional training to ensure that the ADS-B data is retained as an aid rather than a primary source of information unless or until such time as the regulator revises the operating responsibilities of FISO’s. A limitation of the ADS-B system is that until such time as ALL aircraft are fitted with an ADS-B transponder the Pilot Aware equipment offers a more comprehensive solution as it monitor’s Modes A,C and S as well as ADS-B.

Narrative on any events noted during the demonstration and use of the display to understand the situation and potentially to resolve it. Comments Initially system would not display a/c details such as registration, height or other details. It was also noted that the system did not identify callsigns, although we were advised that this is a function that is available within the equipment. What was not clear was whether this could be setup easily prior to each flight. In many cases callsigns are assigned to pilots rather than aircraft and in these situations each pilot would need to enter their respective callsign. It would be useful if the system was able to identify potential confliction information based upon projected track and height. This seems to be a function of the aircraft mounted equipment but not the ground-based equipment. It is however recognised that the existing rules governing AFISO operations may limit this level of operation. To make the system truly effective will require a change in legislation plus additional training to ensure that the equipment is used safely and effectively.

188

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

In addition, and as noted earlier the Pilot Aware system offers monitoring of ADS-B and Mode A, C and S providing a more comprehensive and effective package.

189

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Appendix I Cockpit EC Equipment and interoperability I.1 Introduction Further information on EC equipment is provided in this section. I.2 GAINS PlaneSight (CAP1391 compliant). PlaneSight is a development of the Low Power ADS-B Transceiver (LPAT) used in the EVA Project. LPAT demonstrated the main characteristics required of a GA low power ADS-B transmitter for GA use and was the basis for development of CAP1391. The updated device was renamed “PlaneSight” and was used for aircraft that do not have their own ADS-B-In or ADS-B-OUT equipment. It is not widely marketed. Transmits CAP1391 compliant ADS-B on 1090MHz. [2] Receives ADS-B on 1090MHz using internationally standardised protocol. A reduced transmission power version of PlaneSight was also used for specific power/range tests. A full description of PlaneSight is given in Deliverable D3.2. I.3 SkyEcho1 and SkyEcho 2 (CAP1391 compliant) Following the publication of CAP1391, uAvionix, already active in the US market developing ADS-B- IN/OUT equipment for GA and drones on both the UAT frequency and 1090MHz, adapted its SkyEcho product to comply with CAP1391. SkyEcho (both variants) is a battery powered, portable 1090MHz transceiver, which interfaces with moving map navigation devices such as SkyDemon for the display of ADS-B traffic. I.4 Pilot Aware Transmits and receives position, altitude and vector information on 869.5 MHz, using PAW protocol. Receives ADS-B on 1090MHz using internationally standardised protocol. I.5 Transponders and GPS Mode S transponders with EC capability are not described further. The transponder models and GPS units used in GAINS are listed.

Transponder model GPS Trig 21 Mode S transponder Trig TN72 GPS Trig TY91 Mode S transponder with ADS-B GTX330ES GTX345 Trig TT21 Mode S Transponder Garmin Aera 660 panel mounted Trig TT31 transponder Avidyne IFD540 (FAR91.227 compliant) Garmin GTX 328 Mode S Table 10. Transponders and GPS units demonstrated in GAINS. I.6 ADS-B-IN Units Power FLARM and Pilot Aware can receive and understand standard 1090MHz ADS-B transmissions and CAP1391 and display the track data via a tablet display.

190

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

https://pilotaware.com/ I.7 Display devices Many cockpit moving map navigation and display applications on tablet PC equipment can display on a moving map.ADS-B track data received from ADS-B-IN devices. SkyDemon was used by many pilots taking part in the GAINS demonstrations. There are several similar applications: Easy VFR, Runway HD, ForeFlight, and more. I.8 Equipment Interoperability The consequence of the parallel developments described elsewhere of airborne equipment is that, since the completion of Project EVA, there are now four partly interoperable cockpit ADS-B devices available to GA. The degree of interoperability both air-to-air (cockpit reception) and air-to-ground (ground system reception) is shown in the table below.

CAP1391 Power FLARM PAW Certified ADS- equipment B-IN and ADS- (PlaneSight, B-OUT SkyEcho) equipment CAP1391 equipment detects  X X  is detected by    Note 1 Power FLARM detects   X  is detected by X  X X PAW detects  X   is detected by X X  X Certified ADS-B-IN and ADS-B-OUT equipment Note 1 X X  detects     is detected by ANSP 1090MHz ground ADS-B receiver detects Note 2 X X  GAINS 1090MHz ground ADS-B receiver detects  X X  Table 11. EC equipment interoperability summary.

Note 1.Certified equipment has more stringent data requirements, namely SDA>=1, NACP>=5 (<0.5NM) and, either NACv>=1 (<10m/s) or Valid Velocity and velocity validation. On ground or valid pressure or valid geometric altitude is also required. If using geo alt, GVA must be 2 or greater (≤45m). Velocity validation refers to a receiving aircraft implementing a function to confirm that available velocity data is of sufficient quality for the application. ED194A Appendix E gives an example algorithm.

191

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Note 2. Ground ADS-B receivers can receive CAP1391 transmissions. NATS CRISTAL trials ADS-B equipment receives CAP1391 transmissions but this data is not used operationally. Acceptance for operational use of the data is still under consideration. Discussion of this aspect of ADS-B usage is wider than just UK CAA.

I.8.1 CAP1391, FLARM & PAW At present, of CAP1391, FLARM and PAW, none both directly (air-to-air) detects all other equipment types, and is detected by all other equipment types. Manufacturers are working together to improve this situation. This is described as partial, or one-way, interoperability. • CAP1391 compliant equipment can be detected directly (air-air) by all systems. • Power FLARM can be detected directly (air-air) only by FLARM. • Pilot Aware can be detected (air-air) only by Pilot Aware.

Detection by ANSP ground equipment. CAP1391 equipment can in principle be seen by ANSP standard ground equipment, whereas Power FLARM and PAW cannot. This is potentially an advantage to CAP1391 aircraft installations for en-route operations within airspace covered by ANSP surveillance.

Limited trials use of ground received ADS-B data is allowed at Manchester Barton, North Weald, Goodwood and Dundee. CAP1391 compliant ADS-B broadcasts can be received by NATS CRISTAL experimental surveillance equipment.

Detection by cockpit equipment. All cockpit devices detect 1090MHz ADS-B. However, no cockpit device both detects and is detected by every other device. This is what is meant by partial interoperability. The risk posed is that partial interoperability is a weaker mitigation of the probability of MAC than full interoperability. uAvionix and FLARM have recognised this deficiency and are working together so that the ability to detect FLARM ADS-B is also available on uAvionix SkyEcho. This solution is completely implemented within the aircraft equipment and relies on no external data handling.

PAW has approached the problem in a different manner, by making use of ground infrastructure. Therefore the partial interoperability problem is solved only when the aircraft is in range of the ground infrastructure transmitters.

I.8.2 CAP1391 interoperability with certified ADS-B equipment. Expert opinion on CAP1391 includes the following.

ADS-B downlink protocol. The ADS-B downlink protocol in general forces the transmitting device to self-identify a wide range of static and dynamic quality indicators. These range from navigation source integrity through to certification status and even what kind of altitude encoder is fitted to the aircraft. Many possible implementation strategies are therefore possible, ranging from a fully certified high integrity system with antenna diversity and TCAS interface all the way down to a simple system with low integrity uncertified GPS source. Providing the transmitting device correctly self-annotates all the data it sends out, the receiving system can choose whether to accept or reject any particular data item. For example the receiving system could choose to believe the baro altitude, but not believe the reported velocity.

192

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

More importantly, providing all transmitting systems correctly self-annotate the data, there is no particular barrier to allowing their carriage and use. There may not be credit for it operationally, but providing the data characteristics are correctly described, transmission is permitted on what is often called a “non-interference” basis.

Barriers to widespread adoption. Firstly, EASA made it moderately difficult to install the necessary hardware, since each installation (in a certified aircraft) required a Minor Change Approval. That has gone away with the publication of CS-STAN issue 3 and CS-SC005a.

Secondly, it was only possible to transmit ADS-B messages using a certified transponder. The reason for that is that 1090 MHz is a protected aviation frequency, only approved devices can be licensed to transmit on 1090MHz, and the only approval process in the world for 1090MHz transmission was the TSO certification process.

This was one of the key learnings from the regulatory work in project EVA.

CAP1391 approach. CAP1391 sets out to circumvent these barriers. It puts in place an alternative approval process for transmitting equipment on 1090 MHz which is specific to operation in the UK, and it defines those devices to be non-installed equipment. To do that it makes compromises between cost and performance.

Paraphrasing 92 pages, CAP1391 says that:

• provided the equipment complies with all the applicable sections of ED-102A/DO-260B; • AND the equipment transmits no more than 40 watts; • AND the equipment self-identifies as an uncertified low integrity device; • THEN the UK CAA will allow them to be carried as transmitting personal (non-installed) electronic devices.

Or to put it another way, because they “don’t count” for the more advanced ADS-B applications, and because they are relatively low power, they are permitted to be carried on a non-interference basis.

To make them “count” will increase the cost and complexity.

Impact of possible CAP1391 changes to SDA. In particular, the SDA field directly encodes the ETSO design assurance level that the product was certified to meet. SDA = 0 means “not ETSO certified”. By saying “we recommend that CAP1391 devices should be transmitting SDA = 1”, that is exactly the same as saying to EASA “we recommend that CAP1391 devices should be TSO certified”. That is not what would be intended by such a change but it may be understood that way.

There are already many ADS-B Out solutions on the market that can set SDA=1 (or higher), including products from several avionics manufacturers. They all hold TSO approvals. They are also more expensive than CAP1391 products, partly because they implement a higher performance, and in part as a direct result of the amortised cost of certification.

If you want to take a CAP1391 solution and turn it from an uncertified portable device into a piece of certified installed equipment, you might as well have used the “real thing” in the first place.

Project GAINS does NOT recommend that CAP1391 should be upgraded to a certified device. As there may be a risk of misinterpretation of possible changes as discussed above, a different approach should be considered.

193

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Alternative recommendation. Possible recommendations should approach the problems differently - from the other side – what should the various receiving systems do when they receive data from an uncertified source? Such recommendations should not only be about ground receivers and FISOs, but also about airborne receivers.

Current published standards for airborne receivers require that the receivers ignore transmissions from participants with SDA=0. It is likely that, when that specification was written, reduced capability equipment (such as CAP1391) had not been thought of and this requirement was regarded as just tidying up a loophole. The current report would like to propose discussion possibly leading to a recommendation that current published standards should be revisited.

194

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Appendix J Ground ADS-B Equipment Options Summary J.1 Introduction The GAINS programme has used a single ground ADS-B surveillance display system provided by FAV to gather ADS-B data at the demonstration aerodromes. This is described in detail in GAINS Deliverable 3.1 “Ground Equipment Validation Report”[8] . As the airborne use of ADS-B has increased, several manufacturers have developed ground ADS-B display systems of various design configurations and capabilities. For any system that is used at an aerodrome, it is necessary from a safety and regulation point of view to understand the capability of such equipment and how it may be used safely. This Appendix lists the systems that the GAINS project has encountered. J.2 Avionix (Dundee) The user view of the Avionix system capability is given in Appendix B.2.2. Detailed information about the Company and its products can be found at this web reference: http://en.avionixsl.com/ J.3 uAvionix (Manchester Barton) The uAvionix ground system is summarised in B.3.2. Further information about the Ping Station used at Barton is available at https://uavionix.com/products/pingstation/ J.4 PlaneTRack ADS-B Receiving System Planevision systems have developed ADS-B receiving systems for industrial applications. Although these systems are not certified for aeronautical applications, the technical capability meets most of the minimum operational performance of EASA’s ED-102A standard. Furthermore the output datastream can be transmitted in ASTERIX CAT021 message format, which is the standard developed by Eurocontrol for ATS surveillance systems. Further information about the PlaneTRack system can be found here: https://planevision.systems/planetrack.php J.5 Hobbyist and amateur equipment Other very low cost receiver equipment and web based applications support the detection of ADS-B and FLARM and present the tracks on “radar like” web pages. The UK CAA published the following guidance for air navigation service providers who are considering using surveillance data from unapproved systems: https://www.caa.co.uk/Commercial-industry/Airspace/Communication-navigation-and- surveillance/Display-and-use-of-surveillance-data-from-unapproved-systems/ The CAA notes that “Most of the applications are for educational or recreational purposes. They have not been developed for the purpose of providing air traffic services and are unlikely to comply with relevant Safety and Interoperability regulatory requirements”…. “Furthermore the introduction of additional displays such as tablets, laptops or PCs into a live operational environment may itself prove a distraction and therefore human factor safety implications must also be considered”.

195

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

Appendix K Eye Tracking investigations K.1 Human Performance: eye tracking measurements. Human performance (HP) is discussed in “16.06.05 D 27 HP Reference Material D27”[12]. However, eye tracking specifically is not mentioned in this document. Nevertheless, the HP assessment process is discussed in the following general terms: “the HP assessment process uses an argument and evidence based approach and is structured according to four steps: (1) Understand the ATM concept, (2) Understand the HP implications, (3) Improve and validate the concept, and (4) Collate findings and conclude on transition to next V-phase. For each step, recommended activities, required inputs, and expected outputs are described.”

Following this approach, an eye tracking task can be structured as follows.

K.2 Concept. The concept to be investigated is the proportion of time spent by a GA pilot looking out-the-window (OTW) “eyes outside” for other traffic and for navigation feature orientation, vs the time spent looking inside “head down” at flight instruments, navigation instruments, engine instruments and other in- cockpit indications. The generally accepted concept is that in VFR flying and particularly in the aerodrome traffic circuit environment, the ratio “eyes outside / head down” should be at least 80/20.

K.2.1 Human Performance Implications Pilots are taught to understand visual system limitations as well as visual scanning techniques to ensure relevant areas of sky are scanned systematically and completely. An important visual system characteristic is that it is much easier to see an object that is moving across the visual field. However, another aircraft that shows relative motion is not on a collision course. It is much harder to visually acquire an object that is stationary in the visual field – i.e. on a directly converging trajectory. A continuously moving scan is not as effective to acquire a stationary object as a scan where the pilot frequently stops for a moment to concentrate on each part of the field of view to identify apparently stationary objects. Another phenomenon caused by geometry is that a converging object will seem to be very much the same size for a long period until it suddenly “blooms”. This can be in the very last few seconds before CPA, allowing only a very limited time for pilot reaction.

Pilot scanning techniques are never formally examined in a skill test, although a general impression of head down time is obtained. However, scanning effectiveness may be assessed by eye tracking, which allows objective measurement of three characteristics:

(1) Sharing of attention time of eyes out vs head down - In eyes out mode: comprehensiveness of scan can be assessed. This should cover o visual circuit positional orientation o traffic scan o identification of other traffic in circuit (known from R/T awareness or CDTI)

(2) Focus of attention of head down scan. - In head down mode: which instruments draw attention:

196

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

o To check that scan includes flight and engine instruments (for maintaining stable approach parameters) as well as other instruments (traffic indication on CDTI or other traffic instrument). (3) Focus of attention of OTW scan - Pattern/Rhythm of scanning. o To check what scan pattern is used. o To identify which objects visible OTW are observed (e.g. traffic; circuit recognition points)

Measurements of interest for the eye tracking task can include (1) globally: eyes out vs head down time share o Without CDTI o With CDTI o Is there a significant difference?

(2) comprehensiveness of OTW scan for traffic o systematic scan pattern? Describe pattern.

(3) comprehensiveness of head down scan o Systematic scan pattern? Describe pattern.

(4) dwell time on CDTI when used.

(5) effectiveness of CDTI visual indication o Time taken to acquire an aircraft after position indication on the CDTI vs time taken from situation awareness via R/T

Such objective measurements may be combined with complementary questionnaire assessments to determine subjective perception of differences in - Ease of visual acquisition with and without CDTI - time spent focused on CDTI

K.2.2 Improve and validate the concept The hypothesis is that a CDTI should make a visual scan quicker and more effective by directing it towards other traffic. Measurement and questionnaire analysis as summarised above are required to validate this (or otherwise).

197

GAINS D4.4 AERODROME OPERATIONS DEMONSTRATION REPORT

198