Canada ADS-B Diversity Requirement

[Charles]

It’s not yet clear whether there’s room on the top of my fuselage for the additional antenna. It would have to share space with 2-GPS and 1 comm antenna, plus a magnetometer.

How about mounting it inside the tail on the same ground plane as the bottom-mounted VHF antenna?

[Jetblast]

Rich: When you wrote "This would allow anyone who wishes to use the plane to fly into Canada whenever desired." it might need precision.
If you don't have a top antenna you will not satisfy space ADSB and you would not be able to fly above FL180 in some regions now. Starting next spring you would be limited under 12500'.

And you are right that you need to find some space for an antenna on the top of your aircraft. In another post I saw that there is a combination VHF/Sat antenna that is available.

Charles: are you suggesting that the antenna would be inside the tail on top of the base of the hanging down antenna? If it is what you mean, I wonder if the tail would block the signal or not. I used to own a KR2 and the transponder antenna was hidden in the wing. It worked well except when the body (wood+gelcoat) was between the radar antenna and the transponder antenna.

[Rich]

It’s not yet clear whether there’s room on the top of my fuselage for the additional antenna. It would have to share space with 2-GPS and 1 comm antenna, plus a magnetometer.

And you are right that you need to find some space for an antenna on the top of your aircraft. In another post I saw that there is a combination VHF/Sat antenna that is available.

How about mounting it inside the tail on the same ground plane as the bottom-mounted VHF antenna?

I'm not sure if that's any help, as it has to send/receive through the bases/groundplanes of those other antennas. It might even be worse. This might not be a factor after all, just something to be sure to check out.

VHF/Sat antenna itself doesn't help me. It's really a VHF/GPS antenna.

[Rich]

Rich: When you wrote "This would allow anyone who wishes to use the plane to fly into Canada whenever desired." it might need precision.
If you don't have a top antenna you will not satisfy space ADSB and you would not be able to fly above FL180 in some regions now. Starting next spring you would be limited under 12500'.

If I installed the 345, it would address the issue, which is why doing so would be a positive. It's what the entire +/- post was about. In this case I'm thinking of the next owner(s) of the plane as well as myself. If there is a problem with the top antenna it would presumably prevent me from doing a proper installation at all, making my internal debate moot.

[Jetblast]

Mhoran: could you provide an example of the US report? Also, I saw somewhere there is an FAA program I believe provide a $ credit once you've shown compliance? If you could provide details of that.

Here is an example of a passing test earlier in the thread: viewtopic.php?p=98426#p98426.

Here's an example of a failing test: PAPR_20220108_A2A1E5_473658739.pdf Note the "exceptions" and the highlighted missing elements and integrity & accuracy failures highlighted in red. This makes it very easy to tell if you have not met the performance requirements.

There was a rebate program up to 2020 but it ended after the ADS-B deadline passed. The rebate was $500. Here are some details: https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/faa-relaun ... out-rebate.

It is true that the US report is easy: Red=fail, no red= pass. That's my level of comprehension! I'll send these two reports along as example of where NC could go with theirs.

[Boatguy]

So is Diamond building planes in Canada that aren't compliant with the NC requirements and thus can't be flown in Canada without modification? Which means Transport Canada has certified planes that aren't compliant with NC?

This thread seems like a bit of a inconclusive thrash. Maybe DPA needs to ask Diamond to tell us what needs to be done so that our planes can be flown in Canada? And what of the Austrian built planes?

[Lou]

There is a new section in the August 10 release of AIP Canada dealing wth ADS-B. Here is an interesting bit:

"..., some customers have identified that they may not be able to meet the equipage requirements in time for the mandate effective date and, in some cases, they may require additional time to comply. To help this small number of customers bridge the gap, so long as system capacity permits, NAV CANADA will strive to accommodate aircraft unable to transmit ADS-B in accordance with the Canadian ADSB mandate.

...

"Unequipped foreign State aircraft not covered by a diplomatic note or formal agreement will be required to request accommodation in accordance with the procedure identified in the above section, whereas Canadian State aircraft, ..., will not be required to provide advance notice and will automatically be accommodated by NAV CANADA. For these flights, the following entry will be required in Item 18 of the flight plan:
• SUR/CANADSBX"

So ATC can accommodate non-compliant aircraft and there is a procedure for doing this. I would guess that in most situations they will be able to accommodate us, since radar is available or it is uncontrolled IFR like now. The mandate at this time is focussed on Class A and Class B airspace, with no deadline yet on Class C and D. It feels to me like they are focussed as usual on the carriers, and they just don't know what to do with GA.

Here is the link to AIP Canada in order to read the full section: https://www.navcanada.ca/en/2enreng10august2023.pdf

[Jetblast]

When they write "so long as system capacity permits", that induces variability. A controller may not want or might not be able to deal with the added workload. And since the staffing is short in most units, these added tasks will be the first to be targeted by restrictions.

It's interesting that "Canadian state aircraft" will always be given the service. TC wants users to equipped themselves but they don't see the need to equip their aircraft...

[CFIDave]

Just got an email from FlightPlan.com stating also the need to modify your ICAO flight plan for Canadian ADS-B, even if properly equipped:


UPDATE YOUR ICAO SETTINGS TO MEET NAV CANADA ADS-B REQUIREMENT
As of Aug. 10, 2023, NAV CANADA has implemented the mandate of ADS-B “Out” in Canadian Class A airspace. For compliance, aircraft are required to be equipped with an ADS-B “Out” transponder and have antenna capability for broadcast toward both ground-based and space-based ADS-B receivers.

In addition, “SUR/CANMANDATE” will need to be included in Item 18 when filing ICAO flight plans in Canadian Class A airspace. In light of this, we’ve made it easy to include the remark by selecting the new CANMANDATE box under Settings > ICAO Data for appropriately equipped aircraft. This eliminates the need to manually enter the remark in Item 18 when creating a flight plan.


A way to do this in Foreflight may be to modify your aircraft profile SUR field. But this "Canadian Mandate" will then show up for US flights as well.

[Charles]

I requested the test results from NavCanada for the Canadian mandate for my DA40 with a bottom-mounted transponder antenna connected to a GTX345 transponder. At first glance, the report shows 100% accuracy so I felt pretty good about it. Closer inspection, however, revealed that only 6% of expected transmissions were received (a total of less than 80 over a 90-minute period). I take this to mean that a bottom-mounted antenna will not be sufficient to meet the mandate.

Two emails to Diamond several months ago asking for advice on achieving compliance with the mandate have remained unanswered.

I will come back and post the report later.