What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

ADSB beaconX control head

vlittle

Well Known Member
Here is a preview of the beaconX controller that we developed based on the open-source huVVer-AVI devices. I have moved this from another thread, in order to focus on this one application.

Status: The software/hardware combination is ready for flight testing. Lab testing has been successful— the photo below shows the XP status returned from a tailBeaconX transponder after Altitude and Mode info was sent by the controller.

The test bird uses a Dynon D10A, but most common serial altitude streams can be used.

The huVVer-AVI is available in both a 2” and a 3” version to fit (or retrofit) easily. I will provide the software load directly. Right now, only for Beta trials, but a full release will come later.

Vern

0AE87C45-1CDA-4D13-BABC-46B2B3620493.jpg
 
Very nice, Vern.

Glad there is a lower cost controller for the tailbeaconX forthcoming.

Something I forgot to mention is that uAvionics has supported me in this development. Great tech support.

Also Rob “Tweety” Prior has been reviewing the design and has volunteered to flight test. He’s the ‘B4’ in ‘B43D’. He was involved in the original Beta trial of the tailBeaconX.

VV
 
Great idea

Vern what a great idea. I will consider using that transponder/ADSB system on my next project now.
 
The controller has been successful integrated with a SkyView HDX serving as an altitude encoder and the tailBeaconX. TBX is responding to all control information. See pic.

The integration with a D10A in Tweety’s RV-6 is still a work in process. We may need to upload new software to the early Experimental version of the TBX. It’s reading the altitude but not responding to the control info. We are running the SL70 protocol.

The plan is to fly a two-ship formation for testing. Flying with a purpose, I love it!

0D77103F-027B-4669-9067-204890220D03.jpg
 
Last edited:
Flight testing with the huVVer-AVI programmed as a tailBeaconX control head was successful!

We flew a two-ship sortie to shake out all of the configuration modes and it all went well. A couple of cosmetic tweaks to the display have been made, documentation is being wrapped up and general availability will be well before AirVenture 2022.
IMG_2308-2.jpg

On the left is yours truly (Vern 'Voltar' Little) flying my Harmon Rocket as chase plane, and on the right is Rob 'Tweety' Prior in his RV-6 as flight lead and test bird. Rob has a TSO'd tailBeaconX installed and was one of the original developmental beta testers in Canada for the tailBeaconX.

With the assistance of Victoria (BC) tower, We spent 1.1 hours with Tweety squawking. All-in-all a successful sortie. Time well wasted.

VV
 
Last edited:
So what are the cosmetic changes, you ask?

IMG_2325.jpg

The numerical squawk code display has been slightly modified for legibility (different #1, #3, #4, #7) to look a little less like Runes. (I guess I had Runed my first attempt ;-)

The Reply icon has been modified and Ident is now indicated with a reversed icon, with white background. Ident is now also show in the (optional) transponder status field near the bottom.

IMG_2323.jpg

Not new, but this second image shows how a transponder code is entered. Holding the SWAP button enters a digit* editor where a secondary code is entered. When done, this secondary code is displayed on the SWAP button (like a standby frequency on a Com). Pressing the SWAP button the swaps the primary and secondary squawk codes, like the flip-flop on a Com.

*note these are octal digits.

VV
 
As of today (June 25, 2022), the first public version of the tailBeaconX control head App has been released!

It's available for downloading here: www.huVVer.tech/huvver-avi-tbx-app .

Of course, you'll need a huVVer-AVI flight instrument from MakerPlane as well. As mentioned previously, the App does not run on the M5Stack devices.

There is a QuickStart Guide with mechanical drawings, a wiring diagram, instructions for installing the App, and menu operation. In addtion to a tailBeaconX, you also need a serial altitude source, provided by most EFISs, or serial altitude encoders.

If you already have a huVVer-AVI installed, running the Flight Instruments software, you can connect the tailBeaconX to the open serial port and an optional IDENT switch to the X1 input. Download the new App to the huVVer-AVI using OTA (Over-The-Air) updates (WiFi).

Cheers, Vern
 
That's pretty impressive Vern, certainly makes the tail beaconX a much more attractive proposition. BTW do you have a tail beacon on your Rocket? If it was mounted where the tail light normally is, seems it would be vulnerable to damage on the ground.
 
Hi Jim. I don’t have one on my Rocket, but Rob Prior has one on his 6, mounted on the Stinger. He’s done all the in-flight testing.

My tailBeaconX is going into my new build, along with the OnSpeed system and seven custom displays (huVVer-AVI devices).

Cheers, Vern
 
That's pretty impressive Vern, certainly makes the tail beaconX a much more attractive proposition. BTW do you have a tail beacon on your Rocket? If it was mounted where the tail light normally is, seems it would be vulnerable to damage on the ground.

Any damage I could incur while manoeuvering on the ground would mean that I was manoeuvering in a manner that would probably take out the rudder as well.

By far the largest risks are moving the plane with the tow bar, or leaving the plane parked on a ramp and someone walking past it too close. At a fly-in this weekend I stuck a flag in the ground behind the rudder (one of those collapsing flags that you get with a bike trailer), and nobody damaged it. But I may still move the tBX into the wingtip to make it more secure.
 
I assume you are thinking inside the glass fairing like some com antennas. I wonder how well it would perform in that spot?
Jim
 
I wasn't thinking about damage while moving on the ground, more about working around the machine , such as lifting the tail with a hoist.
However, if it is feasible to mount it in a wingtip then I'm interested.
Thanks, Jim.
 
Here's a teaser video produced by MakerPlane for the huVVer-AVI TBX controller.

It's a standard unit (3" version), loaded with the TBX App. Anyone with an existing unit running the Flight Instrument package can download the App from huVVer.tech. The TBX App replaces the stock Flight Instruments App, but it can always be swapped back.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6r_VQ2zDBA

Note: the huVVer-AVI is not actually connected to a tailBeaconX in this video, so ignore the XP status fields.

Cheers, Vern
 
Last edited:
Evidence of the huVVer-AVI tailBeaconX controller in action:

First, Rob Prior in his RV-6, Tweety. Note the tailBeaconX on the tail stinger. You may need to click on the photo to make it larger. Rob has been involved with testing uAvionix devices since the beginning of the Aireon Canadian field trials.

tweety.jpg

Next, yours truly in my Harmon Rocket, Voltar. I don't have my tailBeaconX installed yet. My development unit is installed on my new build.

Voltar.jpg

Photos credit: Brodie Winkler
 
Update: See
https://www.avweb.com/aviation-news/whitaker-gets-nextgen-marching-orders-from-gao/

Excerpt: …The goal is to transition to satellite-based navigation services and digital communications throughout the system…

So it makes sense for all new builds to install diversity transponders. As for digital communications, that will probably be another expensive piece of gear…

Vern

Just to be clear, the TailbeaconX is not a diversity transponder. It is a single, non-diverse transponder connected to a dipole antenna.

This doesn't seem like a big deal until one starts down the gopher hole discussion around the diversity bit in the digital data stream, when it is and isn't required to be set, etc.

Yes "diversity" means something very specific when one starts to look into the technical minutae... The TailbeaconX simply is not a diversity transponder.

EDIT: with the above being said, the TailbeaconX is an easy path to compliance. The controller offered by Vern makes it also a much more economical alternative. This is all to the good!
 
Last edited:
Just to be clear, the TailbeaconX is not a diversity transponder. It is a single, non-diverse transponder connected to a dipole antenna.

This doesn't seem like a big deal until one starts down the gopher hole discussion around the diversity bit in the digital data stream, when it is and isn't required to be set, etc.

Yes "diversity" means something very specific when one starts to look into the technical minutae... The TailbeaconX simply is not a diversity transponder.

EDIT: with the above being said, the TailbeaconX is an easy path to compliance. The controller offered by Vern makes it also a much more economical alternative. This is all to the good!

Point taken. When I lobbied uAvionix to develop the tailBeaconX (by using a bent dipole antenna), they initially had “no interest” in the Canadian market. My discussions emphasised that it was going to be essential for foreign airspace operation of American aircraft and that eventually the US would likely adopt it as well. I think it only took them about 8 months to develop the TBX after those discussions, and we were into beta testing of the Experimental version. Now NavCan accepts (and even promotes) them as being an equivalent to a true diversity transponder.
 
I still suspect that a non-diverse antenna mounted on the top of the fuselage between the wings and tail is going to show to be adequate for most GA aircraft in Canada. Pointing up, it has the best chance of reaching the satellites. Ground stations are a lot closer and generally aren't directly below you anyway, so even if there's some attenuation to the ground, the signal will still be strong enough to get through... But that wasn't a configuration they tested, apparently.

Now that we have the ability to test performance using NavCanada's own online tools, we should also be past the point of needing an avionics shop to check our transponders.
 
Rob - Vern - excellent points on all fronts.

WRT the NavCanada PAPR tool, I'm not convinced of its validity, in its current iteration, as a means of troubleshooting or verifying performance. The "hit rate" is so low that I can't be sure the performance issue is one associated with the aircraft or with the space segment (although I HIGHLY suspect the latter).

I've often thought that installing the transponder antenna at about the 45 degree point between aircraft waterline and the top of the fuselage would perhaps yield very useful performance.

In many Glastar and Sportsman aircraft a dipole is mounted on the side wall of the fuselage back in the tail section very near the leading edge of the horizontal stabilizer. This should be a sub-optimal position with respect to ground-based Secondary Surveillance Radar, especially for stations ahead of the aircraft. This supposition has been proven to be incorrect. With this in mind I have to think there would be little in terms of performance loss by mounting the transponder antenna fairly far aft on an RV, perhaps within a couple of feet of the horizontal stabilizer, and again, pointing "kind of upward" on the curvature of the fuselage.
 
Back
Top