GPS Issue

[tombuch 0]

There is another thread in this forum that addresses a problem with jump planes conflicting with other air traffic. The thread sort of wandered a bit and suggested that pilots flying near a DZ should know about the skydiving operation. Another post suggested that since skydiving drop zones are not included in GPS units, we should work to get them included. That’s my topic for this post/thread.

For those who do not know anything about airspace, please see my feature on The Ranch web site at: http://ranchskydive.com/safety/tb_article08.htm

Drop zones are currently NOT included in GPS databases. That has become a serious issue as pilots migrate to this new technology. It has become easy for a pilot to flight plan using the latest FAA approved flight planning software and not know that his flight goes directly over a drop zone. A pilot can then fly an airplane equipped with the latest GPS technology and most current database, and never know his flight passed over an active drop zone.

The problem is huge, and it will get worse before it gets better. I’ve been working this issue aggressively for more than a year, and so has USPA. The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) added their voice to the discussion recently, and we have some resolution on the horizon, but a final fix is still a long way off.

Drop zones are still listed in FAA databases as analog locations defined by distance and radial from a VOR. GPS units and flight planning software require digital data such as lat/long coordinates. Since DZ’s are handled as analog data, there is currently no way to get skydiving drop zones into the standard GPS dataset. The same is true for gliders, hang gliders, and ultralight locations.

The FAA is currently working to digitize their data as part of an ongoing modernization effort. They expect to have drop zones in digital form within about a year, although there is a possibility that time frame could be expedited. Last week the FAA agreed to distribute lat/longs for skydiving drop zones to GPS manufactures and data providers on a CD of other data. That will happen as soon as the data is in digital form, and was driven by AOPA. So, in about a year we can expect to have digital data delivered to GPS data providers.

Once data providers have digital detail defining drop zones they will need to update their firmware to display the data, and then actually add the data to their units. That takes time and costs money, and the extra data requires memory. Many of the manufacturers (including Garmin) have said they are not interested in providing drop zone data, so that will require a push, but it doesn’t help to push the manufacturers when the data isn’t even available. This part of the effort will probably begin in earnest in about a year.

Big jets and commercial airlines get their data in a different form for use in Flight Management Systems. This data is defined by an international standard that is updated every two years. The standard is managed by an industry working group that meets just twice each year, and we now have some support on that committee. We are currently working to add drop zones to the data standard for FMS systems, and with a bit of luck will be able to roll out the new standard by late 2005 or early 2006. As with GPS, most FMS providers do not currently plan to take advantage of the data if it becomes available. So again, we will need to attack this issue once the international data distribution standard includes drop zones, gliders, hang gliders, and ultralights.

Once data is available and manufacturers upgrade their systems to recognize the new data, pilots will need to upgrade their boxes and add the new data, then they will probably need to select the data class for display. This adds a long term legacy issue that will delay full implementation for many years.

The key is to drive the availability of data, and then push manufacturers to include the data in their boxes and software releases as a safety of flight issue. USPA and AOPA are working on this problem. FAA is on board in the form of the Aeronautical Charting Office. We can not expect any remedy in the near term, but I think we have a long term solution in the works.

In the mean time, we need to make an extra effort at pilot outreach. Local pilots can add drop zones to their own GPS units as user defined waypoints. Drop zones would do well to communicate with local pilot organizations and FBO’s, and provide their coordinates so pilots can add this detail one DZ at a time. For a sample of an airport notice, please see: http://ranchskydive.com/ranch-pilot-caution.pdf

Tom Buchanan
Instructor Emeritus
Comm Pilot MSEL,G
Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

[LouDiamond 1]

Quote

Drop zones are currently NOT included in GPS databases

Strange you brought this up. I did a few Birdman jumps yesterday with a gentleman who also happened to be a pilot. He has a Garmin 296 that he uses frequently and had rigged up a hand mount for it so he could take it on Birdman jumps. The one thing I noticed as I was playing with it was that the DZ(Raeford) was annotated on the GPS screen as was other flight data( we have Ft Bragg,restricted air space to deal with sometimes). I am assuming Raeford was annotated on the GPS system due to it's being an established air park for quite sometime(correct me if I'm mistaken). What parameters do DZs have to met in order to be listed in GPS databases? Again, I am assuming, that if a DZ is at an established airport/park then it is probably in the GPS database. I imagine DZs where the strip is grass and/ or only used for parachuting may have the problem you mentioned.

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[tombuch 0]

Quote

Quote

Drop zones are currently NOT included in GPS databases

Strange you brought this up. I did a few Birdman jumps yesterday with a gentleman who also happened to be a pilot. He has a Garmin 296 that he uses frequently and had rigged up a hand mount for it so he could take it on Birdman jumps. The one thing I noticed as I was playing with it was that the DZ(Raeford) was annotated on the GPS screen as was other flight data( we have Ft Bragg,restricted air space to deal with sometimes). I am assuming Raeford was annotated on the GPS system due to it's being an established air park for quite sometime(correct me if I'm mistaken). What parameters do DZs have to met in order to be listed in GPS databases?

According to both Garmin and the FAA there is no means of distributing data about drop zones from the FAA database. It is possible that your friend entered the drop zone as a user defined waypoint, or a third party content provider may have a listing of recreational activities that was incorporated into a consumer GPS unit. My GPS has my home DZ listed complete with a parachute symbol, and that's only because I took the trouble to add it myself.

Individual airports are listed in GPS databases. According to Jeppesen, The FAA provides a complete listing of all the airports that are included in printed charts, but most GPS manufacturers remove listings for private use airports. Raeford is probably included as a standard public use airport.

The FAA database that includes parachuting is not digital, and thus can not be shared with GPS providers.

Tom Buchanan
Instructor Emeritus
Comm Pilot MSEL,G
Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

[Hooknswoop 19]

Did it show Raeford as an airport or DZ or both? GPS's will shopw airports, but don't show which airports are also DZ's.

Tom- Good job with this effort, it will have an impact on safety.

Derek

[mattb 0]

Great article!

For skydivers who may think that it is hard to believe a pilot could fly right over a dropzone without noticing trust me it isn't. As a student pilot I can't tell you the number of times I didn't see an airport until the last minute or flew right over a grass strip without noticing it. Airports (particularly unpaved airports) are not that obvious. If a pilot if flying a flight of a resonable distance - say 200 miles - he could easily fly over dozens of small airports in a state like Minnesota that has a plethora of public and private fields. Having jumped for several years before I started flying I consider myself very aware of the risks and agree the system is far from perfect.

Good luck getting this data from the FAA and into the Garmin's that seem to be everywhere in GA now.

Matt

[Flyer2Diver 0]

I'm very glad to hear that you're working on this. I remember when I was learning to fly over northern NJ and we'd frequently be tuned to approach and hear newton or sussex announcing jump operations. We'd steer clear, but I suspect many pilots don't listen to approach (especially because it's hard to know what frequency to tune on a long flight without actually getting flight following handoffs or being IFR).

Maybe this could be the subject of an Aviation Safety Program seminar (I believe the FSDO gives those?)

_______________________________
30005KT 10SM SKC 23/05 A3006

[kallend 2,146]

I cannot begin to imagine why there's a problem converting VOR distance/radial data to lat/long. in any format of choice. It's just a bit of 3-d trigonometry. I already have a program that I wrote for my own use that does just this. That's the sort of thing computers do very well.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[tombuch 0]

Quote

I cannot begin to imagine why there's a problem converting VOR distance/radial data to lat/long. in any format of choice. It's just a bit of 3-d trigonometry. I already have a program that I wrote for my own use that does just this. That's the sort of thing computers do very well.

Well I can imagine the problem. The FAA is converting lots of data and many of the folks doing that are handling their regular charting responsibilities at the same time. Much of the data needs to be verified at the source, and all of the placements need to be confirmed. They can't do everything all at once, so they handle one element at a time. As I understand it right now they are migrating IFR elements. Our little piece of the pie will need to wait. I think I mentioned the drop zone data conversion is expected to happen in about a year, and it could be faster.

The data is actually held by several parts of the FAA and NFDC. The group that has agreed to release the database of drop zones is targeting a year for that part of the project. There is another group that also has the data, and we are working on driving them to convert our little piece a bit faster. I get the impression it's a logistical/budget/staffing issue that needs to be handled internally. I think everybody is on our side, but our side isn't that big.

Sometimes we need to be patient. What seems simple and easy from the outside can be a bit more complex on the inside. It's taken a bit of time to understand the system and get folks on board for the solutions that will help us over the long haul. I like to look at the progress and successes, and not dwell on what 'could be' if everybody saw priorities just like I do.

Peace,

Tom Buchanan
Instructor Emeritus
Comm Pilot MSEL,G
Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

[LouDiamond 1]

Quote

Did it show Raeford as an airport or DZ or both?

It showed up as an airport/field. No parachute symbol was present. He very well may have waypointed the DZ himself. However, there was additional flight info on the screen that I doubt he could of added and there was the restricted airspace pop ups that appeared when we got close to the base. I was really impressed with how fast the unit could aquire and re-aquire satelites and the on screen flight instruments jived with the actual A/C instruments.

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[Flyer2Diver 0]

Raeford shows up as a public use airport ("PK Airpark", 5W4). I suspect that's why it's in the Garmin DB. A while back when I flew up near The Ranch, it didn't appear in the Bendix/King KLN-94 I was using. It's also a very hard field to spot unless you know the landmarks.

As for the restricted airspace, that's fairly standard fare for GPSs. The problem with these toys is that they work so well for most things that it's easy to become dependant and stop looking at sectional charts, etc. (I guess it's not unlike the jumper who becomes dependant on his audible).

Blue Skies

_______________________________
30005KT 10SM SKC 23/05 A3006

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

It showed up as an airport/field.

GPS databases can show airports, but don't show that skydiving may be located at that airport. So an unsuspecting pilot may fly right over the top of the airport/DZ, using the GPS for navigation, and never know that they flew over a DZ.

Getting DZ's into GPS databases would have a direct impact on safety. I hope it gets done.

Derek

[tombuch 0]

Quote

Raeford shows up as a public use airport ("PK Airpark", 5W4). I suspect that's why it's in the Garmin DB. A while back when I flew up near The Ranch, it didn't appear in the Bendix/King KLN-94 I was using.

You are correct, The Ranch does not appear in most GPS databases because it is a private use facility.

The FAA maintains a database of all airports, including private use facilities. They distribute that list to GPS manufacturers and data providers. There is a code attached to the airport record that defines a facility as public, private, military, etc. so electronic systems know how to display the specific facility.

I spoke with Garmin about the issue, and they said that manufacturers remove all the private use airports because there are too many of them, and that they just add clutter and use memory.

An airport owner can call Garmin (actually Jeppesen, the provider of the data) and request that his private use airport appear in their database, and Garmin will add it back in, but it will be depicted as a public use airport. The folks at Garmin explained that since they don't include private use airports, their software doesn't know what they are, and doesn't know how to interpret the FAA code indicating the airport is private. Thus, the airport can only be depicted as public use. The only way around this would be for Garmin to update their software to interpret the private use code and to then display it with a different symbol. They won't do that because they do not perceive a widespread demand, do not want to incur the cost of writing and testing the needed code, and do not want to use the needed memory.

The same problem faces us in the skydiving world.

Once the FAA begins distributing drop zone data the manufacturers of GPS boxes will need to choose to include the code, and they will need to rewrite their software to interpret and display the new data. Any pilot with an old box who wants to access the new code will need to update his database with a recent version that includes drop zones, and he will also need to update the software (OS) of the GPS so the new code will display. That creates a long term legacy issue that would deny drop zone data to older units. In fact, many older GPS units have already exhausted the available memory and are no longer supported with new software or database updates.

There are several large manufacturers of GPS, and many smaller users producing things like moving maps and flight planners. Some of these companies will be delighted to rewrite their code and include drop zones, some will decide not to include the new data. Each manufacturer will need to be approached on it's own.

That's a bit more information about the issue. It all begins to make sense once you understand how the systems are integrated, and how the manufacturers support their products.

Tom Buchanan
Instructor Emeritus
Comm Pilot MSEL,G
Author: JUMP! Skydiving Made Fun and Easy

[kallend 2,146]

Quote

Quote

I cannot begin to imagine why there's a problem converting VOR distance/radial data to lat/long. in any format of choice. It's just a bit of 3-d trigonometry. I already have a program that I wrote for my own use that does just this. That's the sort of thing computers do very well.

Well I can imagine the problem. The FAA is converting lots of data and many of the folks doing that are handling their regular charting responsibilities at the same time. Much of the data needs to be verified at the source, and all of the placements need to be confirmed. They can't do everything all at once, so they handle one element at a time. As I understand it right now they are migrating IFR elements. Our little piece of the pie will need to wait. I think I mentioned the drop zone data conversion is expected to happen in about a year, and it could be faster.

The data is actually held by several parts of the FAA and NFDC. The group that has agreed to release the database of drop zones is targeting a year for that part of the project. There is another group that also has the data, and we are working on driving them to convert our little piece a bit faster. I get the impression it's a logistical/budget/staffing issue that needs to be handled internally. I think everybody is on our side, but our side isn't that big.

Sometimes we need to be patient. What seems simple and easy from the outside can be a bit more complex on the inside. It's taken a bit of time to understand the system and get folks on board for the solutions that will help us over the long haul. I like to look at the progress and successes, and not dwell on what 'could be' if everybody saw priorities just like I do.

Peace,

That sounds like bureacratic BS to me. I could visit every DZ in the country, measure its lat and long with a certified GPS and create a database in way less than a year. If there's a hold up (and I believe you when you say there is) it has nothing to do with the database technology or format conversions.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[newsstand 0]

Having worked in the GPS industry from '86 - '96 I have to agree that aquiring new data would be a snap but you are forgetting that we are dealing with a beauracracy here and things always move slow. Also if they are translating large amounts of other data it is simply a matter of waiting in line. I can't tell you how often I have to tell people it will be two months before their admittedly trivial project will be done when the reason is that it will be seven weeks before it comes to the top of my list.

"Truth is tough. It will not break, like a bubble, at a touch; nay, you may kick it about all day like a football, and it will be round and full at evening."
-- Oliver Wendell Holmes