Maybe I am misinterpreting some of the comments about ADS-B technology, but in my previous experience it proved to be far more accurate than radar data. First I will provide reference to The FAAs guidance on ADS-B technology and AOPAs Nov 2019 issue. Then I will present my own observations from use of the system in the Capstone Program.
https://www.faa.gov/nextgen/programs/adsb/Archival/ (It’s main purpose was testing ADS-B technology in a remote part of Alaska that was without radar coverage to increase safety and find a more reliable tracking method of aircraft in operating around terrain that obscured radar coverage. It had two phases, after which recommendations and improvements were made that are now being implemented nationwide.)
First, Directly from the FAA website on ADS-B technology.
https://www.faa.gov/nextgen/equipadsb/c ... /ins_outs/“ADS-B Out
ADS-B Out works by broadcasting information about an aircraft's GPS location, altitude, ground speed and other data to ground stations and other aircraft, once per second. Air traffic controllers and aircraft equipped with ADS-B In can immediately receive this information. This offers more precise tracking of aircraft compared to radar technology, which sweeps for position information every 5 to 12 seconds.
Radio waves are limited to line of site meaning radar signals cannot travel long distances or penetrate mountains and other solid objects. ADS-B ground stations are smaller and more adaptable than radar towers and can be placed in locations not possible with radar. With ground stations in place throughout the country, even in hard to reach areas, ADS-B provides better visibility regardless of the terrain or other obstacles.”A news article from Aopas November 2019 issue.
https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all ... -b-and-atc“Terminal controllers now receive aircraft position updates every one second, instead of the 4.6 seconds typical with terminal radar systems, he explained.”I started flying in Alaska in 1999, the same year the Capstone program was started in the Yukon- Kuskokwim Delta which was the test bed for gathering data on ADS-B technology. I flew aircraft equipped with both the avionics of the Capstone Phase 1 and Capstone Phase 2 program. Sometime near the beginning of the program, the airline I worked for started equipping our aircraft with the new technology. These aircraft were based and mostly operated out of Bethel, Alaska which was a non radar environment. However, we would fly them back to Anchorage every so often to rotate the aircraft for maintenance or charter work. We weren’t too far along in the program, when the FAA told us to deactivate the ADS-B on our aircraft when returning to the Anchorage radar environment. With the different sample rates of data updating on the controller’s screen between the ADS-B and the slower radar returns, our aircraft would show up on two different spots on the radar screen. One being the conventional radar return using our squawk code and the other being displayed using the one second refresh of ADS-B data that was assigned a separate airplane specific ID code. This would create a collision alert for the controller as our aircraft was displayed in to different places at the same time but in close proximity to each other. Their solution was to have us turn off our ADS-B broadcast since most other aircraft operating around Anchorage were not equipped with it. Then, all aircraft displayed were under the same set of conditions with conventional radar returns and the controllers were not being distracted by the false collision alerts that were generated.
Looking at the data flight-aware displayed for 93012’s flight shows approximately a 16 second refresh rate using 3 different receivers (KBDL, KBAF, & KHVN). Presumably, the actual FAA radar recording will show the ADS-B data with a much higher rate of refresh than flight-aware which will limit the interpolation of data for 16 second intervals and hopefully yield a more accurate representation of the aircraft flight path. I understand flight aware data is far from a perfect representation, but at the moment it provides the most accurate data available to the general public despite its shortcomings. When doing research, I like to use as many different references as possible and cross check the data. Flight aware is a source of information, albeit with some errors which I and other users of have pointed out. However, I would have to disagree with the observation that ADS-B data is not useful. Based on my previous experience with ADS-B generated data, I would say that it portrays fairly accurate information for the time stamp being displayed as it is data generated by the aircraft itself and not some radar that is miles away. Clearly a lot can happen in the 16 seconds prior to refresh on the flight-aware display, but the next snapshot is most likely a fairly accurate snapshot of the aircraft’s data set at that moment in time.
Apologies in advance if I have misinterpreted the comments about ADS-B technology.
(Unequivocally, the use of GPS and ADS-B offered the best location information compared to other cockpit tools including, TCAS, LORAN , VOR, NDB, etc. However its incredible accuracy while solving many situational awareness shortcomings has resulted in pilots becoming so confident in its data, they push on into weather they may not have otherwise tried to penetrate. While decreasing some accident types, it has increased others. That is another topic for another time and place...) edit