New ADS-B Requirement Built on an ASA/CASA Lie

[Dick Smith]

It won’t be long before all IFR aircraft will require ADS-B Out. Yes, a little Twin Comanche based at Longreach or a 172 flying out of Birdsville!

Because of the ASA middle-management “ego” tripping (“we were first in the world…”), Australia is going to lead the world. Even in the USA, where an ADS-B mandate comes in at 2020, it’s not below 10,000 feet in G and E airspace.

Yes, the Australian requirement is unique in the world and I would imagine will send more small aviation charter businesses and training organisations out of business.

The Regulation Impact Statement (“RIS”), which is prepared by CASA and Airservices, is a total sham. He talks of savings of 10% to 15% in fuel and alludes that all aircraft will benefit in this way. Of course, if you are a GA aircraft flying predominantly in uncontrolled airspace, ADS-B Out will not help you in any way in relation to saving fuel.

Remember, costs can be up to $20,000 as you not only have to get an approved Mode-S transponder but also, in many cases, upgrade the GPS to the very latest standard.

And it looks as if they will get away with it! The industry is so weak (primarily because there has been so little money in GA for so long because of our ridiculous regulations) that there is virtually no-one powerful to object.

RIP General Aviation.

[underfire]

Interesting that AUS mandates ADSB, when Airbus/Boeing ac will be fitted, beginning in 2015, with ADSB-2.
The FAA mandate in 2020 is for ADSB-2

[Jack Ranga]

Too late now Dick :cool:

[Old Akro]

Too late now Dick

Wasn't too late for Part 61!!

And VFR aircraft got a last minute exemption from the ADSB madness.

Its primarily GA IFR aircraft that fly below 10,000 ft who are being screwed by CASA / AsA.

There is no safety benefit for IFR aircraft in class G airspace. There is no cost / flight routing / traffic separation benefit in class G. Zilch, nada, none.

Australia is the only country in the world that is mandating ADSB for all IFR in all classes of airspace at all levels.

And Dick left out some costs. Any aircraft with a non WAAS GPS (ie anything made by King or Trimble, plus Garmin 150 & 300 series and 400 & 500 series non WAAS) will require:

ADSB transponder
New grey code altitude encoder
WAAS GPS
New WAAS gps antennae
New coax cable for the WAAS GPS antennae
Sundry engineering orders for the installation (another special Australian notion)
An avioincs rack re-layout if the new GPS is taller than the old one (ie if the existing GPS is a Garmin 155XL, 300XL or King 89 / 94)
If the installation is (say) a Garmin 430 or 650 and it replaces an old King Nav/com (for example) then a new GPS compatible indicator will be required.

This could easily top $25k

[peterc005]

The cost will be nothing like $20,000 for GA.

A Bendix King KT74 costs about $3,800, and is a reasonably simple upgrade from older transponders. The trays are similar sizes and I assume the same antennas and cables can be reused.

Bendix King KT74 (http://www.ozpilot.com.au/Avionics/Bendix-King/Bendix-King-KT74/p-86-161-1385/)

Add, say, $1,000 tops for an Engineering Order and maybe $1,000 for the LAME install.

Probably $5k or $6k for the Mode S transponder upgrade, and you've got a shiny new piece of avionics.

Transponders need to be tested every two years (from memory) and the avionics LAMEs are getting fussier about tolerances, forcing owners to upgrade older transponders anyway. I've been told the Narco AT150 in my plane won't pass again.

If I have to get a new Mode C transponder, I'd just pay a bit more for Mode S to be safe. I assume this will be the same for a lot of owners.

[p.j.m]

It won’t be long before all IFR aircraft will require ADS-B Out. Yes, a little Twin Comanche based at Longreach or a 172 flying out of Birdsville!

Excellent news, shame its taken so long!

The improvement in safety will pay for these things many times over and again.
If a small operator can't afford $2 or $3k to outfit their aircraft, then they shouldn't be flying anyway!

No point scaremongering, and sensationalising Dick - its not going to be anywhere near $20k for small operators, and you know it!
How come you are playing down the safety aspect on this? Shame on you!

Imagine if you beloved MDX went down with one of these things installed. The rescue crew could be sent DIRECTLY to the exact location.

[Slippery_Pete]

It seems safety improvements to some are only warranted where they are free.

Ask every airline pilot in Australia who operates to uncontrolled aerodromes whether they think brand new transponders country wide for the IFR GA fleet would be a safety improvement.

Every second GA IFR aircraft which never sees CTA probably doesn't have the mode C working properly anyway.

In fact, I think it should be mandated for ALL aircraft, not just IFR. That would be the single biggest safety improvement we could make to Australian aviation.

The safety benefit for the country of the entire GA fleet getting new transponders would have to be tenfold more than removing the Willy flight planning restriction.

Which one are you going to bat for the most?

Partial subsidy for owners - perhaps.
Unrealistic expectation for old mate who's 1963 IFR model C172 hasn't had a new piece of avionics for the last 40 years - hardly.

[Horatio Leafblower]

The improvement in safety will pay for these things many times over and again.
If a small operator can't afford $2 or $3k to outfit their aircraft, then they shouldn't be flying anyway!


Mate you obviously haven't installed new TXPRs and new GPSs in an IFR aeroplane.

GNS650 installed by Eaglecopters was $30k, new Trig TXPR about $4k - as installed over 3 400-series Cessnas.

I don't mind installing new gear but yes it is a major cost.

Dick - Good luck with your campaign to remove this requirement.

:rolleyes:

[Old Akro]

Peter

You are only counting about half the costs. ADSB requires a C146a (WAAS) receiver. WAAS receivers require new, different antennae and new coax cable. For most aircraft this requires major diassembly of the interior to route the cable.

In my estimation, the absolute rock bottom price for this will be $6,500 for a secondhand 430W plus $5k installation.

And I think you'll find the KT74 price you are quoting is a US price without Aussie GST, duty, freight & margin. Or is the price from Ozpilot which has a little asterisk saying STC and install kit not included.

Plus, you forgot that you need a grey code altitude encoder which your old Narco is unlikely to have.

$1k installation will be 1 day or less for most avioincs shops. Good luck with that.

You're lucky because the AT150 is 3mm shorter than the KT74. and 10mm less deep. If it was 3mm the other way, it would require the whole stack to be rebuilt.

[Frank Arouet]

It always amazes me when people only read the last posts before weighing into the debate. Go back to the first post by Dick and you will note it is a requirement for IFR aircraft, not VFR in the circuit at Oodnabloodydatttta. So tell me pete pete and pjm (pete maybe), what is the safety advantage at uncontrolled airports? (And Jack, you should be ashamed of yourself baiting this mob). Another thing, where can you buy an IFR GPS setup for $2,000 that will make your Victa IFR legal. I know it's been attempted by one "knowledgeable" poster without an engineering order who thought he could remove his ADF and use his handheld GPS for NVMC flight. This bloke got caught and still barracks for the CAsA mob. Go figure if he's a Troll or not!


Sorry Dick, rant over.

[Old Akro]

The improvement in safety will pay for these things many times over and again.

THERE IS NO SAFETY BENEFIT.

There is a HUGE cost benefit to AsA. There is a BIG cost benefit to the airlines through reduced separation, faster sector times, less holding, etc.

There is no benefit to GA IFR aircraft under 10,000ft which will continue to mix with mode C VFR aircraft and non transponder gliders, balloons, RA(Aus) aircraft & historic aircraft.

Once again, Australia is the only country in the world doing this.

[chimbu warrior]

Imagine if you beloved MDX went down with one of these things installed. The rescue crew could be sent DIRECTLY to the exact location.

Didn't seem to help MH370.

I agree with Dick; this seems to be more about chest-beating than safety.

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

hey pjm.....

Reur "Excellent news, shame its taken so long!
The improvement in safety will pay for these things many times over and again."

Please explain...??

Serious question requiring a serious answer...thanks.

Griffo

[Hempy]

The sad part is, no one cares about GA IFR aircraft under A100 except the operators themselves anyway. ASA certainly don't, their contribution to the Navcharge coffers is so minuscule in the grand scheme of things as to be irrelevant. The decision is made so suck it up. It's coming, for the benefit of every airspace user. If the little guys go under because they can't afford to upgrade, stiff. If private IFR has to go VFR or stay home, stiff.

Don't shoot the messenger.

[p.j.m]

Didn't seem to help MH370.

MH370 wasn't within cooee of any land based receivers like MDX would be today, but point taken, and "international" aircraft should also have satellite ADS-B mandated.

[Dick Smith]

p.j.m.

You state, “the improvement in safety will pay for these things many times over and again”. How does an improvement in safety pay for the cost of the equipment? Let’s say you are a Twin Comanche owner based at Bathurst and fly basically OCTA and therefore use our 1940s self-separation “non-standards” for IFR flying. Where would you get any benefit in safety or any benefit from the accurate position your aircraft is transmitting?

[p.j.m]

ADSB requires a C146a (WAAS) receiver. WAAS receivers require new, different antennae and new coax cable.

More FUD? Any compatible GPS receiver will do fine, no need to run new cabling, existing GPS antenna/connectors will do the job.

[peterc005]

@Old Akro - if you follow the link provided it is an Australian supplier - Mendelssohn, who've always been good in the past. AUD $3,795 inc GST is the price.

My existing blind altitude encoder should work find and I'll use the KLN 94 as the GPS source.

In this case, where the Narco AT150 will need to be replaced anyway, the difference in cost between a Mode C and Mode S transponder will be a couple of hundred bucks.

I imagine all new planes will have Mode S transponders for this reason and it won't be easy to buy something only Mode C.

Check out the Trig TT21, it's about $2,800 with built in altitude encoder:

Trig TT21 Class 2 Mode S Transponder (http://www.ozpilot.com.au/Transponders/Trig-TT21-Class-2-Mode-S-Transponder/p-103-284/)

[p.j.m]

Where would you get any benefit in safety or any benefit from the accurate position your aircraft is transmitting?

Dick, please stop now, everyone knows you have an agenda, pretending to be thick, or obsuse doesn't fool anyone.

Just a single accident avoided, HELLO?

[peterc005]

The benefit for GA is better situational awareness.

Eventually everyone will have ADSB/Mode S, and once cheap ADSB receivers, like the OzRunways Raspberry Pie unit, become common place you'll be able to see who's around without radar.

[OZBUSDRIVER]

The best description I can think of to define ADS-B.

The technology burden is transferred from AirServices to the aircraft owner. AirServices is a passive receiver of the transmitted information. the aircraft owner must supply a certified platform to transmit the required data with the required reliability and integrity.

I have found enough information on this subject to choke a herd of elephants.

Best to talk to actual owners who are live within the system.

[garrya100]

Sorry to disappoint you, but a KLN94 doesn't meet the required standard for ADSB. You need to have An FDE enabled device, read TSO145 or better. The KLN94 is only TSO129.

I've been going through this process working out the costs of upgrading my machine, and the with the cost of upgrading the 430 to the W model (TSO145a), the cost of replacing the transponder and the paper work etc, it will be around $15k depending on the exchange rate.

For those that don't have an upgradable GPS, around $20K sounds about right.

I'll also add ADSB in to OzRunways to get some use out of ADSB, can't really see how it will help me otherwise....

[Old Akro]

Any compatible GPS receiver will do fine, no need to run new cabling, existing GPS antenna/connectors will do the job.

wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong

ADS-B as required for IFR requires a C146a GPS source. Period.

CASA are supposed to be running a programme to investigate using C129a. But I'm not optimistic.

Peter 005, we've had this debate before. The King KLN94 is not acceptable for ADS-B. You are misreading AC 21-45 v2.1. The KLN 94 is a C129a device. Soon its only use will be as a boat anchor, along with the Garmin 150 / 155XL & 300 XL.

From the CASA FAQ's :

14. If I have ADS-B connected to TSO 129, will I have to update the box?
Unless the aircraft has a separate approval for ADS-B compliance, the GNSS will require upgrading to TSO C145/146 since TSO C129 systems do not output all the information required for ADS-B.

[peterc005]

@Old Akro - the avionics LAME I've spoken to is happy to pick up a feed from the KLN 94, so that's good enough for me.

I'll wait until 2015 when the next transponder check is due though.

[BronteExperimental]

Peterc, You need a new LAME.
Why don't you just print CAO 20.18 and read it for yourself.
Or if you have already, share the reasons for your different interpretation?
BE

[Old Akro]

you'll be able to see who's around without radar.

No.

1. Unlike the USA, Australia is implementing ADS-B out only. The units have no ability to receive data.

2. VFR, RA(Aus), ballon, glider & historic aircraft will remain using mode C or will have no transponder at all. So, Ozrunways or any other non certified cheap thing will not see this traffic.

All of the mid-air "frights" I have on IFR plans had have been VFR aircraft or aircraft with non functioning or non-existent transponders. Not one of them would have been made better by my spending $25k on upgrading to ADS-B. This includes an instance of a conflicting direction same level VFR aircraft while I was in IMC!!

There is no benefit to GA IFR aircraft in class G airspace from the fitment of ADS-B

Australia is the only country in the would that is mandating ADS-B for all IFR aircraft in all airspace types at all levels.

[thorn bird]

I listen to all this back and forth...and aint it so Typical of our f..kced up system....nobody, including the regulator has the slightest idea of what is, or aint required, or what complies or what doesn't...Bloody marvelous...The land of the guess!!...guess what!!...Okay..."Simon Said"...spare me.....PLAIN LANGUAGE UNAMBIGUOUS REGULATIONS PLEASE!!!


I agree based on the evidence... all the ADSB mandate was for, was so Mc COMIC could big note himself in Montreal, and ASA directors could get a massive bonus paid for by unfortunate GA operators.

Modelled perhaps on the Solar subsidy where a whole bunch of rich people, who could afford to install solar panels, were subsidized by poor people who couldn't, God our democracy has become a joke!!...CORRUPTION PEOPLE!!

[LeadSled]

The improvement in safety will pay for these things many times over and again.pjm,(and slippery pete)
Absolute rubbish, and that is from AsA's own figures.

In the mid-levels, (10-25,000) the collision risk probabilities have been shown (using AsA's own model) to be a statistical zero, and several magnitudes less than the ICAO standard.

Under the existing arrangements, all classes of airspace in Australia have have a collision risk probability better than the ICAO target, which is about the same collision risk as an asteroid big enough to wipe out life on planet earth.

Neither AsA, nor anybody else, has ever been able to produce a genuine justification to the path that Australia is taking. Every attempt at a cost/benefit analysis to justify the policies have not even been genuine cost/benefit analysis, but more akin to cost/effectiveness analysis, where it is very obvious that it is effective for AsA to transfer costs to the industry in general.

I am reminded, some time ago, now, of a senior Virgin Flight Ops. executive extolling the theoretical virtues of ADS-B, but admitting that they could make a safety case to the board of the company, to justify the costs.

Of course, no trouble, just the Australian way, have it all made mandatory, and sing the safety song to the supremely ignorant, including many in the aviation sector -- as seen from some of the posts on this thread.

Ask every airline pilot in Australia who operates to uncontrolled aerodromes whether they think brand new transponders country wide for the IFR GA fleet would be a safety improvement.

Oh!! The wonderful world view of "Australian" pilots, where fact doesn't get a look in. I am reminded of the then AFAP Technical Director arguing that "a perception of a safety problem was the same as a demonstrated safety problem" and, therefor, Australian airspace management processes had to take into account "perceptions of a safety problem", even though rigorous analysis has shown the problem did not exist.

Being a pilot of any kind does not make you an airspace management expert, any more than having a drivers license makes you an expert on traffic engineering --- even if many think otherwise.

Tootle pip!!

PS: I don't understand the references to requiring a WAAS enabled GPS, although it is true that a number of Garmin GPS, that meet the Australian TSO's of a GPS source are WAAS compatible.

[CaptainMidnight]

I recall the same fuss here when transponders became mandatory for ops in CTA, except then there was only the print media, letters and aeroclub grumbling :)

Gotta move with the times and technology folks.

If you think you have a problem now, wait till 2016 when 200+ navaids will be switched off ......

Being a pilot of any kind does not make you an airspace management expert, any more than having a drivers license makes you an expert on traffic engineering --- even if many think otherwise.You've certainly got that right :D

[Hempy]

Didn't seem to help MH370.

MH370 wasn't within cooee of any land based receivers like MDX would be today, but point taken, and "international" aircraft should also have satellite ADS-B mandated.

Satellite ADS-B aka ADS-C ;)

[Jack Ranga]

(And Jack, you should be ashamed of yourself baiting this mob).

Oi :ugh: I'm not baiting anyone, merely stating the fact that it is far too late to change anything.

[VH-MLE]

"Being a pilot of any kind does not make you an airspace management expert, any more than having a drivers license makes you an expert on traffic engineering --- even if many think otherwise."

The irony of that statement is just classic but you had better tell that to your mate Dick...

[LeadSled]

The irony of that statement is just classic but you had better tell that to your mate Dick...

MLE,
Hard as it may seem to you, Dick has forgotten more about airspace management than most posters here will ever know.

It comes about from a wide variety of experience, world wide, not just flying experience as an end user, but the almost 50 years he has spent delving into the subject, aided by quite an army of people, both here and outside Australia, who have provided him with thoroughly expert advice.

And, for those of you who have a problem with English comprehension, I said: "Being a pilot of any kind does not make you an airspace management expert ---", I did not say "Being a pilot excludes you from ---"

Indeed, one pilot of my acquaintance, who has only ever flown in GA, never professionally, and has never worked for AsA, has also forgotten more about airspace management than most I have come across, his contribution to successful modelling of separation assurance, and valid calculation of collision risk, is just one quite unlikely ( as far as most of you would conceive) pilot to be an expert in this field, it can reasonably be said that he has contributed directly to the processes that have been eventually adopted by ICAO for separation assurance.

Of course, that separation assurance standard is at the heart ICAO "alphabet soup" airspace classification, where the target standard is achieved in each classification of airspace, and any further attempts ar risk reduction are just wasted resources --- something that is still not accepted by most of you, who, quite incorrectly, see G through A as progressively "safer" airspace, as opposed to what is actually the intent and the outcome.

Tootle pip!!

[Dexta]

I have an IFR C172 and a CIR, I rarely fly over 9,000', most of the time between 4,000' and 8,000' in class G. The reason I choose to fly IFR is so that I do not have to "scud run" and I enjoy the precision and skill involved in flying IFR.
My aircraft has a Garmin 300XL, and Mode c Xpndr. Come 2017 I will have to remove the 300XL as it is only TSO129a and replace it with a WAAS capable TSO 146 unit, I will have to remodel the panel, replace cables and antennae. The current quote was a ballpark of $25,000.
I am not going to spend 50% of the value of the aircraft on upgrading the avionics as I will not get that back when/if I sell it. So I have a choice to either fly VFR or not fly at all. If I fly VFR then I may be delayed hours or days waiting for cloud to lift or choose to scud run. If I drive then I have to take my chances on the "wonderful"Australian roads we have.
Also, flying at 4,000 to 6,000 there are no current ADS-B receivers that will pick me up anyway unless I'm flying where there is current radar coverage. So I have no benefit if I spend the money and reduced safety if I cannot afford to spend the money, terrific!

[VH-XXX]

@Old Akro - if you follow the link provided it is an Australian supplier - Mendelssohn, who've always been good in the past. AUD $3,795 inc GST is the price.

My existing blind altitude encoder should work find and I'll use the KLN 94 as the GPS source.

In this case, where the Narco AT150 will need to be replaced anyway, the difference in cost between a Mode C and Mode S transponder will be a couple of hundred bucks.

I imagine all new planes will have Mode S transponders for this reason and it won't be easy to buy something only Mode C.

Check out the Trig TT21, it's about $2,800 with built in altitude encoder:

Trig TT21 Class 2 Mode S Transponder (http://apicdn.viglink.com/api/click?format=go&key=1e857e7500cdd32403f752206c297a3d&loc=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pprune.org%2Fpacific-general-aviation-questions%2F542232-new-ads-b-requirement-built-asa-casa-lie.html&out=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ozpilot.com.au%2FTransponders%2FTrig-TT21-Class-2-Mode-S-Transponder%2Fp-103-284%2F&ref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pprune.org%2Fpacific-general-aviation-questions-91%2F)

PeterC005, seriously you are living in a fairytale. Your costs are nowhere representative of the true costs to the opeartor and industry. Simply quoting a new transponder cost from your on-line pilot supplies store it not going to come close to the actual total cost for many reasons. Also, not everyone is going to try and install their avionics themselves in their certified aircraft like you once tried to do unsuccessfully in your Victa.

I liken your costs to IT where you say it costs $600 for a computer from Harvey Norman so why did it cost $3,000 per PC to roll out to some government department. Chalk and cheese :ugh:

[OZBUSDRIVER]

Dexta, if your home 20 is correct, you are still inside the old j-curve.

Just in case you do fly elsewhere...
http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/wp-content/uploads/adsb_at_5000f_GM.jpg

The red bits are old school ssr, the green bits are within line of sight of an ADS-B receiver at 5000ft.

[swh]

The GPS source for ADS-B does not need to be panel mounted, the easiest solution for GA aircraft at the moment is the Trig TT31 which is a replacement for the KT76A, and use the Freeflight GPS located in the aircraft somewhere as the position source for the ADS-B.

The GPS unit in the panel is not required to be WAAS, nor is it required to be the position source for ADS-B.

Freeflight make a small GPS receiver designed specially as a stand alone position source for ADS-B. You can keep your Garmin 100 in the panel and still have ADS-B.

http://www.freeflightsystems.com/images/WAAS-GPS.pdf

The Freeflight GPS and the Trigg TT31 will set you back around US$5k, probably budget another 5k for install.

Make sure your software version on the transponder and GPS Is correct for ADS-B.

Any avionics shop saying you need to remove your panel mounted GPS and install a WAAS unit for ADS-B, RUN away from, they are speaking B/S.

[Capn Bloggs]

I see no reason for a bugsmasher to have ADSB if not mixing it in CTA. Transponder for ops at Reg/Cert airfields would be great (better for our TCAS) but that is all.

[OZBUSDRIVER]

SWH..spot on!:ok:

You taking notes, XXX? There are more ways to skin a cat than just throw money at it.

[OZBUSDRIVER]

Hey Bloggsy, why should you guys have all the fun. Rx unit fitted to a smartphone/tablet gives me better than your tcas. Doesn't have to be TSO to help your SA:ok:

[Capn Bloggs]

Onya Oz, do you mean you seeing me on that thing? Is your phone picking up my transponder or ADSB?

[Jabawocky]

It is not a TCAS blogsie :ok: Just an ADSB receiver. Of course if everyone had a :mad: unit on board then it would be as good.

[swh]

Would be a very positive thing if they did allow a 129 to provide the GPS input though.You can hook a C129a GPS to a ADS-B transponder, and it will appear to work. The problem is as far as I understand, the C129a GPS units do not output the position integrity along with the position on the serial cable between the GPS and the transponder.

So while the transponder is outputting the GPS position and altitude, it is providing incorrect position integrity. The transponder does not know if it is a C129a or 145.

For how often a 129 'fails', there would surely have to be more than enough accuracy and integrity.... and even if it did fail surely it wouldn't be a major challenge for ASA manage.

Happens often enough, and it would not be hard to manage if the equipment were to report immediately the integrity has been reduced. And the failures are not only on bugsmashers, big jets do also have issues.

Only a week or two ago I think around 30 aircraft disappeared at the same time over Europe. In Europe it is not uncommon to be code 1000, and ADS-B.

[Jabawocky]

So while the transponder is outputting the GPS position and altitude, it is providing incorrect position integrity. The transponder does not know if it is a C129a or 145.

I believe it does as the SIL and all the NIC NAC NUK's etc all need to be in place.....I did remember once :ouch:

So you can plug in a G296 but the SIL will not be there and the ATC system will degrade it for you. Or something to that effect.

PS I could go look it up or get this clarified if anyone REALLY cares.

[swh]

I believe it does as the SIL and all the NIC NAC NUK's etc all need to be in place.....I did remember once

The units I am familiar with the GPS outputs Horizontal Protection Limit (HPL) and Horizontal Figure of Merit (HFOM), these are normally ARINC 429 labels 130 and 247.The ADS-B transponder converts these to NIC, NAC, SIL etc.

I could not see this ARINC output on a Garmin 530, however I could on a 530W with software version 3.20.

I would be interested if you could look it up, and let me know the data format used to transferred it to the ADS-B transponder.

[Dexta]

Dexta, if your home 20 is correct, you are still inside the old j-curve.

Just in case you do fly elsewhere...
http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/...t_5000f_GM.jpg

The red bits are old school ssr, the green bits are within line of sight of an ADS-B receiver at 5000ft.

My home location is correct, and I mainly fly to the SE and Melbourne, so basically as it stands now my "coverage" will be exactly the same with ADS-B as it is with SSR, so if I want to remain IFR I have to spend $25,000 (certified aircraft, not experimental) for no benefit or fly VFR with reduced safety!

[swh]

I have to spend $25,000

Why ??? Who is telling you this rubbish ????

[KittyKatKaper]

My (currently) IFR aircraft has never had a panel-mounted GPS, which means that I'll be up for about about AUD12k for a Garmin 430W plus about 4k for a Mode-S transponder.
Then add many fun hours at $100+/hour to dismantle/reassemble the interior to install the antenna, modules and cabling.
Add some hours to wire and rearrange the instrument panel.
Add a bit more for various drawings and system checks and I foresee that my bank balance will decrease by close to 20k.

Alternatively, I could just get a certified GPS engine to feed the transponder but that still needs at least some work to the interior and instrument-panel wiring.
But because there is no panel display it means that there is no navigational benefit, so why go that route ?

[Old Akro]

Alternatively, I could just get a certified GPS engine to feed the transponder

Its a nice idea, but you might find a Garmin 430 is actually cheaper!!

[Old Akro]

Any avionics shop saying you need to remove your panel mounted GPS and install a WAAS unit for ADS-B, RUN away from, they are speaking B/S.

It is a technical requirement of ADS-B that it be coupled to a C145a or C146a GPS receiver. Full stop. A Mode S - ES transponder is not ADS-B compliant without it. Its actually expressed as a different tech standard, but the commercial reality is that it means a WAAS reciever, viz:
Garmin 480
Garmin 430W / 530W
Garmin GTN 650 / 750
Avidyne IFD 440 / 550
King KSN 770

Its documented in many places, ICAO minutes, CASA regs, take your pick.

There are a couple of companies making WAAS engines to feed an ADS-B transponder, but they are pretty close to the same price as a WAAS display unit, so its hard to see a reason to go that route and miss out on the PBN benefits.

[swh]

They also fed me more rubbish about this being a Cessna problem, not a Garmin issue and you can't change anything on Cessna G1000 system, until Cessna issue a service bulletin to that effect, which at the time, they had not. Sooo if you have late model Cessna with G1000, ADSB is not an option until Cessna tell you how to do it.

There is an organisation in Brisbane that installed a Freeflight WAAS GPS data source in a C208B with G1000 a few months back.

Off the top of my head it does not sound like a complex upgrade, as you said GTX33 to ES, and then change the GPS source on the GTX33 to a Freeflight (serial connection). The GTX33 is not G1000 specific.

The GTX33 installation manual has a nice ADS-B Field Approval Compliance Matrix in the back.

Sure the Foreflight box will make you ADSB compliant but if you are still using a C129 GPS for navigation, it wont help you much in practical IFR terms when PBN comes along also in 2016(?) and ASA save themselves even more money by switching off the NDB's and VOR's.

That is a different issue, and I am sure there will be other alternatives by the time it comes into play.

[OZBUSDRIVER]

Akro, are you reading the same thread you are posting to?

Swh has given price and link to Freeflight...do a google and see how much

Retail Price: $2575US without even trying! Havent seen too many 430W going for that price point.

The Jaba is correct Capn. Only ADS-B...wouldn't Leadsled be in a spin if you could see XPDR as well

[LeadSled]

wouldn't Leadsled be in a spin if you could see XPDR as well

Oz,
Not quite certain what you mean by that, but you know, as well as I do, that all this regulatory requirement should be justified by cost/benefit, not just lumped on the industry, huge costs for a benefit (if any) that is not justified by the cost.

You also know, as well as I do, that a TCAS equipped aircraft (most of the RPT fleet, and most turbine aircraft) will see any transponder aircraft, and if it is Mode C, the TCAS will see the height.

That is the best best protection larger aircraft are going to get (regardless of class of airspace), and they have it now, the ADS-B Out component adds nothing.

You also know, as well as I do, that there is a standard for "ADS-B In" for TCAS, but no manufacturer of TCAS has adopted the standards, because the airlines are not interested, because the ADS-B In signals add no useful functionality to the existing TCAS system. You probably know the reasons (limitations) of why this is so.

As you also know, as well as I do, that the ADS-B system is primarily an aid to ATC, it is not primarily a collision avoidance system, although, certainly, if you have ADS-B In, and suitable displays, you will see other aircraft broadcasting ADS-B Out. It is certainly not suitable for separation in the circuit of uncontrolled airfields, a FACT glossed over by the promoters of the system

So, we are back to a system that has never been cost/benefit justified in any airspace in Australia, but large cost increases have been lumped on operators to save AsA a lot of money, presumably enabling AsA to pay the Government of the day even greater dividends.

This is a shining example of economic waste, something the Australian Commonwealth Government (regardless of who is in power) is very good at, to the very great cost of whatever industry segment is subject to this ratbag type of regulation, in this case, aviation.

Tootle pip!!

PS: Given the separation standards available en-route, to (then) AUSEP capable aircraft, coupled with RVSM, and the the amount of high level traffic, I am sure you are aware that the theoretical reduced separation standard available from using ADS-B at high level has very little practical use. Hence Virgin Flight Ops., never being able to make a business case for ADS-B.

[Old Akro]

Retail Price: $2575US

The prices I have seen in the past have been more, or I have looked at the 1203 model - not sure.

However, the will be EO's for an additional GPS antennae and to mount the engine box, plus the install cost of adding an additional antennae which plus freight, and GST will narrow the gap to maybe only $2,000 cheaper than a secondhand 430W and you still don't get any PBN benefits.

[thorn bird]

Leadie, hear... hear!!


What you may have got wrong is a dividend to Government??
Perhaps a better description would be a dividend to ASA senior management in bonuses, paid for by the aviation industry!!

[LeadSled]

Folks,

Before you commit to any GPS source for ADS-B Out, read the TSO requirements (including the RTCA standards) and make bleeding certain your source meets the fine print --- some floating around are "older" models that do not comply.

DO NOT take a sellers word for it, most of then don't know the fine print, just the OEMs shiny brochures.

Caveat Emptor.

Tootle pip!!

PS: C129 cables and aerial will not do, and cables an cable connections are a prolific source of very annoying problems.

[OZBUSDRIVER]

Quote Sheet (http://www.dacint.com/DAC-international-models-focus.php?Model=1201+WAAS#quotesheet)

FF1201-GPSWAAS [1] 1201 GPS WAAS Sensor System $3,295.00
FF1201-GPSWAAS-HSA [2] 1201 GPS WAAS Sensor System with High Speed Antenna $3,995.00
84100-03-0306 1201 GPS WAAS Receiver CALL FOR QUOTE
84739 1201 Install Manual Addendum $50.00
82809 TNC Connector 90 Degree $90.00
81194 High Speed Antenna $1,600.00
84104 Plug, Dual Crimp, TNC, Sealed, RG142 $100.00
84140 Conn, Recep, 25 Pin Dsub $24.00
84141 Socket, Female, Crimp (25ea per kit) $2.00
84142-01 1201 Installation Kit $300.00
84143-01 1201 Installation Manual $50.00
84150 Backshell Assy $48.00

Just to give a bit of baseline info....pretty rare to see quotes online.
Obviously, US supplier. However, hardware remains the same. Certification in Oz still may equal the EW of the aircraft:ugh:

[bankrunner]

84104 Plug, Dual Crimp, TNC, Sealed, RG142 $100.00

Nice markup on a connector that normally goes for about 25 bucks in its higher quality variants.

That's aviation for you... :eek:

[Eyrie]

Isn't it obvious that the intention is to make equipping a small aircraft for IFR prohibitively expensive to drive them out of the system so that it is left for the airlines and military? VFR will be barely tolerated until better ways of driving up costs are found and implemented as private pilots (like shooters) are regarded as security risks, mavericks and weirdos who aren't proper little subjects who just do as they are told without question. There aren't any citizens in Australia, just subjects.

[Jabawocky]

Quote:
84104 Plug, Dual Crimp, TNC, Sealed, RG142 $100.00
Nice markup on a connector that normally goes for about 25 bucks in its higher quality variants.

That's aviation for you...

Not sure where that was but RS Components sell them and way less than that. In fact I think I bought three of them for under $25 :ok:

[Flying Binghi]

Whats the betting on how much longer we got civvy GPS ?

Seems Oz has a whole lot of recently trained multi passport 'adventurers' coming back from the mid east shortly. Methinks it wont be long before they find Oz a little boring and will seek to 'liven' the place up..:hmm:






.

[Dont Hang Up]

When ground secondary radar moved to Mode S there were protests from commercial aviation and GA alike about the cost of the the new ground infrastructure. GA also did not like the cost of new transponders (the commercial guys had already been forced that way by the TCAS mandate).

One of the arguments - at least against the cost of the Mode S ground infrastructure - was that we should go straight to ADS-B. Now that that is indeed were we are heading it is causing no end of complaint.

[Eyrie]

Flying Binghi, you wouldn't say that if you knew what else GPS was used for. There is NO WAY civilian use will be denied.
Farmers, sailors, surveyors, crop dusters, computer networks for timing are just some of the uses. Not the least the nascent UAV industry which would be a non starter without GPS (Or GNSS actually, there are GPS, Glonass, Beidou and soon Galileo as navigation satellite constellations).

[Capn Bloggs]

Binghi's not on about that, Eyrie. Binghi's on about the baddies taking it over! :eek:

[Old Akro]

One of the arguments - at least against the cost of the Mode S ground infrastructure - was that we should go straight to ADS-B.

I don't believe that this argument was ever put by GA.

1. There is ZERO cost benefit to GA from ADS-B. RPT has a cost benefit, AsA has a huge cost benefit, but GA no absolutely no cost benefit.

2. There is NO safety benefit (or a marginal safety benefit for remote flights only) from ADS-B for GA.

3. Australia is the only country in the world mandating ADS-B for GA IFR in all all airspace classes at all levels.

[Eyrie]

While CASA/AirServices actions can probably be explained by sheer incompetence or stupidity and their unintended consequences, never forget, "Sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from malice"

[LeadSled]

Who knows what the intention is....Whatever. That will probably be the effect. Ever been flying on one of those totally socked in days when you get VFR traffic that has obviously found a CAVOK hole at your level only a mile or so away?

Clear,
How does ADS-B help. Unless you have ADS-B In, which will be rare to no-existent with larger aircraft, and a bit of a hobby thing for smaller aircraft, it will be TCAS looking at a transponder that will give you some (hopefully) useful information.

Remember, airlines are NOT looking at ADS-B In, because it tells you nothing that TCAS tells you.

ADS-B is primarily an ATC tool, it is NOT primarily for aircraft to aircraft collision avoidance.

Tootle pip!!

[Capn Bloggs]

airlines are NOT looking at ADS-B In, because it tells you nothing that TCAS tells you.

No, ADS-B In would give a target velocity; much more helpful than TCAS, which jerks around, sometimes on the wrong side of the screen, sometimes doubled, and is just a blob. IIRC, the yanks were looking at it for in-trail IFR climbs some time ago (eg Hawaii to the mainland).

I agree though that we'll never get ADSB-In. much more cost-effective to use Directed Traffic information! Ex Griffo, I've got a job for you! :}

[Dick Smith]

Remind me again. Are you saying the current regs require all imports- even if secondhand VFR only - to be fitted with ADSB out?

What is the justification of this?

[Old Akro]

Remind me again. Are you saying the current regs require all imports- even if secondhand VFR only - to be fitted with ADSB out?

Yes

What is the justification of this?

No idea. Nothing logical that I can see.

[Old Akro]

The VFR/ultralight fraternity will be the next ones expected to cough up the $25K.

Don't forget that initially VFR was included. It was granted a last minute exemption based on lobbying (by AOPA???).

I think that reviews of short term, expedient exemptions being swept under the carpet is classic CASA. I can see that the ridiculous anomaly of IFR being required to fit ADS-B to fly in the same airspaces as VFR / RA Aus, Gliders, Balloons, etc is absolutely likely to become permanent.

[CaptainMidnight]

In the interests of correcting some misunderstandings:

Civil Aviation Safety Authority - Key timelines (http://www.casa.gov.au/scripts/nc.dll?WCMS:STANDARD::pc=PC_101179)

[peterc005]

What is TSO C196 GNSS?

Does it relate to WAAS capabilities?

[bankrunner]

It relates mainly to FDE capabilities; where the confusion arises is that all of the C196 GNSS receivers on the GA market happen to also be WAAS receivers.

[LeadSled]

Bloggs,
I suggest you read the RTCA standards for ADS-B IN for TCAS.

That's not going to do much to encourage updating the fleet.

Cleared,
I hope you are not suggesting that pilots who breach the present law re. transponders will suddenly mend their ways, and turn on ADS-B ??

Tootle pip!!

[Old Akro]

OK, so if VFR don't have it what's the point in IFR below 10K being mandated?

Exactly!

Australia is the only country in the world mandating ADS-B for all IFR flights at all levels in all airspace types.

[OZBUSDRIVER]

From the AirServices website...

The Australian aviation industry recognises that ADS-B will support the future by allowing pilots to directly see nearby aircraft on a cockpit screen, improving safety and efficiency. To achieve this, it is necessary for aircraft to transmit their position, altitude, and other flight data, for other aircraft to use. ATC can also use the transmitted information.

First time this has been quoted as a reason...

[OZBUSDRIVER]

To be precise, that statement was a given. However, there was no safety case or cost benefit analysis promoted for this obvious benefit of ADS-B. Therefore, Air Services never pushed that wheelbarrow as a reason for mandate.

[Eyrie]

So if you can see all other nearby aircraft on a screen in your own cockpit why do we need ATC and controlled airspace at all?
There was a study done in Europe a few years ago where some of the most densely populated airspace was simulated and aircraft were simply allowed free flight direct to where they wanted to go. The actual number of conflicts as surprisingly low and air to air electronic separation was more than adequate to resolve these.

[Old Akro]

The Australian aviation industry recognises that ADS-B will support the future by allowing pilots to directly see nearby aircraft on a cockpit screen,

I understand that this requires ADSB-IN, which AsA has rejected for Australia.

I think it also would probably also only show ADS-B aircraft? Which would render its safety benefit useless in any airspace where VFR aircraft may be flying.

[thorn bird]

“I understand that this requires ADSB-IN, which AsA has rejected for Australia”.

Probably because the directors of AsA couldn't manipulate it into a cost saving for AsA thereby attracting directors bonuses.

[CaptainMidnight]

P1ssing in the wind here won't do any good.

Contact your industry association or rep:

Civil Aviation Safety Authority - Membership (http://www.casa.gov.au/scripts/nc.dll?WCMS:STANDARD::pc=PC_91118)

[Old Akro]

Captain

Therein lies the problem! Which of those organisations represents the interests of IFR pilots?

Which of those organisations represent pilots of more complex GA types who fly regularly as a business tool (rather than for pleasure on sunny days) ?

Its certainly not the AOPA who gained an exemption for VFR aircraft only.

[CaptainMidnight]

There could be any number (ABAA, AOPA etc.).

Some won't join any association, either having deep pockets and short arms or having a beef with current or past personalities/policies.

If you're not a member of an association then you're unrepresented. Simple as that.

[Old Akro]

An unfortunate part of the Australian political landscape is that government only speaks with Industry bodies. This is nearly unique to Australia and the other countries with which I deal create mechanisms to get direct feedback from operators. I think this is one of Australia's major weaknesses.

If you read the ABAA membership guide its essentially for jet operators who employ professional pilots. Guys like me who fly heavy singles or light twins to get around for business are not eligible.

The AOPA has clearly forsaken pilots like us. It seems to me that the AOPA is a parochial Sydney based body interested in recreational VFR flying.

The other loosley GA bodies on the list are all sport aviation (eg SAAA, RA Aus, GFA, etc).

Currently the guys being screwed by the mandate to install ADS-B for any IFR flight at any level in any airspace have no representation.

I think one of the most effective bodies is the RAAA and the speech by Jeff Boyd is an anthem. But their core values are really about regional airlines, not GA.

If anyone hasn't read Jeff's speech, its here:

A Bridge Too Far | Pro Aviation (http://proaviation.com.au/2013/09/26/a-bridge-too-far/)

[OZBUSDRIVER]

Old Akro, you wish for something similar to the NBAA in the US.

what you ask for appears to bring unity between the disparate charter outfits in the country. PVT business owner/pilots may have more in common with GA CHTR than AOPA. Go by what Smith was trying to advocate for non complying bizjets to further his own issue is a good case in point.

[Old Akro]

What I would wish for is an enlightened, engaged CASA that has the best interests of aviation at heart and has an open dialogue with all levels of aviation and has a visceral understanding of the needs of aviators.

We did have it once upon a time.

***Sigh***

I still check under my pillow for the tooth fairy too.

None of the bodies listed under the CASA list really care at all that IFR GA aircraft that don't regularly fly in primary control zones is about to be screwed to the tune of $25k per aircraft or more.

RAPAC would actually be a reasonable mechanism. but if you read RAPAC minutes, its pretty clear that CASA pays little or no attention to this body.

[CaptainMidnight]

You will find that many of the organisations listed on the CASA website send their reps to the RAPACs, or are on their distribution list.

The reps are not shy about giving stick including to CASA, if their organisations want to push a point of view.

[Flying Binghi]

Looks like the threads gone quiet...

Via Capn Bloggs, #67:

Binghi's not on about that, Eyrie. Binghi's on about the baddies taking it over!

Capn Bloggs, in all the years i've been commenting on this subject here at pprune i've never claimed the terrorists will directly target the actual GPS satellites. The way terrorists will 'target' GPS is by using it as a precise, very cheap and hard to trace weapons delivery system.










.

[underfire]

Looks like the US has put ADSB on hold.

Someone got mad that paparazzi could track the private aircraft with LeBron James on flight aware.

In other fun news....

The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) has launched a Rule Making Team (RMT.0271 & 0272 [MDM.073 (a) & (b)]) on in-flight recording for light aircraft.

(dont tell CASA that EASA is looking at FDR for light aircraft)

[Eyrie]

Where did you get that? The FAA administrator said at Oshkosh a week ago that there would be no hold on ADSB.

As for flight recorders on light aircraft the Euros do all sorts of crazy things. Bureaucracy is their only growth industry. Another good reason to roll back our regs to 1 Jan 2009 and align with FAA/NZ instead of Europe. Besides, the way things are going Europe could turn into a radioactive wasteland in the not too distant future.

[LeadSled]

Folks,

The comments about the current AOPA are, indeed, sad but true.

What most people don't remember (if you are old enough) or never knew, is that AOPA of Australia was formed by a group of commercial/charter operators, not long after WW 11, banding together to protect their present and future activities from an overweening ex-military dominate DCA.

A large part of AOPA's membership problem is is that so few owners or pilots see any point in AOPA membership, as AOPA in recent years has done little in the way of effective advocacy (successful political stirring) such as gave us the Parts 21 to 35, or the now emasculated PIFR.

Tootle pip!!

[Kharon]

I stumbled over the article below while looking for something else (as you do). It raises some interesting points. From one of my favourite web sites.

Matt Thurber (http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/blogs/ain-blog-faa-out-control)...."So Paul went ahead and scheduled the FMS upgrade through his local factory service center. This FMS upgrade is also relatively simple, in that it is covered by a factory service bulletin, so no supplemental type certificate (STC) is involved. Avionics upgrades don’t get much easier than this."

FWIW.