GPS Jamming West Coast USA

[megan]

Australia has a comprehensive Backup Navigation Network based on ground-based navaids

Australia relied heavily on the NDB for nav. Most, if not all, have had the plug pulled, including VOR and DME, and now rely on GPS.

Navigation Rationalisation Project | Airservices

[Capn Bloggs]

So which airfields now have no ground-based navaid as of post 26 May? No need to include the ones with a nearby ground-based aid that can be used as an alternate.

[Ancient-Mariner]

Airservices say, "As part of the transition to the Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) by 4 February 2016, the Airservices Navigation Rationalisation Project (NRP) is switching-off 179 ground-based navigation aids, on 26 May 2016.
The navigation aids to be decommissioned include, non-directional beacons, VHF omni-directional ranges and distance measuring equipment.
GNSS is now the primary means of navigation for all instrument flight rule aircraft, which will be supported by the Backup Navigation aid Network, also known as the BNN."


Then looking at The Backup Navigation Network | Airservices They say,
"The remaining network of navigation aids will form the Backup Navigation Network (BNN) . The BNN will be maintained and monitored by Airservices to support a GNSS contingency mode of operation, in the unlikely case where a pilot is unable to access the satellite service.
In 2004, the navigation aids that form the BNN network were selected by industry after extensive consultation, and following further industry validation in 2010, 14 additional navaids were added to the list."


They do not actually say what nav aids are used for BNN, and Australia is a large country for full radar coverage.


Also, if NDB, VOR and DME is not now used in Australia, does that mean that Aus registered a/c could have some open holes in the panel if they do not fly out of the country?

[Capn Bloggs]

Also, if NDB, VOR and DME is not now used in Australia,

Let's get this straight. This statement is garbage, and Megan knows it. There are plenty of navaids still around. I wait with bated breath for the extensive list of airports in Australia that have allegedly lost all their ground-based navads.

[eppy]

Originally Posted by Ancient-Mariner

Airservices say, "As part of the transition to the Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) by 4 February 2016, the Airservices Navigation Rationalisation Project (NRP) is switching-off 179 ground-based navigation aids, on 26 May 2016.
The navigation aids to be decommissioned include, non-directional beacons, VHF omni-directional ranges and distance measuring equipment.
GNSS is now the primary means of navigation for all instrument flight rule aircraft, which will be supported by the Backup Navigation aid Network, also known as the BNN."


Then looking at The Backup Navigation Network | Airservices They say,
"The remaining network of navigation aids will form the Backup Navigation Network (BNN) . The BNN will be maintained and monitored by Airservices to support a GNSS contingency mode of operation, in the unlikely case where a pilot is unable to access the satellite service.
In 2004, the navigation aids that form the BNN network were selected by industry after extensive consultation, and following further industry validation in 2010, 14 additional navaids were added to the list."


They do not actually say what nav aids are used for BNN, and Australia is a large country for full radar coverage.


Also, if NDB, VOR and DME is not now used in Australia, does that mean that Aus registered a/c could have some open holes in the panel if they do not fly out of the country?

Actually, they do specify the aids. Just open the PDF linked to on the page. For example, for Canberra they list DME, NDB and VOR as the nominated backup aids.

[Three Lima Charlie]

FLIGHT ADVISORY GPS INTERFERENCE TESTING July 12-29, 2016 Las Vegas, NV.
Notice Number: NOTC6614

FLIGHT ADVISORY GPS INTERFERENCE TESTING July 12-29, 2016 Las Vegas, NV.

FLIGHT ADVISORY
GPS INTERFERENCE TESTING
NTTR 16-05
12-29 July, 2016
Las Vegas, NV.

[WhatsaLizad?]

GPS, considering the uses worldwide, IMHO it is probably the biggest free giveaway by one country in the history of mankind.


The US should have set up a subscription licensing program. An A380? $1 million/year should cover it and go down from there based on weight. Drilling a deep water oil well and need a ship to hold station within 1 meter? $5 million flat fee should cover it. Reduced accuracy for pure safety and survival needs should be free.


Then again, the GPS services market from the EU and RU would probably get competitive quickly.

[Groundloop]

and Australia is a large country for full radar coverage.

But they do have full ADS-B coverage.

[LeadSled]

But they do have full ADS-B coverage.

Groundloop,
Where ever did you get that idea.
The coverage is high level only, and strangely, where it is available low level , it seems that ATC do not use it where SSR/Primary radar is available.
There are no formal plans to extend ADS-B coverage to low levels across the country, even though CASA is now suggesting mandatory ADS-B even for VFR post 2019. This despite Government/CASA "policy" for risk based regulation and cost/benefit justification.
Given the major losses recently announced by Airservices Australia, and the shambolic state of the OneSKY plans, budgets and execution, wait for the Senate inquiry "real soon now".
Tootle pip!!

[msbbarratt]

The US should have set up a subscription licensing program. An A380? $1 million/year should cover it and go down from there based on weight. Drilling a deep water oil well and need a ship to hold station within 1 meter? $5 million flat fee should cover it. Reduced accuracy for pure safety and survival needs should be free.

Then again, the GPS services market from the EU and RU would probably get competitive quickly.

The EU considered charging for Galileo, but gave up the idea when it was clear that the only result would be that no one would use Galileo. They also considered using a completely different signal, which would have made a joint GPS / GLONASS / Galileo receiver difficult to implement, and they eventually gave up that idea too. So having set out to be completely different, thankfully Galileo will end up being a moderately improved, complimentary and usable service.

I think the US DoD was much more forward thinking ("Free GNSS for all!") from the very beginning, to their great credit, even in the days of reduced precision. The story behind Galileo gives you an idea of the mindset of the EU politicians and how the realities of life had to be beaten into them by engineers and companies, so no wonder things like Brexit happen...

[Capn Bloggs]

Originally Posted by Leadslid

There are no formal plans to extend ADS-B coverage to low levels across the country,

Why would there be? 80% of the australian landmass is completely devoid of life due to no water, unlike the USA where there is a good spread of civilisation.

Originally Posted by SledLed

even though CASA is now suggesting mandatory ADS-B even for VFR post 2019

Arr, yes, the old "suggested mandatory" trick. Rubbish, mandatory ADS-B for VFR will not happen in Austrlia in any of our lifetimes. Read your email Leadsled (AS 16/06) and stop spreading furphies.

[airtags]

"mandatory ADS-B for VFR" ...................

highly (absolutely. Or should I say fully) unlikely - but it would mean we'll all be catching the train or walking & wondering what to do on sunny weekends with clear skies

AT

[Heathrow Harry]

"...unlike the USA where there is a good spread of civilisation."

I hink you mean PEOPLE not civilisation - I've lived in some of the middle parts and I certainly wouldn't use the C-word to describe them.........

[LeadSled]

Arr, yes, the old "suggested mandatory" trick. Rubbish, mandatory ADS-B for VFR will not happen in Austrlia in any of our lifetimes. Read your email Leadsled (AS 16/06) and stop spreading furphies.

Bloggs,

My dear chap, you really should read the reports of the most recent statements by the DAS.
The above being an "update" of a statement made to myself and several others in terms of " if I had my way" or words to that effect.
Indeed, the members of ASAC regard the "mandatory" being inevitable, and in the not too far distant future, certainly withing my life expectancy. See also the CASA project on the subject of "voluntary ---- VFR ADS-B" just publicly released, CASA Standards Development project: AS 16/06 --- you will find it on the CASA website, if it is up and running.

Why would there be?

There shouldn't, but since when did that stop the nonsense in Canberra, where cost is never a consideration for those who will never pay it.
Tootle pip!!

[Capn Bloggs]

Originally Posted by LeddeeSleedie

See also the CASA project on the subject of "voluntary ---- VFR ADS-B" just publicly released, CASA Standards Development project: AS 16/06 --- you will find it on the CASA website, if it is up and running.

You don't say... I did point that its existence in my post above. No mention of mandatory ADS-B that you are scaremongering about!

[LeadSled]

No mention of mandatory ADS-B that you are scaremongering about!

Bloggs,
You should really try to read what I have actually posted, before you go into full fine and overboost.

If the DAS says he wants it to be mandatory, and ASAC accepts it is going to be, given the tenor of discussions, that rather does indicate the direction, so you better write up the DAS and ASAC for scaremongering, to be fair.

And speaking of "being fair" ----- it goes like this ----- convince enough that they should voluntarily fit ADS-B where it is not currently mandatory, and when you have 20-30% or so, then, with hand on heart, and with a straight face, declaim:

" We must make it mandatory, because it is unfair that X% have spent good money equipping voluntarily, but cannot get the "full safety benefits" because other aircraft owners have not spent the money".

If you think this is fanciful, just have a look at the statements as to why the current ADS-B mandate, completely unjustified on any rational assessment, cannot be delayed to the US 2020 or later , as initially promised at the Tamworth rally by the Minister ( in the presence of the Deputy Prime Minister) and I was one of many witnesses ----- nothing to do with safety, just that it wouldn't be fair to those who have equipped already.

Strangely, I can find nothing in the Act or Regulations requiring "fairness" as a criteria for CASA decision making.

Tootle pip!!