Ozbusdriver, you state:
The directive … to install radar or RADAR-LIKE equipment in ten key airports.
This is not correct. The directive did not call for “RADAR-LIKE equipment”. It clearly stated an “approach radar control service”. It was made quite clear to Airservices that ADS-B would not suffice as it is more equivalent to secondary radar – i.e. that ADS-B equipment alone would not suffice as it will not show up aircraft which are not fitted with ADS-B.
I agree that Airservices went off on a tangent and implied that the directive would allow ADS-B.
Ozbusdriver, I certainly gave no misinformation about security and spoofing signals in relation to ADS-B. The details I gave were factual. That is, the ADS-B as proposed by Airservices can be easily spoofed and aircraft such as those of the customs and police can be easily tracked. I’m sure that with proper design, both of these problems can be fixed, however this has not been done as yet and did not seem to have even been thought about by Airservices.
I’ve always supported ADS-B, and I’ve always stated this. However I believe we should harmonise where possible with the system that is going to be most widely used in the world – therefore it will be less expensive.
Are you really suggesting that Airservices canned their whole low level ADS-B project because of a couple of press releases from me? Wow, they can’t have been very committed – considering they didn’t even answer the points I made, they just simply announced they were cancelling the project! I can imagine the frustration of working for such an organisation. Basically there is not proper communication to the staff and customers. I still don’t know the real reason they cancelled the ADS-B project, do you?
****su_Tonka, you state:
it is great to see you supporting the case for more controllers.
Yes, I support the case for more controllers if Class C airspace is required above Class D. However you don’t answer the obvious question. If Class E airspace above Class D is the standard in the USA, Canada and parts of Europe, why can’t it be the standard here? You have not answered this.
You also make no comment about the fact that Airservices Australia is operating Class D control towers with Class E above in the USA. Surely they would not do be doing that unless it met adequate safety levels.
If Class C airspace is required above Albury, why is it that Class G airspace is accepted for Avalon? That is, right in the circuit area with lots of small planes mixing with jet airliners and with no air traffic control at all – simply “do it yourself” radio calls. This system is not allowed anywhere else in the world as far as I know. It is interesting that you never make a comment against it. I would have thought that you could do this using your pseudonym, as it is hardly likely to threaten your job.