I am not trying to convince anyone of anything...and please guys I feel uncomfortable with "If CC says it is so that is good enough for me". I appreciate the sentiment but I'd be much happier if you look at what I write critically, do your own research that answers the questions I pose or statements I make based on
MY understanding of an issue...and then challenge me if you don't agree....that way we all learn something...I love learning new stuff...I have learned lots in the course of this thread.
ADS-B is great in and of itself...the local context is the question.
SSD...answer my questions based on your understanding of the issues.
They are not rhetorical questions designed to put doubt in people minds.
My first vote was for option 3...the more I read and thought about the issues as I experience them in my work and fun flying the more questions I had...I now prefer option 1
within the Oz GA context and in the
short to medium term.
Upper level ADS-B makes all the sense in the world within the local regulatory context of providing ATM coverage across a vaste continent to cheaply...how many current generation Boeings/Airbus will be ADS-B capable remains to be seen...I remain to be convinced about the practicle/political realities of low level ADS-B.
With no time line for low level ADS-B you can not logically have a time line for mandating GA fitment.