I think Dick is onto what my question re who signs the cheque for this low level ADSB subsidy.
Airservices is a Corporation, (albeit a quango). Their duty is to their shareholder, (s), not as a benevolent fund to subsidise what is now mandated.
We have a new Government that to date has given no indication to subsidising basic social justice measures let alone subsidising "silvertails" flitting in the GAFA.
Qantas already has ADSB as do all other Airlines and the RAAF operating Internationally, (in the flight levels).
OZBUSDRIVER and others by omission admit they don't own aircraft and my guess is the hire one for 20 to 60 hours per annum.
There appears only three now who can possibly benefit from this impost, they being Airservices, the private pilot, who hires an aeroplane, and the regionals who are **** scared of somebody appearing in their windscreen in a CTAF because they are ingrained into looking at dials and not the real world outside. A CTAF is VFR not IFR (is it not?).
I believe the gift horse is a tactical ploy, nothing else. Being a pessimist makes you enjoy the result if it goes the other way. Optimistics are very usually dissappionted.
I have potentially more to loose financially than anyone who hires a weekend 182 and wants to feel safer than his/ her own aviation skills can give them with technology that doesn't do anything more than what is currently in my aircraft at this date and time.
Perhaps one should push to mandate duplicate seatbelts.
Perhaps some should re-read "the ambulance in the valley".
Perhaps they should leave G airspace as it is.