Lefthanded Rock Thrower.
Bollocks, have you flown to the North and East of Perth when the push is on ?, lots of reasonably fast turboprops and jets in the one piece of airspace.
Quantify this as an average risk and then tell me are all these aircraft at the same altitude at the same time?
james michael.
accidents happen anywhere. Particularly in non-radar environments.
Anything is possible, even in a radar environment. My question is what’s the probability?
Scurvy.D.Dog. The figures came from ATSB. Take your fits of denial up with them. They are an average.
A requirement? .. really?
-yes as with a transponder. If it works you are required to use it and, yes I can imagine Archerfield as a CTAF instead of a GAAP.
This debate is based on one side thinking ADSB is a necessary thing and the other the opposite. The thing is, for the concept to work, everyone has to be equipped and recalcitrant’s like me must be forced into compliance. Nobody forced me into a transponder, simply said if you want to fly in certain airspace you have to have one. Common sense shows that TCAS won't work without one, so owners saw the benefit and had them fitted.
If ADSB was such a good thing everyone would embrace it and there would be no need for a mandate. It is yet to prove any benefit to me. I am getting too old to be told what to do and how much to spend especially just to satisfy a mob of bureaucrats and vested interests. And especially when it is more PROBABLE than NOT that NO SUBSIDY will evolve. The proposed GA subsidy only involved TSO'd ADSB OUT anyway.
I am yet to be told what is plan B if the subsidy doesn't materialise. Nobody has shown me a document that shows any irrevocable guarantee. All I have seen and heard is verbal assurances that won't hold water if things go pear shaped.