PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Dick Smith to ASA: "See you in Court!"
View Single Post
Old 27th Nov 2013, 21:32
  #40 (permalink)  
Dick Smith
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,604
Likes: 0
Received 74 Likes on 29 Posts
Kieran17 - Thanks for your really important input.

Of course, what you don’t actually state is whether you can handle an occasional non-ADS-B aircraft. I have been told by senior controllers that, “any controller worth his salt” would be able to handle a non-ADS-B aircraft without too much delay.

By the way, you blame the avionics people who you believe may have “dragged their feet for many years”. In fact, it’s not as simple as that. The major manufacturer of aircraft in the world is, of course, the United States and they have announced they are bringing in an ADS-B mandate from 2020. Of course, the big manufacturers are all designing equipment for that date. When Australia decided to go ahead and introduce the mandate about seven years ahead, the problems started to occur. For example, following is an email that was sent to the CEO of the Australian Business Aviation Association (ABAA) in relation to how $100,000 has had to be spent and that equipment will then be pulled out of the aircraft:

Thank you for this and please pass on my thanks to Dick, it is nice to see someone with his
influence standing up for our industry which unfortunately as Dick says is scared of retribution
from the bureaucracy in Canberra.

In our case we are just about to finish the installation of an ADSB system into our
Corporate aircraft at a cost of $100000.00 dollars. This system is a temporary upgrade to meet the
requirements being forced upon us on the 12th Dec by Air Service Australia as an integrated
system is not being produced by Universal Avionics until the second or third quarter of 2014 .
We have had to go down this route to remain compliant as our aircraft is utilised for charter
and private ops which are not confined to “the J curve” & take us all over Australia and NZ.
Without it the cost of operating at 29000ft is prohibitive to our operation and seriously limits
the range of our aircraft.

Should we decide to export the aircraft back into the USA, we will have to remove this system
as it will not be compliant with the US requirements when they are introduced. The stand
alone systems that CASA and ASA have approved to rush this requirement through will not
meet the FAA standards and should we even wish to take the aircraft into US airspace with this
system we will not be allowed to as the FAA system will require an integrated system. I might
add that CASA originally rejected the stand alone installation due to the fact that the blind GPS
is in no way reflective of the GPS being used to navigate the aircraft. Therefore the possibility
exists that the blind GPS could be inaccurately reporting the position of the aircraft without
the crew knowing. An integrated system utilises the GPS signal being used to navigate the
aircraft therefore any navigation error is accurately reported by the ADSB system. CASA
conveniently changed this requirement to allow a blind GPS & stand alone installation. The
FAA are currently saying they will not allow this and is the basis that the aircraft will not be
able to fly in US airspace until an integrated system is installed.
In my case, with my Citation CJ3, I have been told I can fit some equipment for about $40,000 – which will be a ‘Band-Aid’ attachment to the bottom of the panel and then will not be accepted if I sell my aircraft back to the USA. However, in the first or second quarter of 2014 the proper service bulletin will be released by Cessna to put the correct equipment in using the Collins Pro-Line 21 format. Naturally, I would wish to wait for that.

The key question is, “is it possible for controllers to safely cope with a very small number of non-ADS-B aircraft in the airspace after 12 December 2013?” The fact is that the mandate is only above flight level 290 where there is very low risk of collision yet below flight level 290 no ADS-B mandate exists and, in fact, in most cases pilots have to self-separate as they are not provided with an air traffic control separation service at all.

I have been informed by my friends at Airservices that the main driver for this premature ADS-B introduction is the fact that the airlines will be able to do optimum tracking, depending on the winds for the day, and save considerable amounts of money. That’s good, however no-one seems to have thought of the small and barely viable business aviation community – especially the charter operators who are, I consider, “salt of the earth” people we should be encouraging, not putting out of business.

The very fact that the military are going to be allowed to fly in the airspace above 290 without ADS-B and that the airlines can operate for up to three days with a faulty unit shows that controllers must still be able to use procedural separation and provide a very safe service on the few occasions it is required.
Dick Smith is offline