Chronic Snoozer,
You are missing the required C-145/146 GPS feed.
Tootle pip!!
PS: Despite the very slow takeup of ADS-B by US airlines , the shortcomings of a 1090ES based system are becoming very evident re. channel saturation. This was forecast in the mid-90's, but the lobby for the "el-cheapo" 1090ES system, as opposed to a broadband datalink envisaged by ICAO, buried the forecasts.
Now the chickens are coming home to roost.
PS2:
Snakecharma,
What I want to see is a properly ICAO risk managed and efficient airspace management. where resources are not squandered on perceived risks, but on real and quantified risks. As the current ICAO system was based on the US arrangements, the US NAS represents the most mature iteration of said ICAO recommended system. My experience of the US NAS, over some (now) 50 years, in aircraft from very small to very large, informs my view of how well it works.
As for culture, if that is really a problem, how do so many Australian pilots (approximately 100% -1) , flying in US airspace, instantly adapt to the "foreign culture".
This "cultural difference" argument was run for years by AFAP, along the lines that "Australian pilots" ( and LAMEs) are used to a narrow and highly prescriptive regulatory command and control system, and would be unable to cope with a system where they were required ( for example) to vary radio calls, depending on the circumstances, that is MAKE JUDGEMENT CALLS AND DECISIONS, as opposed to chanting the prescribed mantra, as laid down in the AU AIP.
To this day, CASA make the same claim, as to why we have to have such prescriptive and detailed micro-management regulation, all backed up by a draconian criminal penalty system, because quote:Neither CASA nor the Australian aviation industry is sufficiently mature to be able to handle outcome (performance) based plain language regulation.
This despite the fact that Australian industry, on the whole, exists in a performance based regulatory environment --- AU aviation is the odd one out in Australia.
NAS 2b was NOT wound back because of "safety" problems, it was entirely industrial. Indeed, the circumstances were not entirely unrelated to the failure of Ansett some time later --- same personalities.
Last edited by LeadSled; 15th Apr 2016 at 09:36.