Military Exemption for ADS-B Mandate

[Dick Smith]

There have been discussions on this site in relation to the way that the military was able to wrangle an exemption against the ADS-B mandate. I think one poster said that it was decided it would cost the taxpayer too much money to upgrade older legacy military aircraft and therefore the military should have an exemption. Of course, no such agreement took place in relation to general aviation.

However, I have been asked an important question: what actual military aircraft have been flying and using the exemption? I understand it’s probably Kingairs and possibly the Orion, but does anyone know if any of the VIP fleet were not upgraded to ADS-B in December 2013? And whether those aircraft were allowed to fly on an exemption above FL290?

[no_one]

Go to the links below and you can get the flight history for the Aircraft and the data shows that it was received via ADS-B so yes they do have it installed.

Challenger
https://planefinder.net/data/aircraft/A37-001
https://planefinder.net/data/aircraft/A37-002
https://planefinder.net/data/aircraft/A37-003

BBJ
https://planefinder.net/data/aircraft/A36-001
https://planefinder.net/data/aircraft/A36-002

[Dick Smith]

So why the reason for a military exemption if they are all fitted?

[Vref+5]

VIP fleet will have been fitted so the aircraft can go back onto VH registration easily once the contract is up. I don't think they make a STC for the F-18, PC-9, the Hawk etc so that's pretty hard to fit. It may also come down to the fact that state aircraft can operate with due regard.....

[BPA]

You can also track the Tanker and earlier this year the C17s and the Super Hornets could be tracked (until the RAAF blocked them). So it appears all the latest RAAF aircraft have it installed.

[LeadSled]

Folks,
Are you sure that the various flight trackers are dependent on the aircraft being fitted with ADS-B???
Flight tracking has been around for years, far longer than ADS-B of any kind, whereas Mode S transponders have been around for thirty years or more.
If the flight trackers over the US were ADS-Dependent, there would be precious few aircraft for you to look at.
Do any of you know, FOR A FACT, not an assumption, if any or all the RAAF military transport types have ADS-B, or just a Mode S transponder, after all, some of Airservices publicity, some time ago, seems to have obfuscated the difference between the two.
Tootle pip!!

[no_one]

Yes, I know for a fact, that other than in a small area in the UK where MLAT is available, the tracks going to the plane finder website I linked to are coming from ADS-B.

[Going Nowhere]

MLAT is available around BNE/SYD/MEL on Flightradar24 as well.

[no_one]

Going Nowhere, Thats why i linked to the plane finder website rather then one of the others. So i could be sure that it was abs-b and not mlat.

[TwoFiftyBelowTen]

Pretty sure the Wedgetails are not fitted with ADS-B. Wedgetails are BBJs are B737-700s, so no problem fitting it to the airframe!
Security issue?...so they're not detectable on Internet?

[LeadSled]

Yes, I know for a fact, that other than in a small area in the UK where MLAT is available, the tracks going to the plane finder website I linked to are coming from ADS-B.

No_one,
So this means that "plane finder" only displays a small proportion of the traffic in Europe??
Please tell me, how do you tell that what you are seeing is not Transponder Mode C or S returns, because ADS-B is not widespread in Europe, and only a tiny proportion of airline (or IFR) aircraft in North America are ADS-B equipped. You do understand MLAT, do you, only needs a transponder.
IN FACT you are making an assertion, I want to know how you tell the difference, I might actually learn something. I have read the remarks on their web site, where ADS-B is concerned, in North America it only looks at 1090ES, not UAT, but claims to look at Flarm. In fact it is really taking a feed from the FAA in US.
In the case of plane finder, seems to me there is a certain amount of spin.
Tootle pip!!

[Dick Smith]

I ask again. Why the reason for the military exemption if all fitted?

Mode S only returns without extended squitter for ADSB definetly show up on many tracking sites.

If Airline aircraft are allowed to operate above FL 290 with a failed ADSB clearly they must then be procedurally separated. Why can't an occasional dispensation be given to other aircraft? Just sheer barstardry ?

[Vref+5]

It's probably more to do with the fact the mandate could not actually apply to State aircraft as they don't comply with the CAA CAR and CASR. Bit of a face saving manoeuvre

[le Pingouin]

As Petropavlovsk says, not all RAAF aircraft are fitted.

Why are you differentiating airline aircraft with an in-flight ADS-B failure? Sheer perversion? A GA aircraft with an in-flight ADS-B failure is treated exactly the same. Had one yesterday.

Why do aircraft have MEL items? In-flight failure is an entirely different kettle of fish to lacking the equipment in the first place.

[LeadSled]

Le Ping,
The whole point of Dick's observations are that the system can accommodate a non-ADS-B aircraft above FL290.
CASA ( Mr. McCormick) promised dispensations for the very small number of aircraft capable of operating above FL290, for which no satisfactory ADS-B fit is available at any price that makes commercial ( or common) sense.
Under pressure from AsA, it would seem, CASA withdrew that undertaking, and without satisfactory explanation.
It is sheer bastardy, not technical or operational limitations, that have brought about the present situation.
Tootle pip!!

[Lead Balloon]

The answer is obvious. It's safe if an airline or military aircraft flies through the airspace without an ADS-B that works, but it's dangerous if any other aircraft flies through the airspace without an ADS-B that works. The other aircraft know they are not being operated by an airline or the military and therefore get all irresponsible.

Why do you ask these silly questions?

[le Pingouin]

We might pay more attention if Dick stopped using inflammatory and deliberately misleading language such as trying to introduce a division between GA and airline aircraft where there is none. :=

The airlines don't get to play in ADS-B airspace any more than GA if they have no ADS-B. As I've already said they're treated the same for an in-flight failure.

[Lead Balloon]

And for how many days does an airliner get to fly around with a broken ADS-B?

How does the universe change the balance of risk allocated between an aircraft that has a broken ADS-B and an aircraft that has no ASD-B? How does the universe know?

[Dick Smith]

I am not talking about in flight failures. As I understand the rules an Airline aircraft can operate for a numbers of days without an operating unit. That is actually depart with the ADSB not working.

[thorn bird]

"it would seem, CASA withdrew that undertaking, and without satisfactory explanation."

Would one explanation be the skull who screams desire to be the head of ICAO?? brownie points for being the first?

Dick, I heard of a VIP flight from Perth to LA who had done the right thing and applied for an exemption, being told the exemption only applied to the inbound flight not the outbound, therefore they were restricted to FL280 for over three thousand miles until they left Australian airspace. And people wonder why we are an international Joke!

[Dick Smith]

If it is a true story it's quite disturbing.

Think of the fuel wastage for no measurable safety reason.

[john_tullamarine]

The B737BBJ, Wedgetails (B737), Airbus A330 tankers, Challenger 604 and the entire Beech 200 fleet is all equipped with ADS-B using 1090 Mhz Extended Squitter SSR equipment.

Minor edit ... B300 (32SQN/38SQN).

It's probably more to do with the fact the mandate could not actually apply to State aircraft as they don't comply with the CAA CAR and CASR.

My observation is that the ADF does its reasonable best to comply with civil requirements regardless of obligation.