Airservices GBAS announcement – a disaster for GA
Thread Starter
Airservices GBAS announcement – a disaster for GA
Airservices Australia recently announced a
(See here).
It appears this agreement with Honeywell Aerospace will lead Australia once again into a unique system for augmentation – another AWA DME.
Many people would know that if you buy a current Garmin GPS, included at no extra cost is WAAS (Wide Area Augmentation System). This will operate anywhere covered by the satellite based augmentation system and gives incredible ILS type accuracy. All modern aircraft with the Garmin 400 or 500 series, or with Garmin 1000 systems (even the new Citation Mustang light jet) will be provided fully equipped with WAAS at absolutely no extra cost.
But this will be useless in Australia. From the look of it, Australian GA operators will have to purchase an Airservices/Honeywell Aerospace system so they can perform ILS type approaches.
As far as I can see, this is a disaster for Australian general aviation. I wonder if the Minister has been told of the implications?
It appears that Airservices Australia and their executives will be able to make extra money by Australia going down this unique path. I understand that some of the people at Airservices have claimed that this system will be able to be sold around the world and a royalty would be paid back to Airservices Australia. Perhaps someone can confirm if this is true. Of course, the system will only be sold in countries that don’t put in a US compliant Wide Area Augmentation System.
Remember, that with the Wide Area Augmentation System, the augmentation signals come from a geosynchronous satellite over the equator. Whereas with the Airservices Honeywell system there is a small VHF transmitter placed on the ground near each airport.
Both Collins and Universal are now offering WAAS equipment – fully approved. Once again, this will not work in Australia.
I wonder if the decision to go to a unique Australian system comes from the statement:
That is, the US Wide Area Augmentation System does not exceed the ICAO requirements, it probably just complies with them. If we exceed the ICAO requirements, we must be better.
It appears that there is a Japanese satellite that could provide US WAAS compatible signals, however this has to be proposed, discussed and properly organised.
It is clearly another disaster for general aviation. All of the WAAS compatible equipment provided in new aircraft will be useless. I understand the cheapest Honeywell receiver is likely to cost over $30,000 plus installation and certification. Compare that with “already included in the price” and you can see the problem.
global agreement to develop Ground Based Augmentation Solutions (GBAS)
It appears this agreement with Honeywell Aerospace will lead Australia once again into a unique system for augmentation – another AWA DME.
Many people would know that if you buy a current Garmin GPS, included at no extra cost is WAAS (Wide Area Augmentation System). This will operate anywhere covered by the satellite based augmentation system and gives incredible ILS type accuracy. All modern aircraft with the Garmin 400 or 500 series, or with Garmin 1000 systems (even the new Citation Mustang light jet) will be provided fully equipped with WAAS at absolutely no extra cost.
But this will be useless in Australia. From the look of it, Australian GA operators will have to purchase an Airservices/Honeywell Aerospace system so they can perform ILS type approaches.
As far as I can see, this is a disaster for Australian general aviation. I wonder if the Minister has been told of the implications?
It appears that Airservices Australia and their executives will be able to make extra money by Australia going down this unique path. I understand that some of the people at Airservices have claimed that this system will be able to be sold around the world and a royalty would be paid back to Airservices Australia. Perhaps someone can confirm if this is true. Of course, the system will only be sold in countries that don’t put in a US compliant Wide Area Augmentation System.
Remember, that with the Wide Area Augmentation System, the augmentation signals come from a geosynchronous satellite over the equator. Whereas with the Airservices Honeywell system there is a small VHF transmitter placed on the ground near each airport.
Both Collins and Universal are now offering WAAS equipment – fully approved. Once again, this will not work in Australia.
I wonder if the decision to go to a unique Australian system comes from the statement:
GBAS exceeds the ICAO requirements for precision approach
It appears that there is a Japanese satellite that could provide US WAAS compatible signals, however this has to be proposed, discussed and properly organised.
It is clearly another disaster for general aviation. All of the WAAS compatible equipment provided in new aircraft will be useless. I understand the cheapest Honeywell receiver is likely to cost over $30,000 plus installation and certification. Compare that with “already included in the price” and you can see the problem.
Last edited by Dick Smith; 15th Feb 2007 at 22:41.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: On a Ship Near You
Posts: 787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Or perhaps GBAS/GRAS was developed at a request of the key Qustomer (and a key airline producer, Boeing) to take advantage of the equipment in modern aircraft; I believe this enables a much lower decision altitude than the ILS with more accuracy on the glide path and localiser... Stick one of these on the end of an RNP-RNAV AR and you need never go around unless there is a problem with concrete occupancy/conditions.
Maybe this is where the world is actually headed....?
Who cares about GA complying with the requirements of this system; it's not for GA I would guess. It currently is in SY only; and there are plans to take the system to RPT destinations; where there is no current ILS; for cheaper than ILS establishment cost and essentially no maintenance, even you Dick must applaud this safety improvement... But then again you need to spin everything is my guess.
I wouldn't hazard a guess at what the airborne costs are for a GA operator; but I'm guessing it wouldn't be high; it's just another way of receiving a GPS signal...
Maybe this is where the world is actually headed....?
Who cares about GA complying with the requirements of this system; it's not for GA I would guess. It currently is in SY only; and there are plans to take the system to RPT destinations; where there is no current ILS; for cheaper than ILS establishment cost and essentially no maintenance, even you Dick must applaud this safety improvement... But then again you need to spin everything is my guess.
I wouldn't hazard a guess at what the airborne costs are for a GA operator; but I'm guessing it wouldn't be high; it's just another way of receiving a GPS signal...
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Golden Road to Samarkand
Posts: 443
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ever had a satellite or three drop-out in your GPS? How many times has a GPSRNAV aircraft lost RAIM? All it takes is a CB in a direct line between your aircraft and that equatorial satellite on Final, in IMC and... 
Dick Smith said:
"It appears that Airservices Australia and their executives will be able to make extra money by Australia going down this unique path. I understand that some of the people at Airservices have claimed that this system will be able to be sold around the world and a royalty would be paid back to Airservices Australia. Perhaps someone can confirm if this is true ... "
I don't know about Executives, but does the fact that Airservices might, or might not, make some money (in line with it's shareholder's directions) make the equipment any less useful?
"It appears that Airservices Australia and their executives will be able to make extra money by Australia going down this unique path. I understand that some of the people at Airservices have claimed that this system will be able to be sold around the world and a royalty would be paid back to Airservices Australia. Perhaps someone can confirm if this is true ... "
I don't know about Executives, but does the fact that Airservices might, or might not, make some money (in line with it's shareholder's directions) make the equipment any less useful?
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
here we go again ...
Yep you're right, well researched Dick.
"A disaster for Australia", "a unique system for augmentation", "It appears that there is a Japanese satellite that could provide US WAAS compatible signals, however this has to be proposed, discussed and properly organised."
While you are proposing, discussing and organising, Airservices will be busy getting on with the job of making Australian skies safer. Oh, by the way, this "unique Australian system" has already been sold in Germany.
"A disaster for Australia", "a unique system for augmentation", "It appears that there is a Japanese satellite that could provide US WAAS compatible signals, however this has to be proposed, discussed and properly organised."
While you are proposing, discussing and organising, Airservices will be busy getting on with the job of making Australian skies safer. Oh, by the way, this "unique Australian system" has already been sold in Germany.
HONEYWELL SELECTED TO PROVIDE GROUND-BASED AUGMENTATION SYSTEM AT BREMEN AIRPORT IN GERMANY
First Contract Win to Install Safer, More Reliable Satellite-Based Landing System
MINNEAPOLIS, M.N., February 6, 2007 -- Honeywell (NYSE: HON) announced today that it has been selected by DFS Deutsche Flugsicherung GmbH (DFS) to install its SLS-4000 Ground-Based Augmentation System (GBAS) at Bremen Airport in Germany. The contract marks Honeywell’s first sale of the innovative new technology.
Honeywell’s satellite navigation system will enable precision aircraft landings by enhancing the accuracy of Global Position System (GPS) signals. Initially a prototype system will be installed at Bremen Airport in April. It will be replaced by a certified SLS-4000 system in 2008 following Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Category One approval.
“Our GBAS will help increase safety and reliability during precision landings based on satellite navigation.” said Scott Starrett, Vice President, Military Aircraft, Honeywell Defense and Space. “In the future we expect this new technology to help aircraft land during adverse weather conditions, reduce delays and decrease airline operating costs worldwide.”
Honeywell’s system at Bremen Airport will provide aircraft with landing approach information and GPS satellite corrections. In some places of the world the Instrument Landing Systems (ILS) currently in use face technical limits including frequency interference and adverse multipath effects. Most major airports currently utilize one ILS at the end of each runway. A single GBAS ground station will support an entire airport and provides additional flexibility.
Honeywell International is a $31 billion diversified technology and manufacturing leader, serving customers worldwide with aerospace products and services; control technologies for buildings, homes and industry; automotive products; turbochargers; and specialty materials. Based in Morris Township, NJ, Honeywell’s shares are traded on the New York, London, Chicago and Pacific Stock Exchanges. It is one of the 30 stocks that make up the Dow Jones Industrial Average and is also a component of the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index. For additional information, please visit www.honeywell.com. Based in Phoenix, Honeywell’s aerospace business is a leading global provider of integrated avionics, engines, systems and service solutions for aircraft manufacturers, airlines, business and general aviation, military, space and airport operations
MINNEAPOLIS, M.N., February 6, 2007 -- Honeywell (NYSE: HON) announced today that it has been selected by DFS Deutsche Flugsicherung GmbH (DFS) to install its SLS-4000 Ground-Based Augmentation System (GBAS) at Bremen Airport in Germany. The contract marks Honeywell’s first sale of the innovative new technology.
Honeywell’s satellite navigation system will enable precision aircraft landings by enhancing the accuracy of Global Position System (GPS) signals. Initially a prototype system will be installed at Bremen Airport in April. It will be replaced by a certified SLS-4000 system in 2008 following Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Category One approval.
“Our GBAS will help increase safety and reliability during precision landings based on satellite navigation.” said Scott Starrett, Vice President, Military Aircraft, Honeywell Defense and Space. “In the future we expect this new technology to help aircraft land during adverse weather conditions, reduce delays and decrease airline operating costs worldwide.”
Honeywell’s system at Bremen Airport will provide aircraft with landing approach information and GPS satellite corrections. In some places of the world the Instrument Landing Systems (ILS) currently in use face technical limits including frequency interference and adverse multipath effects. Most major airports currently utilize one ILS at the end of each runway. A single GBAS ground station will support an entire airport and provides additional flexibility.
Honeywell International is a $31 billion diversified technology and manufacturing leader, serving customers worldwide with aerospace products and services; control technologies for buildings, homes and industry; automotive products; turbochargers; and specialty materials. Based in Morris Township, NJ, Honeywell’s shares are traded on the New York, London, Chicago and Pacific Stock Exchanges. It is one of the 30 stocks that make up the Dow Jones Industrial Average and is also a component of the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index. For additional information, please visit www.honeywell.com. Based in Phoenix, Honeywell’s aerospace business is a leading global provider of integrated avionics, engines, systems and service solutions for aircraft manufacturers, airlines, business and general aviation, military, space and airport operations
Don Quixote Impersonator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 77
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Smith
,
I am surprised that you are so disparaging of a unique Australian invention by a singularly unique Australian company that solved a unique Australian problem so neatly and competently.
May I suggest that you do not have the long term experience or knowledge of the actual and may I say it again unique Australian aviation environment at the time of its invention to offer that comment nor respect to the inventors they are due.
FWIW AWA as a company, were the backbone and pioneers of the Australian RF environment across all areas from aviation, the home and industry to our great Australian outback.
The aphorism "Necessity is the Mother of invention" springs to mind.
Furthermore Honeywell who are a highly respected and seriously large company rarely make a mistake in the choice of partners and technology. Airservices enjoys the same level of respect in the ATC environment. You would be well aware of the large numbers of the ex DCA/Airservices "diaspora" who have been forced overseas or poached by overseas service providers and technology companies for their nonpareil Australian ATC trained skills, every single one of them a loss to Australia. We Australians are really very good at and highly prized by other external companies for being able to think outside the box. The giant Boeing Aircraft Company seem to agree also.
So if this is an example of "another AWA DME" and a unique answer to a unique Australian or other countries aviation environment then more power to them I say.
I wont claim it be so because my memory is a bit scratchy on it, but I think AWA actually invented DME period. Maybe someone can help us here.
another AWA DME
I am surprised that you are so disparaging of a unique Australian invention by a singularly unique Australian company that solved a unique Australian problem so neatly and competently.
May I suggest that you do not have the long term experience or knowledge of the actual and may I say it again unique Australian aviation environment at the time of its invention to offer that comment nor respect to the inventors they are due.
FWIW AWA as a company, were the backbone and pioneers of the Australian RF environment across all areas from aviation, the home and industry to our great Australian outback.
The aphorism "Necessity is the Mother of invention" springs to mind.
Furthermore Honeywell who are a highly respected and seriously large company rarely make a mistake in the choice of partners and technology. Airservices enjoys the same level of respect in the ATC environment. You would be well aware of the large numbers of the ex DCA/Airservices "diaspora" who have been forced overseas or poached by overseas service providers and technology companies for their nonpareil Australian ATC trained skills, every single one of them a loss to Australia. We Australians are really very good at and highly prized by other external companies for being able to think outside the box. The giant Boeing Aircraft Company seem to agree also.
So if this is an example of "another AWA DME" and a unique answer to a unique Australian or other countries aviation environment then more power to them I say.
I wont claim it be so because my memory is a bit scratchy on it, but I think AWA actually invented DME period. Maybe someone can help us here.
Grandpa Aerotart
Certainly an Australian invented DME...memeory fails but I think he may have been 'forced' overseas in the time honoured Australian tradition...and the Australian DME was better than the International copy.
Dick the dream of GPS replacing all precision ground based aids was a dead duck years ago...GPS is good but it aint THAT good and does NOT have the system integrity to provide precision approaches to CAT 1 minimas, let alone Cat 2/3.
All it takes is a high level of sun spot activity and you can end up wanting with GPS.
Dick the dream of GPS replacing all precision ground based aids was a dead duck years ago...GPS is good but it aint THAT good and does NOT have the system integrity to provide precision approaches to CAT 1 minimas, let alone Cat 2/3.
All it takes is a high level of sun spot activity and you can end up wanting with GPS.
Thread Starter
Peuce, you say:
Yes, it may do. That is because there is a clear conflict of interest. That is, the organisation that appears to be making a decision that we go ahead with this unique system also makes money from it.
Naturally, they are going to push the system which increases their profits the most. After all, that is the job of directors and executives – increase the profit of the business.
By the way, as far as I understand, the top executives of Airservices receive a bonus (or part of their package) geared to the profits of Airservices. That means every decision is tainted.
It may be the most profitable way to go for Airservices and its executives, but not the best way to go for the country.
I don't know about Executives, but does the fact that Airservices might, or might not, make some money (in line with it's shareholder's directions) make the equipment any less useful?
Naturally, they are going to push the system which increases their profits the most. After all, that is the job of directors and executives – increase the profit of the business.
By the way, as far as I understand, the top executives of Airservices receive a bonus (or part of their package) geared to the profits of Airservices. That means every decision is tainted.
It may be the most profitable way to go for Airservices and its executives, but not the best way to go for the country.
Last edited by Dick Smith; 16th Feb 2007 at 04:19.
Thread Starter
Chimbu Chuckles, you state:
If that is so, the Airservices system will have the same problems. I understand with the Airservices/Honeywell system, differential signals are transmitted on VHF to correct the GPS position. If the GPS signal fades out, the Airservices system won’t work.
By the way, I’m not criticising AWA for their invention, I just believe we should learn from history. That is, if we go it alone with our small population we could end up wasting a lot of money.
Whether we like it or not, we cannot use an AWA 200 MHz DME in Australia today. That is because Airservices (or their predecessor) removed all of the ground stations and harmonised with the US/International system. We don’t want to make the same mistake again.
Also, there has been no proper discussion regarding the pros and cons of going to the US WAAS system or going to a ground based differential system.
All it takes is a high level of sun spot activity and you can end up wanting with GPS.
By the way, I’m not criticising AWA for their invention, I just believe we should learn from history. That is, if we go it alone with our small population we could end up wasting a lot of money.
Whether we like it or not, we cannot use an AWA 200 MHz DME in Australia today. That is because Airservices (or their predecessor) removed all of the ground stations and harmonised with the US/International system. We don’t want to make the same mistake again.
Also, there has been no proper discussion regarding the pros and cons of going to the US WAAS system or going to a ground based differential system.
Dick
Are you sure you have this right (knowing you, you probably do!)?
My understanding was that the US WAAS system uses a network of ground based transmitters in addition to the satellites.
FTDC
Are you sure you have this right (knowing you, you probably do!)?
My understanding was that the US WAAS system uses a network of ground based transmitters in addition to the satellites.
FTDC
We don’t want to make the same mistake again.
200MHZ DME was NOT a mistake! It got us a DME system YEARS before the rest of the world, allowing operations that could NOT have taken place without it.
I don't see many steam trains around today. That doesn't mean that using them, rather than waiting 200years for the diesel, was a mistake!
In any case, this time WE are using the latest, up to date system, while the yanks are investing in obsolete technology.
You are being worryingly general in you comparison of the two GPS systems (apart from the usual USA=Good, anythingelse= Bad). Could you outline the IAP minima possble with the the two systems?
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Golden Road to Samarkand
Posts: 443
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stifling innovation... the curse on Australia.
Australia has a long history of innovation to be proud of... it also has a history of attacking Australian innovation.
C.Y. O'Connor was a brilliant engineer and visionary in WA who has been imortalised in that state's history for his innovation... and for the community's antagonism towards his idea of a water pipeline from Mundaring Weir to Kalgoorlie... antagonism that may have contributed to his death... a death in the days before the water flowed out at the end of the pipe in Kalgoorlie. Today water still flows out of the Mundaring Weir to Kalgoorlie pipeline, and no-one would suggest that it be de-commissioned.
The Black Box is the perfect example of an Australian innovation in aviation that has become a globally adopted technology that has saved many lives... and saved many dollars.
But the Black Box was a financial impost on the aviation industry.
Dick, would you suggest that the Black Box is an unnecessary financial impost on the aviation industry?
I wonder how many more lives and how many more dollars would have been saved over the same period if Australia had mandated installation of the Black Box in General Aviation aircraft.
C.Y. O'Connor was a brilliant engineer and visionary in WA who has been imortalised in that state's history for his innovation... and for the community's antagonism towards his idea of a water pipeline from Mundaring Weir to Kalgoorlie... antagonism that may have contributed to his death... a death in the days before the water flowed out at the end of the pipe in Kalgoorlie. Today water still flows out of the Mundaring Weir to Kalgoorlie pipeline, and no-one would suggest that it be de-commissioned.
The Black Box is the perfect example of an Australian innovation in aviation that has become a globally adopted technology that has saved many lives... and saved many dollars.
But the Black Box was a financial impost on the aviation industry.
Dick, would you suggest that the Black Box is an unnecessary financial impost on the aviation industry?
I wonder how many more lives and how many more dollars would have been saved over the same period if Australia had mandated installation of the Black Box in General Aviation aircraft.
Don Quixote Impersonator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 77
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wizofoz
Thank you, you too seem to remember the actual environment when it was an NDB/DME environment and the excitement when VANX became available. My charts from that period are long gone but if my memory serves me correctly in WA at least, there were maybe 6 VOR in total. Glad we didn't have to wait for the diesel trains.
Mr Smith
it cuts both ways, we could also end up saving a lot of money.
200MHZ DME was a unique solution to a unique airspace problem and it wasn't cheap either. But considering that many aircraft of the day were not equipped with VOR nor were there all that many, it was even then a very cost effective solution for our unique Australian environment. The subsequent Int DME add on, colocated and integrated with installations of new and existing VOR as the traffic and equipment fit progresed was also a cost effective move. Correct decisions made professionally by experienced people in the context of the existing environment
You would have to admit Australians are very good at making do in the context of available money available to them and their environment. It is a fact that in GA we use mostly US designed aircraft in a manner and at a utilisation rate that the manufacturers never intended. Australians then complain at the cost of maintenance. Our 19 to 30 passenger fleet is largely superannuated and with old avionics technology in the cockpit. You must agree the costs of ugrading the avionics technology is in many cases more than the value of the aircraft. The ugrade however isn't reflected in the used value.
Maybe Airservices have recognised that and are providing a cheaper more user/cost friendly technology.
I also find your continual harping about imagined Airservices executive bias towards their bonuses not only offensive but not worthy of you. Many are my personal friends and many more aquaintances, to a man they are internationally respected professionals dedicated to the provision of excellent service. They are also businessmen not only subject to direct Senate scrutiny on ALL their actions, but by the market place. You must also agree that as businessmen if they dont get their technology decisions right the market place will punish them mercilessly.
Thank you, you too seem to remember the actual environment when it was an NDB/DME environment and the excitement when VANX became available. My charts from that period are long gone but if my memory serves me correctly in WA at least, there were maybe 6 VOR in total. Glad we didn't have to wait for the diesel trains.
Mr Smith
That is, if we go it alone with our small population we could end up wasting a lot of money.
200MHZ DME was a unique solution to a unique airspace problem and it wasn't cheap either. But considering that many aircraft of the day were not equipped with VOR nor were there all that many, it was even then a very cost effective solution for our unique Australian environment. The subsequent Int DME add on, colocated and integrated with installations of new and existing VOR as the traffic and equipment fit progresed was also a cost effective move. Correct decisions made professionally by experienced people in the context of the existing environment
You would have to admit Australians are very good at making do in the context of available money available to them and their environment. It is a fact that in GA we use mostly US designed aircraft in a manner and at a utilisation rate that the manufacturers never intended. Australians then complain at the cost of maintenance. Our 19 to 30 passenger fleet is largely superannuated and with old avionics technology in the cockpit. You must agree the costs of ugrading the avionics technology is in many cases more than the value of the aircraft. The ugrade however isn't reflected in the used value.
Maybe Airservices have recognised that and are providing a cheaper more user/cost friendly technology.
I also find your continual harping about imagined Airservices executive bias towards their bonuses not only offensive but not worthy of you. Many are my personal friends and many more aquaintances, to a man they are internationally respected professionals dedicated to the provision of excellent service. They are also businessmen not only subject to direct Senate scrutiny on ALL their actions, but by the market place. You must also agree that as businessmen if they dont get their technology decisions right the market place will punish them mercilessly.
Dick Smith said:
" ...By the way, as far as I understand, the top executives of Airservices receive a bonus (or part of their package) geared to the profits of Airservices. That means every decision is tainted... "
Ergo:
Every decision that the QANTAS Board makes is tainted
Every decision the GARMIN Board makes is tainted
Every recommendation from a Dick Smith Electronics salesman is tainted
Every business decision/statement you make is tainted
My point:
If we follow your reasoning, we shouldn't trust any decision or advice provided by anyone who's likely to make a buck out of it.
Reality:
There are forces other than financial gain at play in the world ... such as accountability, safety management, risk management, shareholder oversight, professional pride and most importantly ... moral responsibility.
I hope you are just conveniently ignoring them to push a point ... the alternative would be sad.
" ...By the way, as far as I understand, the top executives of Airservices receive a bonus (or part of their package) geared to the profits of Airservices. That means every decision is tainted... "
Ergo:
Every decision that the QANTAS Board makes is tainted
Every decision the GARMIN Board makes is tainted
Every recommendation from a Dick Smith Electronics salesman is tainted
Every business decision/statement you make is tainted
My point:
If we follow your reasoning, we shouldn't trust any decision or advice provided by anyone who's likely to make a buck out of it.
Reality:
There are forces other than financial gain at play in the world ... such as accountability, safety management, risk management, shareholder oversight, professional pride and most importantly ... moral responsibility.
I hope you are just conveniently ignoring them to push a point ... the alternative would be sad.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: seq
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dick is right.
A huge amount of aircraft has Garmin 430/530 units and more aircraft every day are getting them. They have WAAS. That is the real world now. Now Airservices in the unreal world tell us we are going to use this GBAS that no one has.
Who is going to pay?
Pilots here talk how good the system will be but they won’t put there hands in their pocket and pay for it. In fact they complain how much it cost to hire an aircraft.
If Airservices stop charging me for a few years I will change my system so my aircraft is so much safer the Australian way.
A better way is charging every pilot $40 or $50 levy to bring it in and we will see how many people think it is a good idea then!
A huge amount of aircraft has Garmin 430/530 units and more aircraft every day are getting them. They have WAAS. That is the real world now. Now Airservices in the unreal world tell us we are going to use this GBAS that no one has.
Who is going to pay?
Pilots here talk how good the system will be but they won’t put there hands in their pocket and pay for it. In fact they complain how much it cost to hire an aircraft.
If Airservices stop charging me for a few years I will change my system so my aircraft is so much safer the Australian way.
A better way is charging every pilot $40 or $50 levy to bring it in and we will see how many people think it is a good idea then!