View Poll Results: Which ADS-B scenario do you support?
Scenario 1 (Status quo)
25
12.69%
Scenario 2 (subsidised-60% VFR fleet fitment)
8
4.06%
Scenario 3 (subsidised-90% VFR fleet fitment)
164
83.25%
Voters: 197. This poll is closed
ADS-B + Subsidy - It's on the table - Submn's close 31 Oct
Europeans are producing ADS-B IN for both heavy end and lighties. Specification for the receiver connects to a CDTI for increased pilot SA.
bugga, cannot get a link to the PDF site.
cut and paste this into google and it should be the very first site to come up-
1090ES ADS-B/TIS-B light airborne system
bugga, cannot get a link to the PDF site.
cut and paste this into google and it should be the very first site to come up-
1090ES ADS-B/TIS-B light airborne system
Grandpa Aerotart
For years Dick has been claiming to have had ideas or implemented ideas that would/did save 100s of millions...when that was clearly BS!!Now a technology comes along which will actually save 100s of millions and he is whinging like a 12 year old.
Nothing has changed then
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Golden Road to Samarkand
Posts: 443
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If we achieve the full ADS-B project and de-commission the MSSRs then Dick loses his biggest argument against third party services and government regulation... cost.
Gary Gnu,
No, I do not believe TCAS traffic advisories (TA) are analogous with “ATC directed traffic information”. However, I do believe that a TCAS traffic advisory is similar and sometimes better than a radar advisory given by ATC. This is for obvious reasons.
The TCAS is an automatic system whereas the radar advisory from ATC is pretty much a manual system and is affected by human frailties – which we all have.
I believe you should be looking at all safety improvements – not ruling out one particular safety improvement (TCAS) because ICAO allegedly made a decision on this 13 years ago when the technology was hardly proven. I totally support that we explore the viability of an ADS-B mandate.
We should take into account present technology that is available that we are not even using. For example Terry Wesley-Smith, Chief Executive Officer of the Regional Aviation Association of Australia, is pushing much of this ADS-B mandate to VFR aircraft. Mr Wesley-Smith would know that we do not even have a requirement for TCAS in existing 10-30 passenger airline aircraft. TCAS is available today and if there is a measurable safety improvement, it should surely be installed – I won’t dare say mandate it.
The latest cost benefit study, which has been produced in relation to the ADS-B mandate is clearly fraudulent. For example, it links the savings of an ADS-B mandate with removing the certified air ground operators at Broome and Ayers Rock. What a con – a local operator at an airport is quite different to an automated ADS-B system being operated from Sydney or Brisbane where the controller cannot see the aerodrome environment.
No, I do not believe TCAS traffic advisories (TA) are analogous with “ATC directed traffic information”. However, I do believe that a TCAS traffic advisory is similar and sometimes better than a radar advisory given by ATC. This is for obvious reasons.
The TCAS is an automatic system whereas the radar advisory from ATC is pretty much a manual system and is affected by human frailties – which we all have.
I believe you should be looking at all safety improvements – not ruling out one particular safety improvement (TCAS) because ICAO allegedly made a decision on this 13 years ago when the technology was hardly proven. I totally support that we explore the viability of an ADS-B mandate.
We should take into account present technology that is available that we are not even using. For example Terry Wesley-Smith, Chief Executive Officer of the Regional Aviation Association of Australia, is pushing much of this ADS-B mandate to VFR aircraft. Mr Wesley-Smith would know that we do not even have a requirement for TCAS in existing 10-30 passenger airline aircraft. TCAS is available today and if there is a measurable safety improvement, it should surely be installed – I won’t dare say mandate it.
The latest cost benefit study, which has been produced in relation to the ADS-B mandate is clearly fraudulent. For example, it links the savings of an ADS-B mandate with removing the certified air ground operators at Broome and Ayers Rock. What a con – a local operator at an airport is quite different to an automated ADS-B system being operated from Sydney or Brisbane where the controller cannot see the aerodrome environment.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Golden Road to Samarkand
Posts: 443
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With respect Dick,
Do you accept that the data provided to pilots and the third party service providers (regardless of whether it's a CAGRO or an ATC) by ADS-B is more detailed and more accurate than the current MSSR system?
Do you accept that the data provided to pilots and the third party service providers (regardless of whether it's a CAGRO or an ATC) by ADS-B is more detailed and more accurate than the current MSSR system?
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 1,256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The present satellites are ultimately controlled by the US military. If there is a period of heightened international tension (Taiwan?) they may well be detuned. It would be wise to preserve some ground based backup capability. Other than that it is all good stuff.
I'm in one of those moods
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: SFC to A085
Posts: 759
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The latest cost benefit study, which has been produced in relation to the ADS-B mandate is clearly fraudulent.
.
... we have heard it all before
.
Removed in the hope that dialogue will end the need for needling
Last edited by Scurvy.D.Dog; 17th Aug 2007 at 03:40. Reason: Add a link :-)
Quokka,
Yes, I do accept that. The problem is that a certified ADS-B unit does not exist at the moment whereas MSSR, mode C transponders and TCAS exists at a present time and are readily available.
I see a plan here for Airservices to constantly support a system that does not yet exist, rather than take the safety advantages now of the highly proven present system, and then move ahead with the better system, when decisions have been made in leading aviation countries where the equipment is proven and certified.
Yes, I do accept that. The problem is that a certified ADS-B unit does not exist at the moment whereas MSSR, mode C transponders and TCAS exists at a present time and are readily available.
I see a plan here for Airservices to constantly support a system that does not yet exist, rather than take the safety advantages now of the highly proven present system, and then move ahead with the better system, when decisions have been made in leading aviation countries where the equipment is proven and certified.
4Greens,
You make a good point in relation to the present GPS system – especially that it can be de-tuned or turned off at anytime. That is why I would imagine that Airbus and Boeing retain TCAS as their form of traffic display and resolution advisory in the cockpit.
Imagine if we went completely to ADS-B as so many people want us to do, and not only was the Airservice’s control system based on ADS-B, but also the aircraft to aircraft traffic avoidance and resolution advisory system. This is putting all our eggs in one basket, there would be nothing if the GPS system was interfered with or went down.
Of course, with transponder/TCAS even if the GPS system goes out and ADS-B does not work you will still have an extremely safe and proven back up to prevent collisions.
You make a good point in relation to the present GPS system – especially that it can be de-tuned or turned off at anytime. That is why I would imagine that Airbus and Boeing retain TCAS as their form of traffic display and resolution advisory in the cockpit.
Imagine if we went completely to ADS-B as so many people want us to do, and not only was the Airservice’s control system based on ADS-B, but also the aircraft to aircraft traffic avoidance and resolution advisory system. This is putting all our eggs in one basket, there would be nothing if the GPS system was interfered with or went down.
Of course, with transponder/TCAS even if the GPS system goes out and ADS-B does not work you will still have an extremely safe and proven back up to prevent collisions.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Golden Road to Samarkand
Posts: 443
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dick,
Not so long ago I passed traffic "for information" to a QF B737 on an aircraft that would pass close to the minimum applicable RADAR separation standard in Class C airspace. On RADAR the aircraft was passing on the right-hand side of the QF B737. The crew of the QF B737 reported to me that the aircraft was displayed on his TCAS passing on the left-hand side.
I passed the traffic information again as passing on the right-hand side and the crew visually sighted the aircraft passing on the right-hand side.
After some discussion in regard to the TCAS display error, the crew indicated that they were aware that TCAS information in regard to lateral displacement of aircraft is not reliable.
Co-incidentally, the very subject of TCAS display errors was included in an article in that month's edition of Flight Safety.
Not so long ago I passed traffic "for information" to a QF B737 on an aircraft that would pass close to the minimum applicable RADAR separation standard in Class C airspace. On RADAR the aircraft was passing on the right-hand side of the QF B737. The crew of the QF B737 reported to me that the aircraft was displayed on his TCAS passing on the left-hand side.
I passed the traffic information again as passing on the right-hand side and the crew visually sighted the aircraft passing on the right-hand side.
After some discussion in regard to the TCAS display error, the crew indicated that they were aware that TCAS information in regard to lateral displacement of aircraft is not reliable.
Co-incidentally, the very subject of TCAS display errors was included in an article in that month's edition of Flight Safety.
Grandpa Aerotart
I have watched a TCAS target 'move' laterally 10 miles and back again in a few seconds...Dick that is why TCAS WILL NEVER be more than an absolute last line of defence against mid air collision.
Selective availability was turned off, from memory, during the Clinton administration...even when it was 'on' the DOP was only a few hundred feet.
With the entire world relying on GPS the US just cannot turn it off...and then there is the Russian satellite system and, I think, a European satellite system too. It's not just little ol' Oz moving to a satellite based ATM system...EVERYBODY IS!!!
Certainly there are issues of national soveriegnty...that is why a basic Radar based ATM infrastructure will remain in place around capital cities and why AsA are looking at GBAS/GRAS as oppsed to SBAS...TCAS will remain in place doing what it does now...last ditch collision avoidance...but GPS is the technology of the future...and it is here right now.
Despite your protestations there is a European company producing an affordable, certified ADS-B out/in with CDTI display unit that can go in everything from a glider to your Citation....I am sure Garmin/Honeywell will follow with something...they are probably beavering away on it right now. Just because Boeing/Airbus are not actively doing anything at the present means nothing..they are aircraft manufacturers...they buy their avionics off the rack just like we do...they will just get the required box from Honeywell or whomever and slide it into a rack under the cockpit...with some software updates problem solved...like they did with TCAS.
In the meantime Dick your Airspace aspirations have been bypased by technology...I suggest you get used to the idea.
Selective availability was turned off, from memory, during the Clinton administration...even when it was 'on' the DOP was only a few hundred feet.
With the entire world relying on GPS the US just cannot turn it off...and then there is the Russian satellite system and, I think, a European satellite system too. It's not just little ol' Oz moving to a satellite based ATM system...EVERYBODY IS!!!
Certainly there are issues of national soveriegnty...that is why a basic Radar based ATM infrastructure will remain in place around capital cities and why AsA are looking at GBAS/GRAS as oppsed to SBAS...TCAS will remain in place doing what it does now...last ditch collision avoidance...but GPS is the technology of the future...and it is here right now.
Despite your protestations there is a European company producing an affordable, certified ADS-B out/in with CDTI display unit that can go in everything from a glider to your Citation....I am sure Garmin/Honeywell will follow with something...they are probably beavering away on it right now. Just because Boeing/Airbus are not actively doing anything at the present means nothing..they are aircraft manufacturers...they buy their avionics off the rack just like we do...they will just get the required box from Honeywell or whomever and slide it into a rack under the cockpit...with some software updates problem solved...like they did with TCAS.
In the meantime Dick your Airspace aspirations have been bypased by technology...I suggest you get used to the idea.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 1,256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1. With a complete ADS-B sytem there will be a temptation to reduce radar coverage on the grounds of cost.
2. Ground based aids such as the ILS may well go.
3. Until at least the European satellites are commissioned then the backup of keeping these systems should be a requirement.
2. Ground based aids such as the ILS may well go.
3. Until at least the European satellites are commissioned then the backup of keeping these systems should be a requirement.
http://www.selex-comms.com
Try this link for PDF. Italian company producing ADS-B IN
http://www.aviationtoday.com/av/topstories
Good avionics news. Garmin are manufacturing TSO ADS-B out transponders. So shot down on two counts Mr Smith. Note that Garmin is NOT a UAT transponder, 1090ES!
Try this link for PDF. Italian company producing ADS-B IN
http://www.aviationtoday.com/av/topstories
Good avionics news. Garmin are manufacturing TSO ADS-B out transponders. So shot down on two counts Mr Smith. Note that Garmin is NOT a UAT transponder, 1090ES!
I'm in one of those moods
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: SFC to A085
Posts: 759
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
4Greens
.
From the JCP
ILS does not figure in the Navaid decommissioning summary! … until augmentation is sorted there is unlikely to be any move on 'non back-up VOR and ILS .....there seems to be a ways to go with the SBAS/GRAS/GBAS stuff … there are pros and cons to each in the context of costs, resulting minimums V’s range, subscription etc etc
.
Re 1090ES TXPDR’s
.
I suspect Garmin have the inside running on events that might be announced in the US shortly. If the world is singing from the same ADS-B page, the number of manufacturers (worldwide) will be huge, and presumably the costs (economies of scale and competition), will make the equipment very very affordable!
.
… makes the possibility of bundled ‘in’ a real possibility within the target funding!
.
.. the only ‘if’ remains the cost of installation …. LAME … AME? … thoughts?
.
From the JCP
8.5 Future Backup Navigation Network
.
In the expectation that most aircraft will in time be equipped with suitable GNSS navigation avionics (as part of the ADS-B avionics system), Airservices proposes to decommission just under half of the existing NDBs and VORs, ensuring that a ‘backup’ network of some 165 navaids remains. This backup network would provide a continuation of navigation services in the event of a GNSS failure. It has been designed to ensure that IFR operations can continue if GNSS is unavailable.
.
In the expectation that most aircraft will in time be equipped with suitable GNSS navigation avionics (as part of the ADS-B avionics system), Airservices proposes to decommission just under half of the existing NDBs and VORs, ensuring that a ‘backup’ network of some 165 navaids remains. This backup network would provide a continuation of navigation services in the event of a GNSS failure. It has been designed to ensure that IFR operations can continue if GNSS is unavailable.
.
Re 1090ES TXPDR’s
.
I suspect Garmin have the inside running on events that might be announced in the US shortly. If the world is singing from the same ADS-B page, the number of manufacturers (worldwide) will be huge, and presumably the costs (economies of scale and competition), will make the equipment very very affordable!
.
… makes the possibility of bundled ‘in’ a real possibility within the target funding!
.
.. the only ‘if’ remains the cost of installation …. LAME … AME? … thoughts?
Quokka,
Yes, I do accept that re TCAS and the vertical plane. However, that is a lot better than an ADS-B system which does not provide a resolution advisory in any way – of which has not been invented yet.
It is all theoretical.
There are a few hand held screens, which can be plugged into an ADS-B, to show the location of other aircraft. These are pretty much a gimmick, even though they cost approximately $15,000 each, because they do not give a verbal traffic alert or resolution advisory.
There are no plans at present for Boeing or Airbus to design an ADS-B system with resolution advisories as TCAS does it so well.
Yes, I do accept that re TCAS and the vertical plane. However, that is a lot better than an ADS-B system which does not provide a resolution advisory in any way – of which has not been invented yet.
It is all theoretical.
There are a few hand held screens, which can be plugged into an ADS-B, to show the location of other aircraft. These are pretty much a gimmick, even though they cost approximately $15,000 each, because they do not give a verbal traffic alert or resolution advisory.
There are no plans at present for Boeing or Airbus to design an ADS-B system with resolution advisories as TCAS does it so well.
Last edited by Dick Smith; 16th Aug 2007 at 23:51.
Chimbu chuckles,
You state:
This is a total furphy!
To put ADS-B in across Australia you need a proper airspace system, so air traffic control can actually provide a control service.
Are you suggesting that we have G airspace as we do now in radar coverage and let the pilots become the air traffic controllers and do the separation when in IMC using their ADS-B units?
I see most of this ADS-B push as one of delaying any change. How can you possibly have ADS-B unless you have a proper air space system where air traffic controllers actually act as airtraffic controllers and control aircraft when in IMC? For this, you need a minimum of Class E airspace.
I can assure you all I will get the Class E extended. Just watch – despite all the resistance to change!
You state:
”In the meantime Dick your airspace aspirations have been bypassed by technology... I suggest you get used to the idea.”
To put ADS-B in across Australia you need a proper airspace system, so air traffic control can actually provide a control service.
Are you suggesting that we have G airspace as we do now in radar coverage and let the pilots become the air traffic controllers and do the separation when in IMC using their ADS-B units?
I see most of this ADS-B push as one of delaying any change. How can you possibly have ADS-B unless you have a proper air space system where air traffic controllers actually act as airtraffic controllers and control aircraft when in IMC? For this, you need a minimum of Class E airspace.
I can assure you all I will get the Class E extended. Just watch – despite all the resistance to change!
Last edited by Dick Smith; 17th Aug 2007 at 01:08.
Dick,
You said:
"Are you suggesting that we have G airspace as we do now in radar coverage and let the pilots become the air traffic controllers and do the separation when in IMC using their ADS-B units?
bingo! At last you've got it!
You said:
"Are you suggesting that we have G airspace as we do now in radar coverage and let the pilots become the air traffic controllers and do the separation when in IMC using their ADS-B units?
bingo! At last you've got it!