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
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Alice Springs
Posts: 1,744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Scared of ghosts?
Our aviation radio system is already unreliable, because it is being used to gather information to collect landing fees. It is not meant for commercial information gathering.
Will ADSB be any different?
Will ADSB be any different?
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
G'day Bushy,
.
If someone uses an airport ... does the owner of said airport have some entitlement to a fee?
.
That said, I think you know my view on that score anyway .. but I guess we are stuck with it
.
It is my understanding (perhaps incorrect) that ADS-B will have a 'PVT' or 'VFR' mode which I think is what you are getting at
.
If someone uses an airport ... does the owner of said airport have some entitlement to a fee?
.
That said, I think you know my view on that score anyway .. but I guess we are stuck with it
.
It is my understanding (perhaps incorrect) that ADS-B will have a 'PVT' or 'VFR' mode which I think is what you are getting at
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Alice Springs
Posts: 1,744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes
Of course airports are entitled to a fee for what they provide.
But it is a gross misuse of the radio system to use it for gathering data for commercial moneygathering purposes. And it is not reliable now, either for collecting the money, or for it's real purpose- air safety.
But it is a gross misuse of the radio system to use it for gathering data for commercial moneygathering purposes. And it is not reliable now, either for collecting the money, or for it's real purpose- air safety.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Darraweit Guim, Victoria
Age: 64
Posts: 508
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is my understanding (perhaps incorrect) that ADS-B will have a 'PVT' or 'VFR' mode which I think is what you are getting at
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
.. assumes airport operators have access to the 12bit data decode... doubt it!
.
.. and our screens already have the SSR_ALL function
.
.. and our screens already have the SSR_ALL function
Quokka,
They are not my documents, and are not available on a web site. If you go back a few pages, your will see the request to post them, I would not presume to edit the documents of the President of ASAC.
If people don't want to take the trouble to read what are very important documents, in trying to make sense of the whole ADS-B imbroglio, what does that say about those who can't spend a few minutes.
The only comment I make on the documents is that they are accurate, and point out the serious errors in the JCP consultation papers, and much of the previous work by the same group.
Tootle pip!!
They are not my documents, and are not available on a web site. If you go back a few pages, your will see the request to post them, I would not presume to edit the documents of the President of ASAC.
If people don't want to take the trouble to read what are very important documents, in trying to make sense of the whole ADS-B imbroglio, what does that say about those who can't spend a few minutes.
The only comment I make on the documents is that they are accurate, and point out the serious errors in the JCP consultation papers, and much of the previous work by the same group.
Tootle pip!!
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
... am formulating a full response, however in the interim:-
.
Re: Risk asessment for the ADS-B proposal, I ask this:-
.
1. how do you quantify risk where data is not available OCTA outside the current veil?
.
2. what is the risk increase of fitment? .. is there in fact any?
.
3. if there is is a clear risk reduction, (as yet not fully quantifyable due variables in third party and or 'in' alerting) is a risk assessment required before hand given there is no negative?
.
4. If costs are contained (guaranteed, which they are not as yet) to neutral why is a full spectrum CBA for GA required beforehand?
.
5. If GNSS is provided to aircraft that do not currently have it, how is that quantifed in benefit, particualry if it provides the basis for TAWS and 'In' plug -in's?
.
Re: Risk asessment for the ADS-B proposal, I ask this:-
.
1. how do you quantify risk where data is not available OCTA outside the current veil?
.
2. what is the risk increase of fitment? .. is there in fact any?
.
3. if there is is a clear risk reduction, (as yet not fully quantifyable due variables in third party and or 'in' alerting) is a risk assessment required before hand given there is no negative?
.
4. If costs are contained (guaranteed, which they are not as yet) to neutral why is a full spectrum CBA for GA required beforehand?
.
5. If GNSS is provided to aircraft that do not currently have it, how is that quantifed in benefit, particualry if it provides the basis for TAWS and 'In' plug -in's?
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Alice Springs
Posts: 1,744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
???????
Your question illustrates one of the major problems with our system.
I cannot believe that you would ask such a question.
When you use radio transmissions as a basis for charging landing fees this is going to cause some of the more unscrupulous to not make radio transmissions. It happens. It also often results in incorrect billing.
Radios are not there for that purpose, and anything that degrades the integrity or availability of information from radio transmissions should be eliminated.
I cannot believe that you would ask such a question.
When you use radio transmissions as a basis for charging landing fees this is going to cause some of the more unscrupulous to not make radio transmissions. It happens. It also often results in incorrect billing.
Radios are not there for that purpose, and anything that degrades the integrity or availability of information from radio transmissions should be eliminated.
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
some of the more unscrupulous to not make radio transmissions
.
what are the options though, airport employing another bod to run around writing down rego's? .... is that extra bod gunna up the landing fee's?
.
... it is silly that that sort of behaviour might generate the need to install recorders and advertise the fact .. or holding point cameras or such like .... it might be the only way to stop that sort of behaviour
.
Whats the solution?
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Bushy, unfortunately you raise a very good point. And I think we have all had many sightings of silent a/c arriving at certain aerodromes.
The cheeky streak in me has made me wonder if using a B744 rego in say Toowoomba would get through to accounts department, but of course I would never get to see the result.
I have heard of one Toger Moth being at opposing ends of the country on the same day........Thats Impressive!!!
Seriously though, why is it we have so many smart ar$es out there doing this. Maybe you have some better and reasonably efficient way of billing landing fees that could be adopted.
J
The cheeky streak in me has made me wonder if using a B744 rego in say Toowoomba would get through to accounts department, but of course I would never get to see the result.
I have heard of one Toger Moth being at opposing ends of the country on the same day........Thats Impressive!!!
Seriously though, why is it we have so many smart ar$es out there doing this. Maybe you have some better and reasonably efficient way of billing landing fees that could be adopted.
J
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Scurv, you beat me to it by seconds it seems.
Camera's at holding points, would breed the same weasils into applying faxke rego stickers, or cutting the grass and doing short takeoffs just to avoid the "flash for cash"
Maybe all airports should be funded from a central fund, and if say 1c per litre of fuel went into that fund, we could do away with all landing fees. This would still be user pays, just easier to collect.
J
Camera's at holding points, would breed the same weasils into applying faxke rego stickers, or cutting the grass and doing short takeoffs just to avoid the "flash for cash"
Maybe all airports should be funded from a central fund, and if say 1c per litre of fuel went into that fund, we could do away with all landing fees. This would still be user pays, just easier to collect.
J
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: A pothole on the information superhighway
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And I think we have all had many sightings of silent a/c arriving at certain aerodromes.
And why not rewrite the rules and get CASA to make calls to the UNICOM mandatory, then they have to use their real call or get caught out after landing.
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
G'day Jaba,
.
Yep that is the sensible option .. what do you reckon the chances are?
.
Piston
.
If things don't improve, that might well be the outcome .... at what cost though
.
Folks need to realise what saving a few bucks is gunna cost them in the end
.
Yep that is the sensible option .. what do you reckon the chances are?
.
Piston
.
If things don't improve, that might well be the outcome .... at what cost though
.
Folks need to realise what saving a few bucks is gunna cost them in the end
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Bushy,
you said monitoring radio calls for billing purposes encourages rogues to do dodgy things. So I think we all agree that encouraging proper radio ettiquette would be a good thing, and to stop the radio being used as a collection device, we should explore other options. Camera's fuel levy.....either way I thought this would help with your gripes.
So did you like my idea? That way everybody pays!
Can any of it be changed..........Scurvy has already given the impression
J
you said monitoring radio calls for billing purposes encourages rogues to do dodgy things. So I think we all agree that encouraging proper radio ettiquette would be a good thing, and to stop the radio being used as a collection device, we should explore other options. Camera's fuel levy.....either way I thought this would help with your gripes.
So did you like my idea? That way everybody pays!
Can any of it be changed..........Scurvy has already given the impression
J
Jaba
I got charged a landing fee for YHUG, when I only carried out navaid work. If the useless b*stards had listened to the tape it would have been clear that I didn't land. Why should I have to stuff around to have it removed from the bill!
Dr
I got charged a landing fee for YHUG, when I only carried out navaid work. If the useless b*stards had listened to the tape it would have been clear that I didn't land. Why should I have to stuff around to have it removed from the bill!
Dr
Last edited by ForkTailedDrKiller; 22nd Aug 2007 at 11:38.
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
.... some (possibly) not so promising info coming through on the wires!.
.. does anyone know (for sure, no guesses) if C129a GNSS complies with the AC as far as acceptable 'equivalent' ???
.
.. also G1000 owners, can you have TCAD traffic inputs (module) retrofitted to a factory G1000 system?
.
Would appreciate firm answers on these Q's
Last edited by Scurvy.D.Dog; 22nd Aug 2007 at 11:02. Reason: Spellin
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Doc
So do you think my idea of a fuel levy going to a central fund for distribution to airfields and their upkeep would be a fairer way to raise revenue then?
Seems you may have a good reason to back this theory too!
J
Sorry Scurvy for the thread drift, the rest of you continue on!
So do you think my idea of a fuel levy going to a central fund for distribution to airfields and their upkeep would be a fairer way to raise revenue then?
Seems you may have a good reason to back this theory too!
J
Sorry Scurvy for the thread drift, the rest of you continue on!