Airservices Australia ADS-B program - another Seasprite Fiasco?
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Alice Springs
Posts: 1,744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes
Creampuff, as always, brings some sanity to what is now an extreme dickbashing thread. Sadly some of the dickbashers are destroying their own credibiity. A pity really, because some of them have useful knowledge and can add to the value of the debate if they can control themselves.
This is valuable debate which can fill knowledge gaps which is what the problem really is.
This is valuable debate which can fill knowledge gaps which is what the problem really is.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Oz
Age: 77
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bushy
When Dick learns to treat fellow posters as he would be treated himself, and to get facts before making assumptions, he won't be 'dickbashed' as you claim.
His allegations about my motives were scurrilous and beneath contempt, certainly not appropriate from anyone seeking to be a leader in aviation. Nor did you reply to my answer to your own loaded question.
The deaths in the Charge of the Light Brigade were due to lack of information due to a communication problem. Dick has closed so many information doors due to his actions that - quite simply - he does not have information - due to his communication problem.
That's not dickbashing, that's a statement of fact - he admits the doors are closed. They are not closed to everyone. The 'useful knowledge' you mention has been ignored by Dick on his publicity campaign.
Enjoy paying for your own ADS-B when the post-Dick 'stuff the subsidy action' mandate occurs, as the debate on here will not alter Dick's course with facts. I don't need to pay; no skin off my nose.
When Dick learns to treat fellow posters as he would be treated himself, and to get facts before making assumptions, he won't be 'dickbashed' as you claim.
His allegations about my motives were scurrilous and beneath contempt, certainly not appropriate from anyone seeking to be a leader in aviation. Nor did you reply to my answer to your own loaded question.
The deaths in the Charge of the Light Brigade were due to lack of information due to a communication problem. Dick has closed so many information doors due to his actions that - quite simply - he does not have information - due to his communication problem.
That's not dickbashing, that's a statement of fact - he admits the doors are closed. They are not closed to everyone. The 'useful knowledge' you mention has been ignored by Dick on his publicity campaign.
Enjoy paying for your own ADS-B when the post-Dick 'stuff the subsidy action' mandate occurs, as the debate on here will not alter Dick's course with facts. I don't need to pay; no skin off my nose.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And he's always got to have the last say.
If I am reading these last posts correctly, the anti Dick mob will blame him for any loss of subsidy because he made an educated guess. Seems factors of arse covering are on and about to "blame" somebody for having intuition.
I suppose I'll be blamed also.
"semi contractural "argument", WOT?
Twaddle and Twiddle.
Get ready for the instant response.
PS. The Light Brigade stuff up was made by Pommies who "purchased" a commission which made them instant experts.
If I am reading these last posts correctly, the anti Dick mob will blame him for any loss of subsidy because he made an educated guess. Seems factors of arse covering are on and about to "blame" somebody for having intuition.
I suppose I'll be blamed also.
"semi contractural "argument", WOT?
Twaddle and Twiddle.
Get ready for the instant response.
PS. The Light Brigade stuff up was made by Pommies who "purchased" a commission which made them instant experts.
Thread Starter
James Michael, this is not about me winning anything – it is about our country making the right decision in relation to future technology. There is no hurry to make the ADS-B decision at the present time because there is no immediate safety issue that needs to be addressed.
What you believe is that if we do not make the decision in the next two months regarding the subsidy, then
I don’t believe this is true. I believe that if we go to the standard system which will eventually be harmonised around the world, newly purchased aviation equipment will come fitted with the ADS-B ‘out’ (and possibly ‘in’) at no charge.
Look at the amazing sophistication of WAAS (Wide Area Augmentation System) where there is a geostationary satellite over the United States which corrects the GPS signals to make them so accurate a pilot can perform a precision approach. Even hand-held GPS units from Garmin come equipped with the US WAAS at no extra charge. The IFR units (which are fitted in many Australian aircraft) have WAAS to an IFR certification as standard at no extra cost.
Why won’t the same thing happen with ADS-B? To fit a Mode S transponder (which are now pretty standard everywhere in the world) with a GPS engine, and squit the required code, could have no more of a hardware cost than about $80. The huge cost is getting the unit to be reliable and having it certified. This can be tens of millions of dollars.
I’ll say it again. I support ADS-B, but I do not support Australia rushing in and making a decision in two months time so that Airservices can make higher profits.
I would like to do what Canada is doing, and roll out the multilateration system (which even works with existing Mode C transponders) before going totally to ADS-B. The multilateration system will be far less expensive to maintain compared to very expensive secondary surveillance radar (SSR) heads.
I have a very important question for Creampuff of the legal/constitutional nature. Will CASA be able to bring in a regulation which says that ASD-B is mandated, however the mandate only applies if the subsidy goes ahead? I would think not. I would say the mandate will be a CASA regulation, the subsidy will be quite separate, and if someone decides to remove the subsidy, the mandate will still remain. Could that be so Creampuff?
By the way, WAAS doesn’t work in Australia. Why? Because Airservices is planning a different system, on a different frequency, that they can sell all around the world to make profits from!
What you believe is that if we do not make the decision in the next two months regarding the subsidy, then
we are GUARANTEED to have to pay for it
Look at the amazing sophistication of WAAS (Wide Area Augmentation System) where there is a geostationary satellite over the United States which corrects the GPS signals to make them so accurate a pilot can perform a precision approach. Even hand-held GPS units from Garmin come equipped with the US WAAS at no extra charge. The IFR units (which are fitted in many Australian aircraft) have WAAS to an IFR certification as standard at no extra cost.
Why won’t the same thing happen with ADS-B? To fit a Mode S transponder (which are now pretty standard everywhere in the world) with a GPS engine, and squit the required code, could have no more of a hardware cost than about $80. The huge cost is getting the unit to be reliable and having it certified. This can be tens of millions of dollars.
I’ll say it again. I support ADS-B, but I do not support Australia rushing in and making a decision in two months time so that Airservices can make higher profits.
I would like to do what Canada is doing, and roll out the multilateration system (which even works with existing Mode C transponders) before going totally to ADS-B. The multilateration system will be far less expensive to maintain compared to very expensive secondary surveillance radar (SSR) heads.
I have a very important question for Creampuff of the legal/constitutional nature. Will CASA be able to bring in a regulation which says that ASD-B is mandated, however the mandate only applies if the subsidy goes ahead? I would think not. I would say the mandate will be a CASA regulation, the subsidy will be quite separate, and if someone decides to remove the subsidy, the mandate will still remain. Could that be so Creampuff?
By the way, WAAS doesn’t work in Australia. Why? Because Airservices is planning a different system, on a different frequency, that they can sell all around the world to make profits from!
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Oz
Age: 77
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bob Murphie
Ask and ye shall receive.
Dick will NOT be blamed
He will be judged in the light of history for how he manipulated that result.
No, YOU won't be blamed. Like your lack of a Senate submission re CASA, you are a follower in this not a leader. Rest easy.
Any chance of returning to the factual part of this ADS-B Debate seemingly so dear to the hearts of all posters until they get the chance to pull out their knife? I've just about given up providing factual information as it seems to fall on deaf ears and hidden agendas (just to add another slit to the death of a thousand cuts
)
Edited to add:
Perhaps because there is not a suitable Australian satellite available since the USA shut down their presence to move the footprint nearer them?
Let's not go down this track of misdirection and half-truth again, the WAAS isue has already been well debated.
Ask and ye shall receive.
Dick will NOT be blamed
because he made an educated guess
No, YOU won't be blamed. Like your lack of a Senate submission re CASA, you are a follower in this not a leader. Rest easy.
Any chance of returning to the factual part of this ADS-B Debate seemingly so dear to the hearts of all posters until they get the chance to pull out their knife? I've just about given up providing factual information as it seems to fall on deaf ears and hidden agendas (just to add another slit to the death of a thousand cuts
)Edited to add:
By the way, WAAS doesn’t work in Australia. Why?
Let's not go down this track of misdirection and half-truth again, the WAAS isue has already been well debated.
JM
You asked:
If the challenge to which your question refers is going to be on the basis of a claim that there is a:
which has been:
because of:
then, yes, I confirm that such a challenge would be treated as unadulterated twaddle.
I asked you:
Please provide the answer.
Dick asked:
Well, the short evasive answer is that CASA does not make regulations: the Governor General does, on recommendation from the Minister. However, to answer to the substance of the question, I promise to run nude through the Tabernacle if I see a regulation that mandates an item of equipment, on condition that a subsidy for fitment of the equipment is available/paid. I do not see any nexus between that condition and safety.
You asked:
Are you [Creampuff] suggesting that a legal challenge would be treated as 'unadulterated twaddle'?
semi-contractual arrangement
frustrated
an attempt to pull the subsidy
I asked you:
Which ADSB system is the VHS, and which is the Beta, and how do you know?
Dick asked:
Will CASA be able to bring in a regulation which says that ASD-B is mandated, however the mandate only applies if the subsidy goes ahead? I would think not. I would say the mandate will be a CASA regulation, the subsidy will be quite separate, and if someone decides to remove the subsidy, the mandate will still remain. Could that be so Creampuff?
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Oz
Age: 77
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bob Murphie
On a slight thread drift
The order was given by Lord Raglan, a career soldier who knew which front he meant for the advance but did not realise those below did not share his panoramic view of the three fronts.
Given he had lost one arm earlier, and had entered the Army in 1804, the charge of the LB being in 1854, one somewhat doubts your claim of purchased commission and instant experts.
Reduce you intake of Dickmite
or you might join Bushy's list of those 'losing credibility".
On a slight thread drift
PS. The Light Brigade stuff up was made by Pommies who "purchased" a commission which made them instant experts.
Given he had lost one arm earlier, and had entered the Army in 1804, the charge of the LB being in 1854, one somewhat doubts your claim of purchased commission and instant experts.
Reduce you intake of Dickmite
or you might join Bushy's list of those 'losing credibility".
Actually, this the fight between BlueRay and VHS. We are now in the digital age, Mr Puff. And, technologically speaking, that is about the comparison of the standards of the two systems. An analog return from SSR or the digital information stream from ADS-B.
What you must question is whether multi-lateration, which must interogate from the ground as per SSR or UAT, which must interact with the ground on a separate system to the airline 1090ES, is the real BLUERAY? I say neither!
1090ES is classified as the world standard for use from the flight levels, oceanic and domestic world wide. The US are intending on running a dual system 1090ES for upper airspace and IFR traffic and UAT for GA traffic. Neither is compatable with the other unless within range of a ground station. UAT cannot talk to 1090ES and vis a vis. The argument is based upon these facts on system availability. 1090ES is available right now here in Australia. just add an approved system and you're live with TAAATS. FACT!
The same receiver unit is to be used for all airspace in the GAFA. FACT! It is the cheapest option on the table. FACT! ADS-B returns accurate positional information regardless of distance from receiver station, unlike radar. FACT!
Either way, subsidy or not. This is the system that will be installed, 1090ES ADS-B. Regardless of any contrary arguments about keeping legacy equipment. I put it to you, Mr Puff. AirServices will be constrained by regulation on how the changeover occurs from en-route ssr surveillance to sole ADS-B surveillance. It will not be carried out in an unsafe manor.
Unlike what the industry had to endure with the roll-out of a poorly designed airspace system with little education and even less time from instigation to implimentation.
This is not a choice of "Your with us or your terrorists" Just study the facts and make an informed decision. The aim of this argument is to facilitate and ensure the subsidy. Otherwise, we will be forced to pay for it ourselves. Either through hip pocket or higher hire rates.
Ever since ADS-B was first mooted, there has been a contrary view that we should wait for the Americans to see what they install. UAT is not transferable to this country. Good idea, lots of options but just too damn expensive. In our regime of user pays, GA could not afford to pay for the system devoted solely for GA. (methinks the FAA will come to the same conclusion) VDL4 is a basic argument of what type of carrier to use (GSM or GPRS as compared to mobile phones) Multilateration good idea but requires heaps of stations to triangulate each transponder interogation to resolve a position, extensive rollout equals extensive cost to AirServices which may well bite GA with user charges in the airspace MLAT operates to recoup costs. Airlines do not need MLAT to access ADS-B so I am very sure will enjoy paying for "extras" NOT!
Every argument against ADS-B fails on cost alone. Delay rollout incurs cost for refurb of SSR that WILL be charged to airlines from the start. ADS-B fitment then must be payed for by all participants. MLAT after trial basis must incur a charge for every aircraft that flies within it's coverage. Airlines and GA. Nav Charges for VFR, that will go down well with the toweling hat brigade. On a cost basis alone, the only effective system that is scaleable AND economical in doing so, is ADS-B 1090ES.
The fear is and always has been the CASA mandate.
Governments pay a subsidy all the time. My business receives a return on diesel excise of some $0.19 per litre and has done so for the life of GST. LPG fitment is but another. How many examples are needed? Incentive is a better option than taxation.
Creampuff, study all the data and make your own mind up.
What you must question is whether multi-lateration, which must interogate from the ground as per SSR or UAT, which must interact with the ground on a separate system to the airline 1090ES, is the real BLUERAY? I say neither!
1090ES is classified as the world standard for use from the flight levels, oceanic and domestic world wide. The US are intending on running a dual system 1090ES for upper airspace and IFR traffic and UAT for GA traffic. Neither is compatable with the other unless within range of a ground station. UAT cannot talk to 1090ES and vis a vis. The argument is based upon these facts on system availability. 1090ES is available right now here in Australia. just add an approved system and you're live with TAAATS. FACT!
The same receiver unit is to be used for all airspace in the GAFA. FACT! It is the cheapest option on the table. FACT! ADS-B returns accurate positional information regardless of distance from receiver station, unlike radar. FACT!
Either way, subsidy or not. This is the system that will be installed, 1090ES ADS-B. Regardless of any contrary arguments about keeping legacy equipment. I put it to you, Mr Puff. AirServices will be constrained by regulation on how the changeover occurs from en-route ssr surveillance to sole ADS-B surveillance. It will not be carried out in an unsafe manor.
Unlike what the industry had to endure with the roll-out of a poorly designed airspace system with little education and even less time from instigation to implimentation.
This is not a choice of "Your with us or your terrorists" Just study the facts and make an informed decision. The aim of this argument is to facilitate and ensure the subsidy. Otherwise, we will be forced to pay for it ourselves. Either through hip pocket or higher hire rates.
Ever since ADS-B was first mooted, there has been a contrary view that we should wait for the Americans to see what they install. UAT is not transferable to this country. Good idea, lots of options but just too damn expensive. In our regime of user pays, GA could not afford to pay for the system devoted solely for GA. (methinks the FAA will come to the same conclusion) VDL4 is a basic argument of what type of carrier to use (GSM or GPRS as compared to mobile phones) Multilateration good idea but requires heaps of stations to triangulate each transponder interogation to resolve a position, extensive rollout equals extensive cost to AirServices which may well bite GA with user charges in the airspace MLAT operates to recoup costs. Airlines do not need MLAT to access ADS-B so I am very sure will enjoy paying for "extras" NOT!
Every argument against ADS-B fails on cost alone. Delay rollout incurs cost for refurb of SSR that WILL be charged to airlines from the start. ADS-B fitment then must be payed for by all participants. MLAT after trial basis must incur a charge for every aircraft that flies within it's coverage. Airlines and GA. Nav Charges for VFR, that will go down well with the toweling hat brigade. On a cost basis alone, the only effective system that is scaleable AND economical in doing so, is ADS-B 1090ES.
The fear is and always has been the CASA mandate.
Governments pay a subsidy all the time. My business receives a return on diesel excise of some $0.19 per litre and has done so for the life of GST. LPG fitment is but another. How many examples are needed? Incentive is a better option than taxation.
Creampuff, study all the data and make your own mind up.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Oz
Age: 77
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Creamie
I bow to your legal argument; nevertheless I disagree that a challenge would fail.
If you wish me to define which is the VHS and which the Beta you have already frustrated our contract because there are three ADS-B systems.
However, the simple answer again is that 1090ES is the international high level standard and is unlikely to yield to the lower level preferences of individual states.
To answer your other concern -
If you get a subsidy to so fit, what is your nett financial position if it turns out orphan?
I bow to your legal argument; nevertheless I disagree that a challenge would fail.
If you wish me to define which is the VHS and which the Beta you have already frustrated our contract because there are three ADS-B systems.
However, the simple answer again is that 1090ES is the international high level standard and is unlikely to yield to the lower level preferences of individual states.
To answer your other concern -
I don't want a subsidy to fit what may turn out to be an expensive orphan system
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
james michael;
Six minutes from my post to your response, good even by your standards.
My name has been in Hansard more times than yours mate, sometimes it doesn't serve any purpose to duplicate what others more qualified than I can offer.
And I am open to an education even from a braggard. First I ever heard of a Lord coming up through the Ranks. But you would know obviously.
Edited for a time check.
Six minutes from my post to your response, good even by your standards.
My name has been in Hansard more times than yours mate, sometimes it doesn't serve any purpose to duplicate what others more qualified than I can offer.
And I am open to an education even from a braggard. First I ever heard of a Lord coming up through the Ranks. But you would know obviously.
Edited for a time check.
[Thread drift/]
Mr Smith WAAS will work in Australia. The Japanese MTSAT WAAS signal footprint is squarely over the Aussie continent. What stops WAAS in AUS is the inability of the powers that be to charge users for something that becomes freely available. It will take an equal expenditure to set up reference stations and ground uplinks and transmitters for the propriatory GRAS system as it would to provide for an augmentation signal for WAAS.
The fear is "control" of the GNSS signal, the reality is the ability to charge EACH and EVERY user a fee.
All this is history repeating, did I hear someone say INTERSCAN was a dinosaur technology.
[Thread drift/off]
Mr Smith WAAS will work in Australia. The Japanese MTSAT WAAS signal footprint is squarely over the Aussie continent. What stops WAAS in AUS is the inability of the powers that be to charge users for something that becomes freely available. It will take an equal expenditure to set up reference stations and ground uplinks and transmitters for the propriatory GRAS system as it would to provide for an augmentation signal for WAAS.
The fear is "control" of the GNSS signal, the reality is the ability to charge EACH and EVERY user a fee.
All this is history repeating, did I hear someone say INTERSCAN was a dinosaur technology.
[Thread drift/off]
...Hmmm, apt that Light Brigade analogy 
Got me thinking of the US rescue mission to Iraaan a few years ago - all the high tech stuff imobilized by the simplist of things... sort of what could happen to ADS-B if some GPS Buzz Bombs turn up
... any-way, I'm back to reading A Line in the Sand, all about 40 Issrally tanks taking on 500 enemy tanks back in 73 - great stuff
Got me thinking of the US rescue mission to Iraaan a few years ago - all the high tech stuff imobilized by the simplist of things... sort of what could happen to ADS-B if some GPS Buzz Bombs turn up
... any-way, I'm back to reading A Line in the Sand, all about 40 Issrally tanks taking on 500 enemy tanks back in 73 - great stuff
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Oz
Age: 77
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bob Murphie
I do not jump to your beat or time clock.
Welcome to your first time - Raglan was commissioned as a Cornet in the 4th Light Dragoons on 9 June 1804.
Have you served, Bob Murphie? If so to what rank, and if to officer status did you BUY a commission or earn it, you that speaks with authority on Lord Raglan?
Reduce your Dickmite intake and it will reduce the thread drift. Oh, I forgot did I not, the idea is to mangle the thread for a strategic advance to the rear.
OZ
The other thing stopping MSAT is sovereignty - the Japanese I believe will not guarantee the signal. Creampuff could comment on what that means to Airservices.
I do not jump to your beat or time clock.
Welcome to your first time - Raglan was commissioned as a Cornet in the 4th Light Dragoons on 9 June 1804.
Have you served, Bob Murphie? If so to what rank, and if to officer status did you BUY a commission or earn it, you that speaks with authority on Lord Raglan?
Reduce your Dickmite intake and it will reduce the thread drift. Oh, I forgot did I not, the idea is to mangle the thread for a strategic advance to the rear.
OZ
The other thing stopping MSAT is sovereignty - the Japanese I believe will not guarantee the signal. Creampuff could comment on what that means to Airservices.
Without drifting too far, JM. The signal is available. However, Australia would still have to provide a network of ref staions and a couple of uplinks to the satellite to transmit an augmented signal as a WAAS. The satellite is already visible to GPS receivers. There is already a ref station transmitting from CB as well as one from Hawaii. Nothing to do with state to state guarantees just the stations to guarantee signal quality. Got a link here somewhere.
As you can guess, this argument was done to death a while back. WAAS would be the single biggest improvment in aviation safety for IFR ops all round Australia. Every single aerodrome could have access to a CATI "ILS like" approach with glideslope information. This is what would have saved the likes of YHOT YLHR and YBLA more than anything else. A GLIDESLOPE!
There are a lot of pilots who would wish for this more than ADS-B!
As you can guess, this argument was done to death a while back. WAAS would be the single biggest improvment in aviation safety for IFR ops all round Australia. Every single aerodrome could have access to a CATI "ILS like" approach with glideslope information. This is what would have saved the likes of YHOT YLHR and YBLA more than anything else. A GLIDESLOPE!
There are a lot of pilots who would wish for this more than ADS-B!
Thanks Oz and SDD: I will digest Oz's 0542 and respond when practicable. Please bear with me if I appear to be missing an obvious point.
JM: What about the costs of maintenance and upgrades?
Orphan systems become increasingly and, eventually, prohibitively expensive to maintain and upgrade, because the costs are spread across a relatively small and decreasing market.
If DME-A had become the world standard for DME, DME-A equipment would have become increasingly cheaper, smaller, more reliable and efficient. However, someone came up with different systems that performed the same function as DME-A at a cheaper price, because the costs of the design, manufacture, upgrade and support of those systems were spread over a market orders of magnitude greater than that for DME-A. DME-A was then doomed.
DME-A was a great system in its time, but so was Beta video.
I'd rather spend money on the box that's fitted to 100,000 GA aircraft than the one that's fitted to 10,000, because chances are that one's going to get better and cheaper as time goes by, and the other, not.
That's my concern.
JM: What about the costs of maintenance and upgrades?
Orphan systems become increasingly and, eventually, prohibitively expensive to maintain and upgrade, because the costs are spread across a relatively small and decreasing market.
If DME-A had become the world standard for DME, DME-A equipment would have become increasingly cheaper, smaller, more reliable and efficient. However, someone came up with different systems that performed the same function as DME-A at a cheaper price, because the costs of the design, manufacture, upgrade and support of those systems were spread over a market orders of magnitude greater than that for DME-A. DME-A was then doomed.
DME-A was a great system in its time, but so was Beta video.
I'd rather spend money on the box that's fitted to 100,000 GA aircraft than the one that's fitted to 10,000, because chances are that one's going to get better and cheaper as time goes by, and the other, not.
That's my concern.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Alice Springs
Posts: 1,744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Two things-and the future
1.Why is multilat being installed in Tassie? Will it be installed elsewhere?
2 James-No I do not get paid for posting here. I want to see all aviators get a fair deal. Not ADS(A)
I think the future will be ADS-B for all who wish to fly in any sort of controlled airspace, including CTAF(R). It will be mandated, whether there is a subsidy or not. Airservices will be providing a separation service in CTAF(R), and of course they will charge for it.
There will be less air traffic controllers not more, because the en-route section will be automated, and crews will have to lookout for traffic themselves using ADS-B in.
GA aircraft will get realtime weather, navigation and traffic from ad ons to the ADS-B in or by mobile phone or similar device.
At the present time the display of realtime weather in the cockpit is more useful for GA pilots than ADS-B The proposed system does not provide it.
2 James-No I do not get paid for posting here. I want to see all aviators get a fair deal. Not ADS(A)
I think the future will be ADS-B for all who wish to fly in any sort of controlled airspace, including CTAF(R). It will be mandated, whether there is a subsidy or not. Airservices will be providing a separation service in CTAF(R), and of course they will charge for it.
There will be less air traffic controllers not more, because the en-route section will be automated, and crews will have to lookout for traffic themselves using ADS-B in.
GA aircraft will get realtime weather, navigation and traffic from ad ons to the ADS-B in or by mobile phone or similar device.
At the present time the display of realtime weather in the cockpit is more useful for GA pilots than ADS-B The proposed system does not provide it.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Oz
Age: 77
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Creampuff
Let me give you an answer that is fact as I understand it.
Question me on the logic if you will.
DME A was exactly that. Unique Australian. The possible next candidate is GBAS / GRAS, although that depends on Keith's work with the USA on the working party into WAAS/GBAS/GRAS.
1090ES is NOT uniquely Australian. It is the ICAO flight level standard for airlines. But, we are talking expensive boxes for airliners.
Nonetheless, IT IS THE SAME GROUND STATIONS FOR 1090ES NO MATTER WHAT LEVELS AIRCRAFT OCCUPY - FROM ON THE AIRFIELD TO FL410 AND BEYOND.
Therefore, 1090ES is going to occur and remain in Australia.
In Europe there will be a mix of 1090ES and I believe VDL4 at lower levels depending on individual state decisions - BUT, they still MUST provide 1090ES stations for ICAO aircraft in the ultimate. So they are entering a duality of systems.
Ditto USA. UAT offers information provision that 1090ES does not. But, it requires translators between 1090ES aircraft and UAT equipped aircraft for the trade-off. Let us not argue the information which is in a state of flux anyway as satellite providers fight back, and Australia does NOT have the economies of scale to attract paid service providers.
So USA will have two systems - but again must have 1090ES for ICAO aircraft.
Let us examine the UK. You have until March 2012 to change your mode approach control (Mode A/C) transponder TO A MODE S UNIT.
BUT, you have to register for a CAA exemption to allow continued use of your Mode A/C FROM 31 March 2008.
The theme throughout all the above is that Mode S and its partner ADS-B are achieving ICAO and international recognition, whereas VDL4 and UAT have more chance of being orphans.
If you are Dick Smith and flying to flight levels in the USA what is your decision:
Fit one only 1090ES unit that covers all your flight, or fit BOTH as you MUST have the 1090ES at flight levels. Not to contemplate interworking two ADS-B systems with the remainder of your avionics, and,
Fit TCAS that will obviously be developed for ADS-B to match your system. And, 1090ES ADS-B IN is available aircraft to aircraft whereas if you are in a UAT equipped aircraft you are dependent on being in translator ground station range.
There may be considerable UAT equipment designed for the USA but it is interesting that the Garmin 1090ES unit we discussed earlier is due this quarter while we await a sniff of UAT equipment.
The other argument - becomes emotive with assumptions made about costs - is whether Australia can afford the complex UAT/1090ES translator stations as that is another cost that would be passed on to users.
At around (I believe) $130,000 to roll in an ADS-B ground station, if you look to the stars you might even contemplate mining companies to which that is pocket money being offered the option to drop in an ADS-B ground station if their airport decides to fly in international workers in Jet PTO.
OK, a bit long winded but I can see yours is a fair dinkum question. Have I made sense?
Edited to add
Bushy
Yours came while I was typing. Thank you.
I think the above covers much of your concern also.
Best hope for XM satellite wx, nothing I have seen or researched to date indicates Australia will get what the USA can by its size - third party wx etc.
Fair to argue that we (Tas and monsoon excepted) also make use of AWIS, AERIS, etc enroute, plus wx from ATC in any case.
Let me give you an answer that is fact as I understand it.
Question me on the logic if you will.
DME A was exactly that. Unique Australian. The possible next candidate is GBAS / GRAS, although that depends on Keith's work with the USA on the working party into WAAS/GBAS/GRAS.
1090ES is NOT uniquely Australian. It is the ICAO flight level standard for airlines. But, we are talking expensive boxes for airliners.
Nonetheless, IT IS THE SAME GROUND STATIONS FOR 1090ES NO MATTER WHAT LEVELS AIRCRAFT OCCUPY - FROM ON THE AIRFIELD TO FL410 AND BEYOND.
Therefore, 1090ES is going to occur and remain in Australia.
In Europe there will be a mix of 1090ES and I believe VDL4 at lower levels depending on individual state decisions - BUT, they still MUST provide 1090ES stations for ICAO aircraft in the ultimate. So they are entering a duality of systems.
Ditto USA. UAT offers information provision that 1090ES does not. But, it requires translators between 1090ES aircraft and UAT equipped aircraft for the trade-off. Let us not argue the information which is in a state of flux anyway as satellite providers fight back, and Australia does NOT have the economies of scale to attract paid service providers.
So USA will have two systems - but again must have 1090ES for ICAO aircraft.
Let us examine the UK. You have until March 2012 to change your mode approach control (Mode A/C) transponder TO A MODE S UNIT.
BUT, you have to register for a CAA exemption to allow continued use of your Mode A/C FROM 31 March 2008.
The theme throughout all the above is that Mode S and its partner ADS-B are achieving ICAO and international recognition, whereas VDL4 and UAT have more chance of being orphans.
If you are Dick Smith and flying to flight levels in the USA what is your decision:
Fit one only 1090ES unit that covers all your flight, or fit BOTH as you MUST have the 1090ES at flight levels. Not to contemplate interworking two ADS-B systems with the remainder of your avionics, and,
Fit TCAS that will obviously be developed for ADS-B to match your system. And, 1090ES ADS-B IN is available aircraft to aircraft whereas if you are in a UAT equipped aircraft you are dependent on being in translator ground station range.
There may be considerable UAT equipment designed for the USA but it is interesting that the Garmin 1090ES unit we discussed earlier is due this quarter while we await a sniff of UAT equipment.
The other argument - becomes emotive with assumptions made about costs - is whether Australia can afford the complex UAT/1090ES translator stations as that is another cost that would be passed on to users.
At around (I believe) $130,000 to roll in an ADS-B ground station, if you look to the stars you might even contemplate mining companies to which that is pocket money being offered the option to drop in an ADS-B ground station if their airport decides to fly in international workers in Jet PTO.
OK, a bit long winded but I can see yours is a fair dinkum question. Have I made sense?
Edited to add
Bushy
Yours came while I was typing. Thank you.
I think the above covers much of your concern also.
Best hope for XM satellite wx, nothing I have seen or researched to date indicates Australia will get what the USA can by its size - third party wx etc.
Fair to argue that we (Tas and monsoon excepted) also make use of AWIS, AERIS, etc enroute, plus wx from ATC in any case.