Airservices Australia ADS-B program - another Seasprite Fiasco?
you haven't made an a clear case for your point of view. You are raising an extreme possibility but you are not applying risk assessment to your point of view.
If, before 9II, you were thinking about what had the highest probability of occuring - what would be your answer ?
So Flying Binghi, in that case, is having the unit so you can speak with some personal experience of TAS units changing your perceptions at all.
Did it really cost $10K?
Did it really cost $10K?
I was being a little flipant with my replys last night - playing along with james michael. I got the unit for IFR and NGT flight.
VFR in a high traffic area with randomly tracking flights I think it is more dangerous to focus on the TAS then look out side (sole pilot ops)
If I only flew VFR, I wouldnt buy it.
Close calls? About 1 air-prox outside of controlled airspace every 6 months, that we know of.
These aircraft involved in the claimed air-prox. Do they have any form of TAS installed ??
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not sure what you mean by "claimed" there. The incidents were all reported and therefore (i assume) can be looked up.
To answer your question, I don't know off the top of my head
AFAIK the aircraft involved were all turbo-props doing FIFO from PH, so the usual types would be Metro, Bras, Conquest etc etc
To answer your question, I don't know off the top of my head
AFAIK the aircraft involved were all turbo-props doing FIFO from PH, so the usual types would be Metro, Bras, Conquest etc etc
Not sure what you mean by "claimed" there. The incidents were all reported and therefore (i assume) can be looked up.
... still be interested to know if these aircraft you say were involved in airprox incidents had a TAS fitted or not ? If as you say there is an issue there, I would asume they have, and if not, Why-not.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not sure where to find the data i'm afraid. I can look it up at work through the ESIR database, but that's the only way i'm aware of.
I was shown the data only as a summary of incidents for a given segment of airspace, although i do have some personal recollection of at least one event. It may be selfish...but i prefer not to be the one plugged in when the **** hits the fan
I was shown the data only as a summary of incidents for a given segment of airspace, although i do have some personal recollection of at least one event. It may be selfish...but i prefer not to be the one plugged in when the **** hits the fan
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are raising an extreme possibility but you are not applying risk assessment to your point of view
You haven't made a clear case for this happenning
Flying Binghi cheers for the answer
PTM, glad to hear you guys aren't too worried about self separation. I always looked at it as pilots trying to second guess ATC in controlled airspace and causing all sorts of bother.
Gaunty et al put up a good argument for accelerating ADS-B rollout up in the WA mineral provinces in Scurvy's thread from a couple of months ago.
Hoping to hear a fresh argument some time soon.
Gaunty et al put up a good argument for accelerating ADS-B rollout up in the WA mineral provinces in Scurvy's thread from a couple of months ago.
Hoping to hear a fresh argument some time soon.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PTM, glad to hear you guys aren't too worried about self separation. I always looked at it as pilots trying to second guess ATC in controlled airspace and causing all sorts of bother.
Soooo.... I get the impression that some of the West Oz carriers dont have an in-aircraft TAS, and we have posters on pprune saying a TAS (either via radar or ADS-B) is an urgent requirement What I see here is a suggestion that every aircraft owner in Oz is expected to subsidise a TAS system (ADS-B) for a handfull of WA operators.
Doing a "Reductio ad adsurdum" would suggest these carriers ground themselves immediately until they have an in-aircraft TAS - the sort of system that has been around for many years.
I seem to recall Dick Smith had some comments re some pax carriers not having any in-aircraft TAS.
What I see here is a suggestion that every aircraft owner in Oz is expected to subsidise a TAS system (ADS-B) for a handfull of WA operators.Doing a "Reductio ad adsurdum" would suggest these carriers ground themselves immediately until they have an in-aircraft TAS - the sort of system that has been around for many years.
I seem to recall Dick Smith had some comments re some pax carriers not having any in-aircraft TAS.
...and taking a slightly different approch -
phew_they_missed!, if its such a major requirement, why dont the WA operators pay for a radar themselves ???
Well, i guess it's it situational. There are times when self-sep works, times where it doesn't. The problem is that a pilot response to one separation issue could just create other issues down the track. They don't/can't have the same overall picture as the controller.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Oz
Age: 77
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Phew, Flying Binghi, and Peuce
One must question about this risk and how genuine is the concern.
In case of genuine concern aircraft should have fitted TCAS, as has Mr Binghi, if traffic in West Australia is of risk. In my read of Avalon Study I find Sharp do not use TCAS - is this common for small operators?
By reading past and present Airservices study of Unicom and NAS I find noone wants to pay for Unicom as mitigation. And, facts of analysis also from NAS PIR and Airservices studies read that problems are shared in cause by all users and particularly poor procedure on radio and in circuit.
Much talk until money required.
This leads to Peuce point. Services where warranted. In ICAO Aisrapce G class what services warranted? Is it not to the users to supplement system in Class G?
To my reading, ADS-B may be good mitigator in West Australia.
One must question about this risk and how genuine is the concern.
In case of genuine concern aircraft should have fitted TCAS, as has Mr Binghi, if traffic in West Australia is of risk. In my read of Avalon Study I find Sharp do not use TCAS - is this common for small operators?
By reading past and present Airservices study of Unicom and NAS I find noone wants to pay for Unicom as mitigation. And, facts of analysis also from NAS PIR and Airservices studies read that problems are shared in cause by all users and particularly poor procedure on radio and in circuit.
Much talk until money required.
This leads to Peuce point. Services where warranted. In ICAO Aisrapce G class what services warranted? Is it not to the users to supplement system in Class G?
To my reading, ADS-B may be good mitigator in West Australia.
Thread Starter
James Michael, just because Garmin has a remote squawk entry via the G1000 and GNS480, it doesn’t mean that the unit transmits certified ADS-B data. In fact it doesn’t.
My suggestion is that you place a phone call to Garmin (or their representative in Australia) and ask if they have a certified ADS-B unit that can be installed in your aircraft. Get the price of the unit and the price of the installation, then post the result here.
Capn Bloggs, the ADS-B flight testing which is being undertaken in Florida is a completely different system to the one Airservices is planning here. This is my very point. Wouldn’t it be better to be a little conservative, wait a little while, and install the system which the majority of the world goes to? Then the prices will be substantially lower and the support for the system will be substantially higher.
Phew they missed!, if there is a measurable safety problem – or an efficiency problem where aircraft are delayed in the WA mining area – surely that will be substantially solved by the high level ADS-B project. These high level transceivers are already being installed and will give coverage in the higher level controlled airspace in WA. If this is so there will be a substantial reduction in cost compared with spending over $100 million in subsidising aircraft in the east – where there is no measurable safety problem.
More importantly, why not use the multilateration transceivers – similar to those being installed in Tasmania – in the west? Then the whole system will work with standard transponders with incredible accuracy, without reliance on GPS, and at far lower cost.
My suggestion is that you place a phone call to Garmin (or their representative in Australia) and ask if they have a certified ADS-B unit that can be installed in your aircraft. Get the price of the unit and the price of the installation, then post the result here.
Capn Bloggs, the ADS-B flight testing which is being undertaken in Florida is a completely different system to the one Airservices is planning here. This is my very point. Wouldn’t it be better to be a little conservative, wait a little while, and install the system which the majority of the world goes to? Then the prices will be substantially lower and the support for the system will be substantially higher.
Phew they missed!, if there is a measurable safety problem – or an efficiency problem where aircraft are delayed in the WA mining area – surely that will be substantially solved by the high level ADS-B project. These high level transceivers are already being installed and will give coverage in the higher level controlled airspace in WA. If this is so there will be a substantial reduction in cost compared with spending over $100 million in subsidising aircraft in the east – where there is no measurable safety problem.
More importantly, why not use the multilateration transceivers – similar to those being installed in Tasmania – in the west? Then the whole system will work with standard transponders with incredible accuracy, without reliance on GPS, and at far lower cost.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: australia
Posts: 606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dick,
'Phew they missed!, if there is a measurable safety problem – or an efficiency problem where aircraft are delayed in the WA mining area – surely that will be substantially solved by the high level ADS-B project. These high level transceivers are already being installed and will give coverage in the higher level controlled airspace in WA. If this is so there will be a substantial reduction in cost compared with spending over $100 million in subsidising aircraft in the east – where there is no measurable safety problem.'
I think you'll find the problem is actually getting them up high in the first place.
'Phew they missed!, if there is a measurable safety problem – or an efficiency problem where aircraft are delayed in the WA mining area – surely that will be substantially solved by the high level ADS-B project. These high level transceivers are already being installed and will give coverage in the higher level controlled airspace in WA. If this is so there will be a substantial reduction in cost compared with spending over $100 million in subsidising aircraft in the east – where there is no measurable safety problem.'
I think you'll find the problem is actually getting them up high in the first place.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you'll find the problem is actually getting them up high in the first place.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Oz
Age: 77
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Dick Smith
This from Garmin
GTX 330 ES Mode S Panel Mount – Available Q3 2008
Because my iphone is not yet in shop does nopt stop my believing in same.
Why would Garmin make such unit unless they have belief in 1090ES technology? Are you saying this unit will not send out ADS-B signal?
This from Garmin
GTX 330 ES Mode S Panel Mount – Available Q3 2008
Because my iphone is not yet in shop does nopt stop my believing in same.
Why would Garmin make such unit unless they have belief in 1090ES technology? Are you saying this unit will not send out ADS-B signal?
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Alice Springs
Posts: 1,744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Go ahead
Then go ahead and put it in. But do not make it compulsory for people who do not wish to go there. Don't try to con GA people by giving false information about proposed subsidies, and the benefits thereof, and what the equipment will do. Do not legislate to give a monopoly to any particular company.
Most GA aircraft have been fitted with transponders, and many have never been anywhere near controlled airspace. These and other owners/operators are wary about further mandatory expense that is only there to benefit ATC and the airlines. Who will service ADSB out in the bush.? The transponders we fitted were a maintenance problem, and hardly ever were of any benefit to us in Alice Springs. Mostly we could not even tell if they were working properly.
I think ADSB is the way of the future but unfortunately it is necessary to make lots of noise to get some reasonable behaviour from our aviation authorities. GA aircraft (below 5700 kg) outnumber airliners by about ten to one, and must be given proper consideration.
Most GA aircraft have been fitted with transponders, and many have never been anywhere near controlled airspace. These and other owners/operators are wary about further mandatory expense that is only there to benefit ATC and the airlines. Who will service ADSB out in the bush.? The transponders we fitted were a maintenance problem, and hardly ever were of any benefit to us in Alice Springs. Mostly we could not even tell if they were working properly.
I think ADSB is the way of the future but unfortunately it is necessary to make lots of noise to get some reasonable behaviour from our aviation authorities. GA aircraft (below 5700 kg) outnumber airliners by about ten to one, and must be given proper consideration.