Airservices Australia ADS-B program - another Seasprite Fiasco?
Sooo... looks like some posters here urgently want the $15,000 'Beta' system, Jaba wants the $7,000 'VHS' system, and Dick Smith would prefere to wait 5 odd years and get the $300 'DVD' system 
GaryGnu, to relate it to Oz, what was the original Oz government policy re airport sales - Did it help Oz aviation and has the policy changed at all ?
GaryGnu, Is that suggesting we will need to retain all our current nav aids and radars when we have GPS failure and/or permanent loss ?
Will the U.S. keep LORAN as a back-up ? thats the 'other' ADS-B system.
james michael, sounds like you have no way of challenging the couple of scenarios I offered
...and you've spoken to Microair and its all doozie eh 
If you choose not to believe stated US Government policy there is not much I can do to change your mind.
there will be a back up network of radio navaids by which to navigate...
Will the U.S. keep LORAN as a back-up ? thats the 'other' ADS-B system.
I have spoken at length to Microair Avionics...
...and you've spoken to Microair and its all doozie eh
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Oz
Age: 77
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FB
I comprehend the scenarios you offer but I restate what I believe.
GPS is here except in the event of major war. Turning it off is improbable otherwise, too much dependency. Although, to be fair, in the WAAS/GBAS debate I understand some sovereignty issues with MSAT. Different argument.
GPS already has failures, thus the removal of TSO129a from the ADS-B platform. I was uncertain re this, the data are persuasive.
Yes, GPS can be used by terrorists. I use a knife with my steak, the same knife can be used to terminate me. Tools have various uses, do we allow the 1% factor to overcome the good.
ADS-B is a surveillance mode resulting from technological advance that allows ATC efficiencies and aircraft-aircraft efficiencies. I don't believe the arguments against overrule those for.
What is needed is rational debate on the inevitable and how to best manage it.
I comprehend the scenarios you offer but I restate what I believe.
GPS is here except in the event of major war. Turning it off is improbable otherwise, too much dependency. Although, to be fair, in the WAAS/GBAS debate I understand some sovereignty issues with MSAT. Different argument.
GPS already has failures, thus the removal of TSO129a from the ADS-B platform. I was uncertain re this, the data are persuasive.
Yes, GPS can be used by terrorists. I use a knife with my steak, the same knife can be used to terminate me. Tools have various uses, do we allow the 1% factor to overcome the good.
ADS-B is a surveillance mode resulting from technological advance that allows ATC efficiencies and aircraft-aircraft efficiencies. I don't believe the arguments against overrule those for.
What is needed is rational debate on the inevitable and how to best manage it.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I trust you. I have long suspected that the sweetener Airservices intended to trot out was to throw in ADS-B IN in the Microair package at the subsidy value. (I doubt several local frumious bandersnatches will believe you though.)
Maybe its useful to IFR GA but that is the limit IMHO. And that should not be subsidised.
Subsidy is for OUT only, thats to have the targets in the ATC system and to ensure RPT get TCAS from the combined ADSB/Mode C fitted lighties.
J
Subsidy is for OUT only, thats to have the targets in the ATC system and to ensure RPT get TCAS from the combined ADSB/Mode C fitted lighties.
Creampuff, the gear IS available, it just doesn't come from the US. Check out SELEX and Funkwerk for TSO gear for GA aircraft.
1090ES is the world-wide standard! Not UAT or WAMLAT or VDL4 or....
Guest
Posts: n/a
Why would you guys say that having traffic on your moving map is only "eyecandy" and "not needed for GA"?
Surely anything that improves situational awareness and traffic separation would be welcomed? In Alaska there has been a 40% reduction in aviation accidents since ADS-B was introduced. Certainly no coincidence!
I will definitely get myself an ADS-B IN box once the system is up and running. Any mid-air collision is one too many, especially when my own a** is on the line..
Surely anything that improves situational awareness and traffic separation would be welcomed? In Alaska there has been a 40% reduction in aviation accidents since ADS-B was introduced. Certainly no coincidence!
I will definitely get myself an ADS-B IN box once the system is up and running. Any mid-air collision is one too many, especially when my own a** is on the line..
Grandpa Aerotart
there has been a 40% reduction in aviation accidents since ADS-B was introduced. Certainly no coincidence!
No coincidence...none...no possible unrelated contributors?
Rubbish!
Justify that statement.
the gear IS available, it just doesn't come from the US. Check out SELEX and Funkwerk for TSO gear for GA aircraft.
Serious questions: How much would that gear cost to buy and fit to an average VH-registered bugsmasha? Does that gear satisfy current Australian regulatory requirements for ASDB-out?
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Oz
Age: 77
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jabby and Oz
You are being altruistic. Why should the normal VFR owner want his aircraft downtimed and stuffed around with to provide a surveillance system that offers him no benefits beyond the present? Answer, Airservices needs to provide some BENEFIT.
The benefit is NOT that of being able to operate in airspace as usual. If Airservices want to shift goal posts then forget the deal and let them keep the radar going. GA and particularly VFR stand to be more airspace restricted by ADS-B. Read the Airservices written NAS DP V1.4 about the Class E veils, and note the ADS-B Phase 2 mandatory ADS-B at CTAF R.
Therefore, Airservices needs to offer a sweetener. If Microair can include IN in the package, and that's a possibility, what a sweetener that would be. For VFR, if there can be a dashboard display display of the GPS data (admittedly the 145 display would not be to 146 standard) then that's a sweetener even if VFR pays for the display.
Creampuff
Ah so, that was a bit of fun, back to business. I doubt anyone in GA would accept the proposals without Airservices taking exactly the step you suggest and trotting out a list of TSO approved units and their cost. This is real caveat emptor stuff.
But it's also a circular argument until agreement in principle is reached as no manufacturer is going to gear up for an Australian mandate until there is some substance. We have seen the Airservices RFP withdrawn, Defence is perhaps an unwilling bride, and now Dick Smith is going to stop the deal - would you be investing money on that basis?
But, if we were to approach this as an unemotive business deal with Airservices the seller and everyone below FL180 a buyer, what would be the buyers specification and purchase motivation, that's the question.
You are being altruistic. Why should the normal VFR owner want his aircraft downtimed and stuffed around with to provide a surveillance system that offers him no benefits beyond the present? Answer, Airservices needs to provide some BENEFIT.
The benefit is NOT that of being able to operate in airspace as usual. If Airservices want to shift goal posts then forget the deal and let them keep the radar going. GA and particularly VFR stand to be more airspace restricted by ADS-B. Read the Airservices written NAS DP V1.4 about the Class E veils, and note the ADS-B Phase 2 mandatory ADS-B at CTAF R.
Therefore, Airservices needs to offer a sweetener. If Microair can include IN in the package, and that's a possibility, what a sweetener that would be. For VFR, if there can be a dashboard display display of the GPS data (admittedly the 145 display would not be to 146 standard) then that's a sweetener even if VFR pays for the display.
Creampuff
Ah so, that was a bit of fun, back to business. I doubt anyone in GA would accept the proposals without Airservices taking exactly the step you suggest and trotting out a list of TSO approved units and their cost. This is real caveat emptor stuff.
But it's also a circular argument until agreement in principle is reached as no manufacturer is going to gear up for an Australian mandate until there is some substance. We have seen the Airservices RFP withdrawn, Defence is perhaps an unwilling bride, and now Dick Smith is going to stop the deal - would you be investing money on that basis?
But, if we were to approach this as an unemotive business deal with Airservices the seller and everyone below FL180 a buyer, what would be the buyers specification and purchase motivation, that's the question.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Alaska
Chimbu, here's the justification:
From here: Avionics Magazine :: ADS-B’s Global Advance
There are plenty of other references to that and other trials out there.
It's a no brainer as far as I'm concerned. See and avoid. We know how bad humans are at looking out the window and spotting other aircraft in the big blue yonder, especially when we add student pilots and super busy GAAP airspaces into the mix. See on the display to improve situational awareness, of course not to replace looking out, I don't know how we can't be for it!
Let's be constructive and help each other in the aviation industry to move from WWI technology to 21st century, there's no way we won't benefit from it!!!
The Anchorage conference marked the commencement of Capstone II in the Juneau/Ketchikan region in southeast Alaska. It will involve a further 200 aircraft. Capstone I already has been hailed a success. Once the part of Alaska with the highest aircraft accident rate -- in a state that already had a much higher accident rate than any of the other 49 states -- the Bethel region has seen a 40 percent reduction in accidents. It now is the Alaska region with the lowest accident rate.
There are plenty of other references to that and other trials out there.
It's a no brainer as far as I'm concerned. See and avoid. We know how bad humans are at looking out the window and spotting other aircraft in the big blue yonder, especially when we add student pilots and super busy GAAP airspaces into the mix. See on the display to improve situational awareness, of course not to replace looking out, I don't know how we can't be for it!
Let's be constructive and help each other in the aviation industry to move from WWI technology to 21st century, there's no way we won't benefit from it!!!
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Gents / Ladies too,
The issue in Aalaska is not about a massive reduction in midair collissions, it was accidents all round. The reason for this as I understand it is with the ADSB they now have the surveillence of RADAR.....without the expense and infrastructure of RADAR.
I may be wrong, I just do not have the time to spend rereading it all again.
As for a sweetener JM, you do not need one. Better ATC coverage and some safety improvements for you and RPT and if YOU want ADSB IN, you can have it for a small extra fee. What more can you expect. Thats enough as it is.
J
The issue in Aalaska is not about a massive reduction in midair collissions, it was accidents all round. The reason for this as I understand it is with the ADSB they now have the surveillence of RADAR.....without the expense and infrastructure of RADAR.
I may be wrong, I just do not have the time to spend rereading it all again.
As for a sweetener JM, you do not need one. Better ATC coverage and some safety improvements for you and RPT and if YOU want ADSB IN, you can have it for a small extra fee. What more can you expect. Thats enough as it is.
J
It all comes flooding back to me now. I've been so busy I'd forgotten that this was all debated to death a while ago.
It was about Australia 'going it alone' rather than waiting to see what the rest of the world, or at least a substantial part of it, is going to do.
I see no point in Australia spearheading a technology that may turn out to be a unique and therefore unnecessarily expensive orphan. The imperatives that resulted in an Australia-unique DME system do not exist in respect of the functionality that ADSB is intended to deliver.
I remain with Dick on this one.
It was about Australia 'going it alone' rather than waiting to see what the rest of the world, or at least a substantial part of it, is going to do.
I see no point in Australia spearheading a technology that may turn out to be a unique and therefore unnecessarily expensive orphan. The imperatives that resulted in an Australia-unique DME system do not exist in respect of the functionality that ADSB is intended to deliver.
I remain with Dick on this one.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Oz
Age: 77
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jabba and Creampuff
It's not about Australia going alone. 1090ES is already there for RPT. A visit to a TAAATS centre demonstrates the marriage of ADS-B and MSSR information.
Safety improvements and for RPT? Jabba, if you closely read the relevant studies the issues are behavioural (and include RPT, increasingly so with fuel prices) and are not fixed by ADS-B IN. Although, it is of interest that the airlines always call for safety - as long as they are not paying. Have a read of the Avalon Study - what TCAS on one local short haul carrier?
Jabba, don't confuse surveillance with safety - first you need 'active' surveillance. What ATC surveillance of code 1200 in Class G? And what at CTAF where is the highest risk? Lots of paints on the screen - forget it - if you look at the Armidale study you will find the paints were masked to ATC because of the clutter.
I'm partly with Dick - on facts, not emotion - and Creampuff re this. If you study the purported benefits of the JCP, smoke and mirrors emerge. Take SAR as one example. Track the last ADS-B data to save us. Perhaps handy where ADS-B exists but whether or not it does one would far better initiate their 406 PLB for an instant SAR alert with one's details updated 3 times per hour and accurate to about 40 metres.
Having said that, if Airservices want to save $100M on radar etc - what's really in it for GA?
It's not about Australia going alone. 1090ES is already there for RPT. A visit to a TAAATS centre demonstrates the marriage of ADS-B and MSSR information.
Safety improvements and for RPT? Jabba, if you closely read the relevant studies the issues are behavioural (and include RPT, increasingly so with fuel prices) and are not fixed by ADS-B IN. Although, it is of interest that the airlines always call for safety - as long as they are not paying. Have a read of the Avalon Study - what TCAS on one local short haul carrier?
Jabba, don't confuse surveillance with safety - first you need 'active' surveillance. What ATC surveillance of code 1200 in Class G? And what at CTAF where is the highest risk? Lots of paints on the screen - forget it - if you look at the Armidale study you will find the paints were masked to ATC because of the clutter.
I'm partly with Dick - on facts, not emotion - and Creampuff re this. If you study the purported benefits of the JCP, smoke and mirrors emerge. Take SAR as one example. Track the last ADS-B data to save us. Perhaps handy where ADS-B exists but whether or not it does one would far better initiate their 406 PLB for an instant SAR alert with one's details updated 3 times per hour and accurate to about 40 metres.
Having said that, if Airservices want to save $100M on radar etc - what's really in it for GA?
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: 24 27 45.66N 54 22 42.28E
Posts: 987
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is not a case of Australia going it alone with ADSB. Europe is roaring ahead with its implementation because it is a nobrainer to install a widespread ADSB network to in the long term replace an expensive radar network. We in the Middle East have just started using a new system that has a seamless ADSB display so that when we switch off our radar inputs (which we have done in the test environment) all ADSB equipped aircraft continue to blip along as usual updating every 3.2 seconds. Currently we have between 20 and 30 % of all aircraft equipped but that will quickly increase considering the rate of new aircraft deliveries here in the UAE.
I have spent a lot of time at one of the main manufacturers in Europe of the ADSB ground units and it is amazing to see the little 20 cm long fibreglass stick with the mobile phone size battery running it, and when they explain that a small solar panel could run the unit in a remote location with little maintenance you realise the potential for full radar like coverage not only across all of Australia but also across much of the world oceans and remote areas.
This technology is the future and Australia is highly respected internationally for being one of the countries leading the way. Every day in the majority of Australia, aircraft are subject to procedural separation, and people are worried about what happens if GPS is lost????
Embrace the technology, realise what it will do for pilots, controllers and the travelling public alike, and stop a bunch of panic merchants who are resistant to change when we finally get a change that deserves to be supported (unlike the debacle called NAS, hmmm 500 mile an hour jets in the same bit of non-radar airspace with non-communicating lighties, yeh that sounds like a great idea, and who cares what the USA does, if an idea is stupid it is stupid regardless of who else is stupid enough to do it).
I have spent a lot of time at one of the main manufacturers in Europe of the ADSB ground units and it is amazing to see the little 20 cm long fibreglass stick with the mobile phone size battery running it, and when they explain that a small solar panel could run the unit in a remote location with little maintenance you realise the potential for full radar like coverage not only across all of Australia but also across much of the world oceans and remote areas.
This technology is the future and Australia is highly respected internationally for being one of the countries leading the way. Every day in the majority of Australia, aircraft are subject to procedural separation, and people are worried about what happens if GPS is lost????
Embrace the technology, realise what it will do for pilots, controllers and the travelling public alike, and stop a bunch of panic merchants who are resistant to change when we finally get a change that deserves to be supported (unlike the debacle called NAS, hmmm 500 mile an hour jets in the same bit of non-radar airspace with non-communicating lighties, yeh that sounds like a great idea, and who cares what the USA does, if an idea is stupid it is stupid regardless of who else is stupid enough to do it).
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Adrift upon the tides of fate
Posts: 1,840
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Creampuff, I don't have time to write a proper response (especially to Dick) now, however,
Given that the money for this technology is going to be pissed away anyway (maintaining/replacing old radars), why not accept the 'experiment'? If the world goes another way (ala DME) then change in the future- but the world will be learning from us and the benfits flow immediately to oz aviation in having ADS-B NOW. If the problem is that; if, in future, a system change is required, owners fear that AsA wont pay for it, then just have that rider put in now. With the pace of technological change, trying to go with "what's best" appears to be a futile exercise in naval gazing and procrastination.
I see no point in Australia spearheading a technology that may turn out to be a unique and therefore unnecessarily expensive orphan
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
appears to be a futile exercise in naval gazing and procrastination
procrastination = mastubation, in the end you are only screwing yourself!
Teenagers............what next!
J
Courtesy of a friends daughter who included this in a school project
procrastination = mastubation, in the end you are only screwing yourself!
Teenagers............what next!
procrastination = mastubation, in the end you are only screwing yourself!
Teenagers............what next!
Jaba, thats a well thought out contribution
...perhaps an appropriate analogy though - Dont protect your self and go with the wrong 'system' and we could be paying for it for the next 20 odd years
... and the cost of the inevitable 'divorce' when Osama getts his end in 
.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Melbourne
Age: 59
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Smith has made a lot of noise about the cost-blow out and eventual scrapping of the Sea Sprite helicopter program (interestingly he has never made any mention of the $1 billion required to get the Collins Class submarine into shape...a new Government, means old sins are forgiven apparently), but has anyone ever heard him explain the over-run of the TAAATs system?
TAAATs was Mr Smith's CAA baby and it ran at least $77 million over budget. And that's before the cost of the legal wrangling over contracts in included.
Applyiong Mr Smith's `Sea Sprite' logic you owe the taxpayer more than $77 million. I'm sure the tax commissioner will be happy to accept a cheque or money order.
TAAATs was Mr Smith's CAA baby and it ran at least $77 million over budget. And that's before the cost of the legal wrangling over contracts in included.
Applyiong Mr Smith's `Sea Sprite' logic you owe the taxpayer more than $77 million. I'm sure the tax commissioner will be happy to accept a cheque or money order.
