Airservices Australia ADS-B program - another Seasprite Fiasco?
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Dick
I fear many of the RPT and RFDS type folk are not bothered looking at this thread any more and hence will not respond. If any of you who are RPT/RFDS/ATC would you please respond with your thoughts on this comment..........
I believe that many of them do not see things the same way. I know there are many FIFO jet services to add to this, however here is a list of areas that may not have decent radar coverage below 5000 and many below 10,000. And this is where the capture of likely targets exists.
Horn Island, Weipa, Proserpine, Gladstone, Mt Isa, Longreach, Winton, Barcaldine, Emerald, Blackwater, Thangool, Charleville, Roma, Bundy, Moree, Ballina, Narrabri, Wagga Wagga, Mildura, Albury, Kunnenurra, Broome, Port Hedland, Alice Springs, Ayers Rock, MANY MINING CENTRES in the GAFA........ Anyone want to add more?
If I am way off the mark, my contacts must be telling me big porky pies about their workday adventures
.
J
I fear many of the RPT and RFDS type folk are not bothered looking at this thread any more and hence will not respond. If any of you who are RPT/RFDS/ATC would you please respond with your thoughts on this comment..........
I cannot see any immediate safety problem that would require VFR aircraft which fly in the low levels to be fitted with an expensive ADS-B ‘out’ unit.
Horn Island, Weipa, Proserpine, Gladstone, Mt Isa, Longreach, Winton, Barcaldine, Emerald, Blackwater, Thangool, Charleville, Roma, Bundy, Moree, Ballina, Narrabri, Wagga Wagga, Mildura, Albury, Kunnenurra, Broome, Port Hedland, Alice Springs, Ayers Rock, MANY MINING CENTRES in the GAFA........ Anyone want to add more?
If I am way off the mark, my contacts must be telling me big porky pies about their workday adventures
.J
I'm in one of those moods
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: SFC to A085
Posts: 759
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NAA ANNOUNCES ADS-B PROGRAM AS THE WINNER OF THE 2007 ROBERT J. COLLIER TROPHY
NAA: National Aeronautic Association
NAA: National Aeronautic Association
Arlington, Virginia, March 6, 2008 – The National Aeronautic Association (NAA) announced today at their Annual Spring Awards Luncheon that the Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) Team of public and private sector groups has been selected as the recipient of the 2007 Robert J. Collier Trophy.
Government and industry leaders who have collaborated for nearly a decade will be honored "for conceptualizing, developing, and the initial implementation of Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast, the next generation performance-based air-ground, ground-air, and air-air surveillance system."
“ADS-B is a ground-breaking effort for next-generation airborne surveillance and cockpit avionics,” noted NAA Chairman and Collier Selection Committee Chairman Walter Boyne. “Its implementation will have a broad impact on the safety, capacity and efficiency of the national airspace system.”
Thread Starter
Scurvy, unfortunately you are wrong. If you purchased the latest Airbus A380, you would find that whilst it transmits ADS-B, it actually shows aircraft on the screen using TCAS. At the present time it does not have any “mix” of the ADS-B signals on that display. The reason for this – as pointed out previously on this site – is because the ADS-B position is very accurate, whereas the TCAS position can vary.
I have researched this thoroughly. Microair do have experimental ADS-B ‘in’ units, however they do not have a TCAS-like voice read out for Traffic Advisories or Resolution Advisories. I have flown aircraft with the FAA Capstone system and they have the same problem. It is more of a gimmick, because you look down on the display and see lots of aircraft appearing, however you cannot study the display all of the time, and once again there is no audio call out when traffic is close.
Whatever you want to make out, the facts are simple. That is, there is no certified (or non-certified) ADS-B ‘in’ unit available which gives an audio call out for nearby traffic. Because a pilot cannot study the display all the time, it means the available systems are not as effective as TCAS.
As I have mentioned previously, this will change in the future. I understand there are some patent problems in relation to audio call outs with ADS-B, and that is why the US Capstone does not feature such announcements.
By the way Scurvy, you know that one of the reasons that you cannot provide a radar service to the lowest level of radar coverage at Launceston is because the tower controllers are not radar rated.
In the USA and other leading aviation countries, the radar covered airspace remains with the Centre until the lower level of radar coverage. Because the Centre controllers are radar rated, and because they are there 24 hours per day, it is quite a superb and safe service.
Australia is the only country I know of in the world where a pilot is forced to leave a radar frequency when in IMC to change to the tower and talk to controllers who are not radar rated.
One day I think we will try the system that is used in the rest of the world, and find that it adds to safety. Of course, that will probably be after someone makes a mistake at a place like Hamilton Island and flies into a mountain because the controllers in the tower had no idea that the error had been made.
And the FAA won the Collier Trophy for the Capstone system which is totally different to that planned here!
I have researched this thoroughly. Microair do have experimental ADS-B ‘in’ units, however they do not have a TCAS-like voice read out for Traffic Advisories or Resolution Advisories. I have flown aircraft with the FAA Capstone system and they have the same problem. It is more of a gimmick, because you look down on the display and see lots of aircraft appearing, however you cannot study the display all of the time, and once again there is no audio call out when traffic is close.
Whatever you want to make out, the facts are simple. That is, there is no certified (or non-certified) ADS-B ‘in’ unit available which gives an audio call out for nearby traffic. Because a pilot cannot study the display all the time, it means the available systems are not as effective as TCAS.
As I have mentioned previously, this will change in the future. I understand there are some patent problems in relation to audio call outs with ADS-B, and that is why the US Capstone does not feature such announcements.
By the way Scurvy, you know that one of the reasons that you cannot provide a radar service to the lowest level of radar coverage at Launceston is because the tower controllers are not radar rated.
In the USA and other leading aviation countries, the radar covered airspace remains with the Centre until the lower level of radar coverage. Because the Centre controllers are radar rated, and because they are there 24 hours per day, it is quite a superb and safe service.
Australia is the only country I know of in the world where a pilot is forced to leave a radar frequency when in IMC to change to the tower and talk to controllers who are not radar rated.
One day I think we will try the system that is used in the rest of the world, and find that it adds to safety. Of course, that will probably be after someone makes a mistake at a place like Hamilton Island and flies into a mountain because the controllers in the tower had no idea that the error had been made.
And the FAA won the Collier Trophy for the Capstone system which is totally different to that planned here!
lot's happening in this disneyland today
james michael, you've been derogatory of this thread on several occasions - I'm wondering why you bother posting here if its so bad ? you keep coming back for some reason
Edit -
I prefer to stand by what I stated which is quite logically linked to 'off to meetings' in THIS disneyland where I am working.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Oz
Age: 77
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Binghi
Quick coffee break.
Kindly do not ascribe to me things I did NOT state.
I said
YOU may care to read 'this disneyland' as Pprune given your dreamtime posts about GPS and missile attacks. I do not.
I prefer to stand by what I stated which is quite logically linked to 'off to meetings' in THIS disneyland where I am working.
On several occasions you state? Come back with them when you come back with your substantiation for telling me I am a fool.
Dick Smith
But, if you examined ATSAW in the cockpit of the A320/340 you will find traffic selector switches on the dash panel, ADS-B traffic on the navigation display beside the primary flight display, and additional information on the MCDU.
From Airbus - are not facts superior to anecdote
ATSAW in Flight - SA and LR Prog - Q1 2009 - TCAS suppliers Honeywell and ACSS.
A380 - TBD
A350 - entry into service
ATSAW on airport surface - development ongoing on all programs.
Must run - off to meetings, lot's happening in this disneyland today (Bing-o)
Quick coffee break.
Kindly do not ascribe to me things I did NOT state.
I said
Off to meetings, lot's happening in this disneyland today
I prefer to stand by what I stated which is quite logically linked to 'off to meetings' in THIS disneyland where I am working.
On several occasions you state? Come back with them when you come back with your substantiation for telling me I am a fool.
Dick Smith
But, if you examined ATSAW in the cockpit of the A320/340 you will find traffic selector switches on the dash panel, ADS-B traffic on the navigation display beside the primary flight display, and additional information on the MCDU.
From Airbus - are not facts superior to anecdote
ATSAW in Flight - SA and LR Prog - Q1 2009 - TCAS suppliers Honeywell and ACSS.
A380 - TBD
A350 - entry into service
ATSAW on airport surface - development ongoing on all programs.
Must run - off to meetings, lot's happening in this disneyland today (Bing-o)
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: 24 27 45.66N 54 22 42.28E
Posts: 987
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This Discussion is going around in circles...
The reason why is because certain people hang their hat on 1. ADSB 'In" not being ready and installed in aircraft. and 2. The reliance on GPS relating to the switchover from SSR to ADSB, and the risk of 'turning off' the GPS network.
Firstly ADSB 'In' is irrelevant in the argument of whether to use ADSB as a replacement for SSR radar. With ADSB 'Out' the changeover is transparent to all operators, as some will still have a TCAS display and some won't but other than ATC being able to run traffic closer to each other in remote (currently non-radar procedural) areas, the operator will not notice any difference. The big change will be from the ATC side of the fence, as they will be able to have widespread surveillance across Australia instead of the current situation where the majority of Australia is currently non-radar. If in the future ADSB 'In' becomes available and widespread then yes it will offer further advantages to operators by giving increased Situational Awareness to operators, but the current lack of this is irrelevant to this current discussion, so please stay on topic and stay relevant.
Secondly as has been mentioned earlier, the Primary radars will remain and I wouls suggest that given there is a lot of overlap of radar coverage on the East Coast, there will be areas where they can switch of a few radar heads (delivering big savings) but not effect the effective SSR coverage to any detrimental degree. What it would mean is some of the current redundancy in the system would be lost, but this would be acceptable given that SSR would now be the backup redundant system anyway. Also if anyone really thinks that the GPS network will ever be switched off or intentionally degraded they are dreaming. That is like suggesting that due to Terrorists using the internet to communicate, the internet will be turned off.
If it really does become apparent that terrorists are using GPS to guide their unmanned bombs (I highly doubt that and think the hijacking of a plane still is the easiest way to achieve the bad guys ends), then I am of the understanding that an error can be intentionally introduced into the GPS network. Now even if 1 Nautical Mile was introduced into the network and we had to run 7NM between all ADSB traffic it still beats 30NM RNAV standards that we run currently in non radar airspace.
I will say again that an ADSB ground unit is extremely low cost, runs on a tiny amount of electricity (easily supported by solar panels) and has no moving parts so minimal maintenance needed. This means that for the price of one radar head and the related calibration and maintenance process, ASA could pay for the installation of an entire network of ADSB units in remote areas. To use a Dickism, "I'm sure you will all agree" that this is a positive outcome for all customers.
Firstly ADSB 'In' is irrelevant in the argument of whether to use ADSB as a replacement for SSR radar. With ADSB 'Out' the changeover is transparent to all operators, as some will still have a TCAS display and some won't but other than ATC being able to run traffic closer to each other in remote (currently non-radar procedural) areas, the operator will not notice any difference. The big change will be from the ATC side of the fence, as they will be able to have widespread surveillance across Australia instead of the current situation where the majority of Australia is currently non-radar. If in the future ADSB 'In' becomes available and widespread then yes it will offer further advantages to operators by giving increased Situational Awareness to operators, but the current lack of this is irrelevant to this current discussion, so please stay on topic and stay relevant.
Secondly as has been mentioned earlier, the Primary radars will remain and I wouls suggest that given there is a lot of overlap of radar coverage on the East Coast, there will be areas where they can switch of a few radar heads (delivering big savings) but not effect the effective SSR coverage to any detrimental degree. What it would mean is some of the current redundancy in the system would be lost, but this would be acceptable given that SSR would now be the backup redundant system anyway. Also if anyone really thinks that the GPS network will ever be switched off or intentionally degraded they are dreaming. That is like suggesting that due to Terrorists using the internet to communicate, the internet will be turned off.
If it really does become apparent that terrorists are using GPS to guide their unmanned bombs (I highly doubt that and think the hijacking of a plane still is the easiest way to achieve the bad guys ends), then I am of the understanding that an error can be intentionally introduced into the GPS network. Now even if 1 Nautical Mile was introduced into the network and we had to run 7NM between all ADSB traffic it still beats 30NM RNAV standards that we run currently in non radar airspace.
I will say again that an ADSB ground unit is extremely low cost, runs on a tiny amount of electricity (easily supported by solar panels) and has no moving parts so minimal maintenance needed. This means that for the price of one radar head and the related calibration and maintenance process, ASA could pay for the installation of an entire network of ADSB units in remote areas. To use a Dickism, "I'm sure you will all agree" that this is a positive outcome for all customers.
Binghi
While you are researching UAV go back half a century exactly to pre-GPS and the Malkara. While Airbus talk of fly by wire, the Malkara most certainly was an earlier derivative.
You might also like to research payloads for UAV, then the chance of actually purchasing one from the arms dealers, and compare to the availability and payload of a Bonanza or GA8 flown by a suicide pilot
While you are researching UAV go back half a century exactly to pre-GPS and the Malkara. While Airbus talk of fly by wire, the Malkara most certainly was an earlier derivative.
You might also like to research payloads for UAV, then the chance of actually purchasing one from the arms dealers, and compare to the availability and payload of a Bonanza or GA8 flown by a suicide pilot
I used the term UAV to describe a small unmanned flying device that can carry a payload cheaply. The use of the term Buzz Bomb is to relate the scenario to a real terrorist event that actualy happened, and that involved multiple flying bombs designed to terrorise the civy population. This scenario has happened before - just with-out the acuracy of GPS. Imagine what Hitlers Buzz Bombs could have done with a 30 metre delivery accuracy.
The GPS guided Terrorist Buzz Bomb (GPS Buzz Bomb) used in the scenario would not have any off the shelf aircraft components in its construction. Apart from the first prototype, it would be a very cheap to make device, probably less then a grand, and would use components in its manufacture that would not arouse any suspision at the time of purchase.
For example, Jabawocky used an alternate guidance system based on inertial nav - If an idividual walked into an airport avionics shop and ordered a dozen, or even hundreds of inertia nav systems do you think there would be no questions ??? on the other hand if an individual just bought one GPS at a time, ...no questions asked, and no identifiers for the security people.
(obviously the GPS will need to be modified)
Propulsion system - the GPS Buzz Bomb would likely have a wing span of six to 10 feet, so a single cylinder honda engine with a home made prop would suffice... efficient, who cares, its only flying the once.
Payload - The IEDs make a big bang for a small package - a dozen GPS Buzz Bombs turning up all within the GPS 30 metre delivery zone would cause more then a little concern
james michael, the alternate operating systems you described are expensive, require an operater for each device to the target, and have multiple tracable systems of operation and device purchase.
GPS Buzz Bombs on the other hand, will be launched off shore, need few people involved in their operation, and are set and foreget ... and where were they launched from....???
If it really does become apparent that terrorists are using GPS to guide their unmanned bombs (I highly doubt that and think the hijacking of a plane still is the easiest way to achieve the bad guys ends), then I am of the understanding that an error can be intentionally introduced into the GPS network. Now even if 1 Nautical Mile was introduced into the network and we had to run 7NM between all ADSB traffic it still beats 30NM RNAV standards that we run currently in non radar airspace.
IMHO, with the ADS-B system, we are going to get too reliant on a fragile GPS based air-nav system.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: australia
Posts: 606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Binghi,
Time for a deep breath, okay , now let it out slowly, okay, better.
On my first reading of James Michaels post that stated "Off to meetings, lot's happening in this disneyland today" I took it that he had to stop posting because his work was a madhouse, somehow you seemed to find it as an insult directed at you and/ or this discussion. Step back and keep your objectivity. I think its great that people,such as you and I and others, are passionate about these issues,. Lets not let this passion blind us to what is being said.
Some salient points,
1. ADS-(B)roadcast has been up and working in Australia for over 2 years and is installed in international, domestic and regional aircraft.
2. ADS-(C)ontract (satellite and VHF based) has been used in Oceanic and remote areas for over 8 years.
3. The GPS signal has never been turned off, even during 9/11.
4. GA will not pay for the Avionics, the airlines (the passengers if you will, Dick) through ASA will pay,as ADS-B out is for the protection of the airlines in areas that currently have no surveillance, hence they are paying.
5. Any GA aircraft with ADS-B Out will not have to pay navcharges if they are not in the 'system' as a flightplan (TAAATS call them Flight Data Records, FDRs), ATC will be able to see these 'blips' in range of an ADS-B ground station, and give traffic to aircraft who are in the system.
6. There is no sneaky plan to make GA come into the system so they can start to get charged, it would overwhelm the system and the controllers. Unless you ask for it, there is no way we want to start separating lighties somewhere out in the boonies.
Also, there seems to be a conception out there that controllers are behind this initiative because it would mean more controllers. I've got no idea how this thinking got started. It makes no difference to us, whether there are more or less controllers, we wouldn't get anymore money, our (lack of) career choices wouldn't change. In fact a redundancy package to get out is looking fairly attractive at the moment, THEN head off to overseas.
For those who say "mmmm, means more controllers" nudge, nudge ,wink, wink,vested interest, could you please let me know what you think the advantages are to me, because I'm just not seeing it.
The advantage of ADS-B surveillance to controllers, is that we can do our job safer and more efficient, with something we have trust in.
P.S. Give the terrorist UAV/buzz bombs a rest, it is getting tiresome.I notice you are a lone voice. Dick, any thoughts on the buzz bombs scenario being a showstopper for GPS navigation?
Time for a deep breath, okay , now let it out slowly, okay, better.
On my first reading of James Michaels post that stated "Off to meetings, lot's happening in this disneyland today" I took it that he had to stop posting because his work was a madhouse, somehow you seemed to find it as an insult directed at you and/ or this discussion. Step back and keep your objectivity. I think its great that people,such as you and I and others, are passionate about these issues,. Lets not let this passion blind us to what is being said.
Some salient points,
1. ADS-(B)roadcast has been up and working in Australia for over 2 years and is installed in international, domestic and regional aircraft.
2. ADS-(C)ontract (satellite and VHF based) has been used in Oceanic and remote areas for over 8 years.
3. The GPS signal has never been turned off, even during 9/11.
4. GA will not pay for the Avionics, the airlines (the passengers if you will, Dick) through ASA will pay,as ADS-B out is for the protection of the airlines in areas that currently have no surveillance, hence they are paying.
5. Any GA aircraft with ADS-B Out will not have to pay navcharges if they are not in the 'system' as a flightplan (TAAATS call them Flight Data Records, FDRs), ATC will be able to see these 'blips' in range of an ADS-B ground station, and give traffic to aircraft who are in the system.
6. There is no sneaky plan to make GA come into the system so they can start to get charged, it would overwhelm the system and the controllers. Unless you ask for it, there is no way we want to start separating lighties somewhere out in the boonies.
Also, there seems to be a conception out there that controllers are behind this initiative because it would mean more controllers. I've got no idea how this thinking got started. It makes no difference to us, whether there are more or less controllers, we wouldn't get anymore money, our (lack of) career choices wouldn't change. In fact a redundancy package to get out is looking fairly attractive at the moment, THEN head off to overseas.
For those who say "mmmm, means more controllers" nudge, nudge ,wink, wink,vested interest, could you please let me know what you think the advantages are to me, because I'm just not seeing it.
The advantage of ADS-B surveillance to controllers, is that we can do our job safer and more efficient, with something we have trust in.
P.S. Give the terrorist UAV/buzz bombs a rest, it is getting tiresome.I notice you are a lone voice. Dick, any thoughts on the buzz bombs scenario being a showstopper for GPS navigation?
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Oz
Age: 77
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Max, exactly what I meant (as I finish my fish and chips on the run). I think Binghi is taking the argument personally, yet I have not called him a fool.
Binghi, go research early UAV developments and their payloads - or more correctly lack of payloads. The scenario you describe is more a Clive Cussler or Dan Brown fiction where the hero knocks off 17 attackers with automatic weapons with his trusty automatic pistol than a probable reality.
We cannot allow our lives to be frustrated by planning our moves around low probability fictional scenarios. You are more at risk flying, or standing in your field and being hit by a meteorite, than the terrorist UAV scenario.
This argument is, as one suggested earlier, going around in circles with little new evidence presented against. On the balance of the evidence presented, I find ADS-B is my shepherd, I shall not want for safety, and deliver us oh CASA from further airspace restrictions as we adopt this technology.
Binghi, go research early UAV developments and their payloads - or more correctly lack of payloads. The scenario you describe is more a Clive Cussler or Dan Brown fiction where the hero knocks off 17 attackers with automatic weapons with his trusty automatic pistol than a probable reality.
We cannot allow our lives to be frustrated by planning our moves around low probability fictional scenarios. You are more at risk flying, or standing in your field and being hit by a meteorite, than the terrorist UAV scenario.
This argument is, as one suggested earlier, going around in circles with little new evidence presented against. On the balance of the evidence presented, I find ADS-B is my shepherd, I shall not want for safety, and deliver us oh CASA from further airspace restrictions as we adopt this technology.
Time for a deep breath, okay , now let it out slowly, okay, better.
Lets not let this passion blind us to what is being said.
there seems to be a conception out there that controllers are behind this initiative because it would mean more controllers
P.S. Give the terrorist UAV/buzz bombs a rest, it is getting tiresome.I notice you are a lone voice.
Binghi, go research early UAV developments and their payloads - or more correctly lack of payloads. The scenario you describe is more a Clive Cussler or Dan Brown fiction where the hero knocks off 17 attackers with automatic weapons with his trusty automatic pistol than a probable reality.
We cannot allow our lives to be frustrated by planning our moves around low probability fictional scenarios. You are more at risk flying, or standing in your field and being hit by a meteorite, than the terrorist UAV scenario.
This argument is, as one suggested earlier, going around in circles with little new evidence presented against. On the balance of the evidence presented, I find ADS-B is my shepherd, I shall not want for safety, and deliver us oh CASA from further airspace restrictions as we adopt this technology.
We cannot allow our lives to be frustrated by planning our moves around low probability fictional scenarios. You are more at risk flying, or standing in your field and being hit by a meteorite, than the terrorist UAV scenario.
This argument is, as one suggested earlier, going around in circles with little new evidence presented against. On the balance of the evidence presented, I find ADS-B is my shepherd, I shall not want for safety, and deliver us oh CASA from further airspace restrictions as we adopt this technology.
further airspace restrictions as we adopt this technology
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: 24 27 45.66N 54 22 42.28E
Posts: 987
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FB, I could sit and write 100 scenarios here right now with the current system in place on how to blow things up and cause terror. Any Pilot or Controller could. As I said the September 11 technique is still quite easy to do (even with everyones perfume and open bottles of booze thrown in the bin at the airport), and would be the more likely way to deliver terror than the complexity of UAV delivery using GPS. Face it the world these days is already reliant on GPS and has been for quite a while. It won't be getting turned off, with or without utilisation by terrorists for their own purpose.
I think you would really like to have objections to ADSB, but if this is your only argument you really are struggling to make a case. Maybe until you come up with a more compelling argument, you should let the rest of us discuss the real issues here which are how does the installation get paid for and at what time and in what manner will the SSR network be phased out or reduced. If the buzzbomb argument continues I will just put your posts to the ignore list, and hopefully the rest of the people here who want to actually advance Australian (and the rest of the world's) ATM systems will do the same.
Now enough with the 'Red under the Bed' conspiracy theories and back to the real issues...
I think you would really like to have objections to ADSB, but if this is your only argument you really are struggling to make a case. Maybe until you come up with a more compelling argument, you should let the rest of us discuss the real issues here which are how does the installation get paid for and at what time and in what manner will the SSR network be phased out or reduced. If the buzzbomb argument continues I will just put your posts to the ignore list, and hopefully the rest of the people here who want to actually advance Australian (and the rest of the world's) ATM systems will do the same.
Now enough with the 'Red under the Bed' conspiracy theories and back to the real issues...
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Oz
Age: 77
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Binghi
On the run, but quickly.
Forget the UAV scenario, you have your mind made up to the exclusion of facts.
please, stop taking half the context in quotes - what I said was
What I am saying to YOU is that adopting ADS-B may well save us from further CASA pronouncements of Class C airspace and more restrictions on CTAF R. Recently, with "a little help from our friends" Avalon moved from G to C, OAR has several studies going in WA, and the matter of PTO operations side by side with GA is under review by Ambidji at this very instant. Read ICAO Annex 6.
I am off again and I am not going to keep repeating myself in further circular arguments with you. Go jump in the citation with Dick Smith while he checks out the A320/340 panels.
On the run, but quickly.
Forget the UAV scenario, you have your mind made up to the exclusion of facts.
please, stop taking half the context in quotes - what I said was
and deliver us oh CASA from further airspace restrictions as we adopt this technology
I am off again and I am not going to keep repeating myself in further circular arguments with you. Go jump in the citation with Dick Smith while he checks out the A320/340 panels.
Face it the world these days is already reliant on GPS and has been for quite a while.
Forget the UAV scenario, you have your mind made up to the exclusion of facts.
I am not going to keep repeating myself in further circular arguments with you.
What I am saying to YOU is that adopting ADS-B may well save us from further CASA pronouncements of Class C airspace and more restrictions on CTAF R. Recently, with "a little help from our friends" Avalon moved from G to C, OAR has several studies going in WA, and the matter of PTO operations side by side with GA is under review by Ambidji at this very instant.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Oz
Age: 77
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Binghi
Now you really have done it. I have pulled three chest muscles, coughed and choked and spilt my nice cuppa of canteen coffee, and been cautioned by the boss for disrupting the workplace through raucous laughter.
Please reserve such posting to the approved date - 264 days or so from now,no?
Yes, you have maintained a consistent message.
I have maintianed a fairly consistant 'message', which I have unforetunatly had to gradualy expand upon so as to aid clarity to rebut many of your posts.
Please reserve such posting to the approved date - 264 days or so from now,no?
Yes, you have maintained a consistent message.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had hoped I had "voiced my last reasons" and submitted as a pessimist, I am never disappointed, I hoped your subsidy comes through and enabling me to also take advantage of the offer. I even opened myself to the Union type mantra and expected ridicule of not being part of the push for the introduction but accepting the "benefit", which I again say, I don't really need.
Some need a reminder of history when you talk about UAV's and "buzz bombs". One only has to look back at the Gulf,wars, Scud missiles, very much the WW2 state of the art device which could easily be equipped with a satelite guidance system. The recent Lebanon war with Israel copping man made and portable missiles landing in an approximate guesstimate, also easily converted. The Gaza Strip with similar means of delivery to a target today.
Those that don't learn from history are doomed to repeat the event.
Why dismiss this possibility out of hand, yet persist in the safety benefit arguement that ADSB gives to a C172 flying VFR between Alice Springs and Boulia below A010?
Some need a reminder of history when you talk about UAV's and "buzz bombs". One only has to look back at the Gulf,wars, Scud missiles, very much the WW2 state of the art device which could easily be equipped with a satelite guidance system. The recent Lebanon war with Israel copping man made and portable missiles landing in an approximate guesstimate, also easily converted. The Gaza Strip with similar means of delivery to a target today.
Those that don't learn from history are doomed to repeat the event.
Why dismiss this possibility out of hand, yet persist in the safety benefit arguement that ADSB gives to a C172 flying VFR between Alice Springs and Boulia below A010?
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Thanks folks.......
Now how about we all start lobbying the Government for another leap forward and a massive improvement in Safety and efficiency...........WAAS!
Yes..... this seems to be forgotten about.......
WAAS is worth spending money on!
Anyone care to add to that?
Except FB....he feels that anything GPS is on thin ice
J
Now how about we all start lobbying the Government for another leap forward and a massive improvement in Safety and efficiency...........WAAS!
Yes..... this seems to be forgotten about.......
WAAS is worth spending money on!
Anyone care to add to that?
Except FB....he feels that anything GPS is on thin ice
J