Airservices Australia ADS-B program - another Seasprite Fiasco?
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Oz
Age: 77
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
T28D
Excellent point.
Thinking it through, it would only happen involuntarily if they fly over 10,000' at present, and that's unlikely.
Or if ADS-B is mandated for CTAF R and they operate there - and such mandate will occur with or without the subsidy in time anyway, although at present it is the deferred stage 2 JCP2.
Let's also look at the weight.
Transponder swap for existing - nil nett.
TSO145 GPS engine, coax, aerial - say 3 kg?
3 kg equals what percentage of the average Ag payload?
Now, I have noted some hefty farm lads flying Ag aircraft. I guess if payload is critical the operators either need to convince their pilots to get off the Australian obesity wagon, or hire jockeys as pilots.
Either way, I think the ADS-B equipment effect on MAUW is comparable to a gnats gnob
Thoughts?
Excellent point.
Thinking it through, it would only happen involuntarily if they fly over 10,000' at present, and that's unlikely.
Or if ADS-B is mandated for CTAF R and they operate there - and such mandate will occur with or without the subsidy in time anyway, although at present it is the deferred stage 2 JCP2.
Let's also look at the weight.
Transponder swap for existing - nil nett.
TSO145 GPS engine, coax, aerial - say 3 kg?
3 kg equals what percentage of the average Ag payload?
Now, I have noted some hefty farm lads flying Ag aircraft. I guess if payload is critical the operators either need to convince their pilots to get off the Australian obesity wagon, or hire jockeys as pilots.
Either way, I think the ADS-B equipment effect on MAUW is comparable to a gnats gnob
Thoughts?
Mr Smith, why are you so very keen to have Approach Radar and Class C over class D? I see you are now trying to beat up the Minister for Transport as they attempt to recind the requirment for AirServices to provide approach radar for the ten regional aerodromes as stipulated in the study/commision or whateve Minister Anderson decreed back in 05.
Mr Smith, why are you so against the low level roll-out of ADS-B? This technology will provide for surveillance in the airspace surrounding these classD towers for way less than the $150,000,000.00 set for the task.
Why are you opposed to the very thing that can be implimented for the funds provided? You should be consilatory and explain to the Minister exactly what ADS-B can do in relation to this directive. The ALP could come out as heroes of the commonwealth and proclaim loud and long how they saved the country money by installing a surveillance system that cost way less than what the evil coallition wanted to do.
Your fluries of solicitors letters is going to backfire on you. ADS-B could well be the way you can have your cake and curry favour with the Minister.
Mr Smith, why are you so against the low level roll-out of ADS-B? This technology will provide for surveillance in the airspace surrounding these classD towers for way less than the $150,000,000.00 set for the task.
Why are you opposed to the very thing that can be implimented for the funds provided? You should be consilatory and explain to the Minister exactly what ADS-B can do in relation to this directive. The ALP could come out as heroes of the commonwealth and proclaim loud and long how they saved the country money by installing a surveillance system that cost way less than what the evil coallition wanted to do.
Your fluries of solicitors letters is going to backfire on you. ADS-B could well be the way you can have your cake and curry favour with the Minister.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, you're stating that mandatory installation of an ADS-B squitter in the crop-duster would not have prevented the Close Proximity?
Had the duster been fitted, sure. I don't doubt its a great gadget.
RE Flightwatch and who's paying, sorry it was late and I'm not right up on a whole lot of the argument. However you can't deny that the fitting of ADSB is part of lessening the load of other systems(manpower, not outdated technology). And as for the money... These things are expencive. If someone is covering the bill to have every aircraft fitted, that someone or an associate of there's must stand to make a whole lot more. Especially if as Dick has stated it can be done cheaper and better. (I think that's what he has stated) When have you ever seen business or gov do things the expencive way just for the good of society as a whole. Sorry I'm not convinced.
I have been with the topic from the start. I guess I must be missing something.
Mr Bing,
I'm afraid he's ahead on points, mate ... don't know if he has a piece of lead in his glove or not, but he's got some good moves ... crying foul to the ref won't save you ... you're going to have to do some more fancy footwork to evade the killer blow ...
I'm afraid he's ahead on points, mate ... don't know if he has a piece of lead in his glove or not, but he's got some good moves ... crying foul to the ref won't save you ... you're going to have to do some more fancy footwork to evade the killer blow ...
Mr Bing,
I'm afraid he's ahead on points, mate ... don't know if he has a piece of lead in his glove or not, but he's got some good moves ... crying foul to the ref won't save you ... you're going to have to do some more fancy footwork to evade the killer blow ...
I'm afraid he's ahead on points, mate ... don't know if he has a piece of lead in his glove or not, but he's got some good moves ... crying foul to the ref won't save you ... you're going to have to do some more fancy footwork to evade the killer blow ...
Heres me thinking this was a pilots 'game' and you think its a thugs boxing 'game'
- pionts ?
- glove ?
- ref ???
- footwork ?
........back to you now
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Oz
Age: 77
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bing
A thugs boxing game says you as criticism of Peuce?
Only when someone says
After I have several times been quite specific that I stand to gain not a cent and have no direct or indirect pecuniary interest.
That's thuggery, Bing. Cut down your dickmite intake. One puncher of fellow posters reputations is enough on here already.
Antz
Adding an extra safety benefit is lessening what other systems and manpower? The ATC experts on here have already made it clear that there is no saving to them
And this slayed me
Next you will believe politicians' promises. This is the Dick who gave us the Australian transponder mandate in Class E, 'cheaper and better ' with user pays, Class G to Class C (thus clearances and transponders for Avalon) - and plenty of rhetoric about cheaper and better with ADS-B admitting not only does he not have the full facts but he does not even know who from industry is at the decision meetings.
If you are going to believe unsubstantiated rhetoric for deity's sake don't reply to emials from Nigeria - you'll need your money in the bank to pay for the next 'saving' from our saviour.
A thugs boxing game says you as criticism of Peuce?
Only when someone says
... looks to me, like james michael stands to profit greatly from ADS-B
That's thuggery, Bing. Cut down your dickmite intake. One puncher of fellow posters reputations is enough on here already.
Antz
However you can't deny that the fitting of ADSB is part of lessening the load of other systems(manpower ...
And this slayed me
Especially if as Dick has stated it can be done cheaper and better
' with user pays, Class G to Class C (thus clearances and transponders for Avalon) - and plenty of rhetoric about cheaper and better with ADS-B admitting not only does he not have the full facts but he does not even know who from industry is at the decision meetings.If you are going to believe unsubstantiated rhetoric for deity's sake don't reply to emials from Nigeria - you'll need your money in the bank to pay for the next 'saving' from our saviour.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: 34 South
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dick....Dick....are you there Dick??
Just popped my head in again.
Its been a long time since Dick has been here.
Maybe his attention span reached its limit.
Or maybe, as he said, he is finished with this thread and everyone on it.
Dick....Dick....don"t want to play anymore?????
Its been a long time since Dick has been here.
Maybe his attention span reached its limit.
Or maybe, as he said, he is finished with this thread and everyone on it.
Dick....Dick....don"t want to play anymore?????
Interesting Editorial in todays Courier Mail about yesterdays state wide (QLD) phone failure. Whilst its not about ADS-B, I think a couple of comments relate well to my concerns about the fragility of ADS-B.
I hope the Courier Mail does'nt mind me borrowing this paragraph -
...In the wake of this glitch - if you can call a small disaster that cost millions and inconvenienced countless thousands such a thing - it may be high time to reconsider our reliance on singular systems, without the option for substantive back-up.
Full Editorial at - Communcation crisis should not be so easy | The Courier-Mail
(my bolding)
I hope the Courier Mail does'nt mind me borrowing this paragraph -
...In the wake of this glitch - if you can call a small disaster that cost millions and inconvenienced countless thousands such a thing - it may be high time to reconsider our reliance on singular systems, without the option for substantive back-up.
Full Editorial at - Communcation crisis should not be so easy | The Courier-Mail
(my bolding)
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Oz
Age: 77
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bing
Anything in the article on thuggery to fellow posters not needing redundancy?
I think yours is a great call about redundancy.
Surprising the CM did not mention that there is backup in the telephone network - there is the terrestrial system and the mobile phone system working on entirely separate networks. But, why should a newspaper spoil a good story with facts?
For aviation, enroute separation is achievable by INS and DTI, in simple terms.
But, you are correct - the benefit of having BOTH MSSR and ADS-B in primary traffic areas would be invaluable should the tired old radar fall over - given radar is only based on a single revolving head that is a monty for destruction that would take it out of action for weeks by a Binghi Whizzer Line of Sight Terrorist UAV bomb (actually did someone say a 50 cal burst would suffice?).
ADS-B to the rescue in the high traffic terminal areas to keep the airline passengers and freight on the move. Redundancy to the Rescue.
Bing, I can see you have converted from ADS-B Atheist to Commonsense Convert. Hopefully the Airservices people reading this thread, lacking guidance from the Guru, will recognise the invaluable soundness of what you propose.
It's almost enough, but not quite, to have me absolve you from the deliberate slur on my motives for being here.
Anything in the article on thuggery to fellow posters not needing redundancy?
I think yours is a great call about redundancy.
Surprising the CM did not mention that there is backup in the telephone network - there is the terrestrial system and the mobile phone system working on entirely separate networks. But, why should a newspaper spoil a good story with facts?
For aviation, enroute separation is achievable by INS and DTI, in simple terms.
But, you are correct - the benefit of having BOTH MSSR and ADS-B in primary traffic areas would be invaluable should the tired old radar fall over - given radar is only based on a single revolving head that is a monty for destruction that would take it out of action for weeks by a Binghi Whizzer Line of Sight Terrorist UAV bomb (actually did someone say a 50 cal burst would suffice?).
ADS-B to the rescue in the high traffic terminal areas to keep the airline passengers and freight on the move. Redundancy to the Rescue.
Bing, I can see you have converted from ADS-B Atheist to Commonsense Convert. Hopefully the Airservices people reading this thread, lacking guidance from the Guru, will recognise the invaluable soundness of what you propose.
It's almost enough, but not quite, to have me absolve you from the deliberate slur on my motives for being here.
Bing
Anything in the article on thuggery to fellow posters not needing redundancy?
I think yours is a great call about redundancy.
Surprising the CM did not mention that there is backup in the telephone network - there is the terrestrial system and the mobile phone system working on entirely separate networks. But, why should a newspaper spoil a good story with facts?
For aviation, enroute separation is achievable by INS and DTI, in simple terms.
But, you are correct - the benefit of having BOTH MSSR and ADS-B in primary traffic areas would be invaluable should the tired old radar fall over - given radar is only based on a single revolving head that is a monty for destruction that would take it out of action for weeks by a Binghi Whizzer Line of Sight Terrorist UAV bomb (actually did someone say a 50 cal burst would suffice?).
ADS-B to the rescue in the high traffic terminal areas to keep the airline passengers and freight on the move. Redundancy to the Rescue.
Bing, I can see you have converted from ADS-B Atheist to Commonsense Convert. Hopefully the Airservices people reading this thread, lacking guidance from the Guru, will recognise the invaluable soundness of what you propose.
It's almost enough, but not quite, to have me absolve you from the deliberate slur on my motives for being here.
Anything in the article on thuggery to fellow posters not needing redundancy?
I think yours is a great call about redundancy.
Surprising the CM did not mention that there is backup in the telephone network - there is the terrestrial system and the mobile phone system working on entirely separate networks. But, why should a newspaper spoil a good story with facts?
For aviation, enroute separation is achievable by INS and DTI, in simple terms.
But, you are correct - the benefit of having BOTH MSSR and ADS-B in primary traffic areas would be invaluable should the tired old radar fall over - given radar is only based on a single revolving head that is a monty for destruction that would take it out of action for weeks by a Binghi Whizzer Line of Sight Terrorist UAV bomb (actually did someone say a 50 cal burst would suffice?).
ADS-B to the rescue in the high traffic terminal areas to keep the airline passengers and freight on the move. Redundancy to the Rescue.
Bing, I can see you have converted from ADS-B Atheist to Commonsense Convert. Hopefully the Airservices people reading this thread, lacking guidance from the Guru, will recognise the invaluable soundness of what you propose.
It's almost enough, but not quite, to have me absolve you from the deliberate slur on my motives for being here.
Hmmm... a half-way sensible post from you james michael. A bit better then some of your recent hysteria
... still, you seem determined to miss-represent what I have previously written.james michael, I note you seem determined to intimidate this here pilot and my concerns with ADS-B ... and seems to me, you are determined to intimidate anybody who disagrees with you - is that what you're about ?
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Oz
Age: 77
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bing
If you could demonstrate the intimidation you claim?
Was that where I suggested you stood to make a bucket of money out of ADS-B?
I'm also intrigued at how someone intimidates via information posted hereon. Sharing facts and data and agreeing with your redundancy theory as something I had not even seen the value of in handling PTO in terminal areas is hardly intimidation.
I thought the first mention of thuggery came from you. Actually. reflecting on it, I think the red words above need to be reversed although it would obviously be intimidatory to suggest you withdraw the unwarranted slur on my character and motives.
Edited to add - and while I'm preparing my reply you are at it again with more invective, thus putting another bullet in your tootsie.
Better a buffoon than a spitoon, Bing.
If you could demonstrate the intimidation you claim?
Was that where I suggested you stood to make a bucket of money out of ADS-B?
I'm also intrigued at how someone intimidates via information posted hereon. Sharing facts and data and agreeing with your redundancy theory as something I had not even seen the value of in handling PTO in terminal areas is hardly intimidation.
I thought the first mention of thuggery came from you. Actually. reflecting on it, I think the red words above need to be reversed although it would obviously be intimidatory to suggest you withdraw the unwarranted slur on my character and motives.
Edited to add - and while I'm preparing my reply you are at it again with more invective, thus putting another bullet in your tootsie.
Better a buffoon than a spitoon, Bing.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flying Binghi;
I would advise you that you underestimate Mr michael.
He is not as stupid as he looks.
Indeed he looks like a photo I once saw in an AOPA magazine.
Seems that the AOPA forum is dead so they must start spruiking their propaganda on a sterile website as this. You should note, if I have his handle correctly, he, and his "puss filled" mate are banned here.
It must be bad for their members who only want them to represent them in the quest to "fly without unnecessary restrictions and costs". If he is who I believe he is.
If things go pear shaped, they will blame Dick Smith or myself.
Remember this is the same crew that wanted the ASIC mandated so they could make a quid out of their members. Same mob wanted the security locking devices introduced so they could claim saviour status by designing a mixture control lock. Same mob that accepted money from CASA for Roadshows, same mob who didn't fight the Part 47 registration mess, the same mob who made a deal with CASA AVMED branch so it only cost you half what CASA reckoned was a good thing, and embraced, albeit with reservations the ADSB concept.
I believe the spruiker here, Mr james, has an interest that does not abide what his fellow members expect of him as a member of a peak GA aviation body.
He has demonstrated he is an avid supporter of the concept and to hell with his responsibilities.
I believe his problem are just started.
I support your appreciation of his personality disorder, Buffoon.
Start the clock and wait his response, I'll give it 5 minutes.
Bets anyone?
I would advise you that you underestimate Mr michael.
He is not as stupid as he looks.
Indeed he looks like a photo I once saw in an AOPA magazine.
Seems that the AOPA forum is dead so they must start spruiking their propaganda on a sterile website as this. You should note, if I have his handle correctly, he, and his "puss filled" mate are banned here.
It must be bad for their members who only want them to represent them in the quest to "fly without unnecessary restrictions and costs". If he is who I believe he is.
If things go pear shaped, they will blame Dick Smith or myself.
Remember this is the same crew that wanted the ASIC mandated so they could make a quid out of their members. Same mob wanted the security locking devices introduced so they could claim saviour status by designing a mixture control lock. Same mob that accepted money from CASA for Roadshows, same mob who didn't fight the Part 47 registration mess, the same mob who made a deal with CASA AVMED branch so it only cost you half what CASA reckoned was a good thing, and embraced, albeit with reservations the ADSB concept.
I believe the spruiker here, Mr james, has an interest that does not abide what his fellow members expect of him as a member of a peak GA aviation body.
He has demonstrated he is an avid supporter of the concept and to hell with his responsibilities.
I believe his problem are just started.
I support your appreciation of his personality disorder, Buffoon.
Start the clock and wait his response, I'll give it 5 minutes.
Bets anyone?
NOW, to recap what I think seems to have the poster calling him/her self james michael in a fluster. (I seem to have to keep repeating myself)
I have a concern that an ADS-B based ATC system, by relying on the GPS signals presents a danger to the future of Oz aviation, in that the GPS signal can be lost for any number of reasons.
Remove the GPS signal and we have NO ADS-B.
One scenario I have presented, is a small Buzz Bomb type device, possibly hundreds, launched from 500 plus miles off-shore and turning up here in Oz with better then 30 metres accuracy. Will we still want those GPS targetting signals being provided ?
Sunspots - GPS can be greatly affected by sun 'storms' or sunspots. We are currently in a sunspot lull, with the sunspot season, which lasts many years, about to get underway again.
At present, Australia currently has a good robust ATC system that has NO reliance on any one component - I think the QLD telephone dramas demonstraite all to well what can happen.
With the present system of aircraft transponders (non ADS-B) and aircraft fitted traffic aviodance systems (TAS), if the entire ATC system vanished, individual aircraft fitted with TAS will still be able to see other aircraft fitted with transponders. Large passenger jets currently have TAS installed. Most GA aircraft already have non ADS-B transponders fitted.
... and thats all for now, my one typing finger is wearing out
I have a concern that an ADS-B based ATC system, by relying on the GPS signals presents a danger to the future of Oz aviation, in that the GPS signal can be lost for any number of reasons.
Remove the GPS signal and we have NO ADS-B.
One scenario I have presented, is a small Buzz Bomb type device, possibly hundreds, launched from 500 plus miles off-shore and turning up here in Oz with better then 30 metres accuracy. Will we still want those GPS targetting signals being provided ?
Sunspots - GPS can be greatly affected by sun 'storms' or sunspots. We are currently in a sunspot lull, with the sunspot season, which lasts many years, about to get underway again.
At present, Australia currently has a good robust ATC system that has NO reliance on any one component - I think the QLD telephone dramas demonstraite all to well what can happen.
With the present system of aircraft transponders (non ADS-B) and aircraft fitted traffic aviodance systems (TAS), if the entire ATC system vanished, individual aircraft fitted with TAS will still be able to see other aircraft fitted with transponders. Large passenger jets currently have TAS installed. Most GA aircraft already have non ADS-B transponders fitted.
... and thats all for now, my one typing finger is wearing out
I apreciate the advice Bob Murphie
I best repeat what I have posted before -
I have NO association with Dick Smith. I have never met the man, I have never talked to him, I have never corresponded with him.
My understanding is that Dick Smith is FOR ADS-B. I am against ADS-B
My views are entirely my own
Edit - My understanding is Dick Smith is for an improved ADS-B system, not the current proposal. And Dick Smith does not want ADS-B below 10,000 feet, He sees no valid safety reason for it.
I best repeat what I have posted before -
I have NO association with Dick Smith. I have never met the man, I have never talked to him, I have never corresponded with him.
My understanding is that Dick Smith is FOR ADS-B. I am against ADS-B
My views are entirely my own
Edit - My understanding is Dick Smith is for an improved ADS-B system, not the current proposal. And Dick Smith does not want ADS-B below 10,000 feet, He sees no valid safety reason for it.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Oz
Age: 77
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bob Murphie
I suggest in future you eat your dickmite; don't smoke it.
Your posts are a most amazing mishmash of conspiracy and convolution that leaves one uncertain and calling for position advisory.
I think is is increasingly obvious to all readers that you are not here to debate ADS-B, you are here to cover the strategic withdrawal of the Aviation Pope and try and drag the thread into invective so it is closed.
Your name rings a bell - are you not the disenchanted ex-AOPA director who has been around forums since your 'exit' trying to get even?
Sorry Bob Murphie, your drift will not succeed.
Bing
An apology to you, I thought you were on the dickmite trail but your current post returns to the topic. And, I'm in a fluster you say? Yeah, right, I might just hold off on the m'aidez for the moment
Pardon? It is reliant on TAAATS (that is backed up ML / BN) and radar heads - that are not backed up but will be by ADS-B. The system has ABSOLUTE reliance on one component - each radar head - until ADS-B arrives.
You trot out your RAIM data and I'll trot out mine.
Now I get it - it's you with the pecuniary interest - you have forked out $10K plus for a TCAS and it becomes obsolete with ADS-B. Ahhhhhhh.
Bing, you must be chewing a small plug of dickmite - like him you ignore responses and move on to the next wild card.
Your whole scenario is based on:
1. Terrorist attacks
2. GPS system total failure or blocking.
Ever studied probability and/or chaos theory?
Dick Smith is FOR ADS-B? On his terms. Who does he represent (apart from Dick)?
I suggest in future you eat your dickmite; don't smoke it.
Your posts are a most amazing mishmash of conspiracy and convolution that leaves one uncertain and calling for position advisory.
I think is is increasingly obvious to all readers that you are not here to debate ADS-B, you are here to cover the strategic withdrawal of the Aviation Pope and try and drag the thread into invective so it is closed.
Your name rings a bell - are you not the disenchanted ex-AOPA director who has been around forums since your 'exit' trying to get even?
Sorry Bob Murphie, your drift will not succeed.
Bing
An apology to you, I thought you were on the dickmite trail but your current post returns to the topic. And, I'm in a fluster you say? Yeah, right, I might just hold off on the m'aidez for the moment
At present, Australia currently has a good robust ATC system that has NO reliance on any one component
GPS can be greatly affected by sun 'storms' or sunspots.
if the entire ATC system vanished, individual aircraft fitted with TAS will still be able to see other aircraft fitted with transponders
Bing, you must be chewing a small plug of dickmite - like him you ignore responses and move on to the next wild card.
Your whole scenario is based on:
1. Terrorist attacks
2. GPS system total failure or blocking.
Ever studied probability and/or chaos theory?
Dick Smith is FOR ADS-B? On his terms. Who does he represent (apart from Dick)?
Moderator
There are those posting in this thread whose access to PPRuNe has previously been removed, on a number of occasions, under various nom de plums.
They have a long history of contributing to the demise of various aviation bulletin boards but have never been given the same opportunity on PPRuNe. Because they destroyed other similar forums and have no where else to go, they are again back voicing their ill informed, bigoted opinions on PPRuNe.
They are back under a variety of pseudonyms and they and I know who they are. They are easy to detect: persistently aggressive, bigoted and biased "expert opinion" posts; inability to accept other’s perspectives; inability to debate an issue in a calm professional manner. They exhibit very little real knowledge or experience of the subjects they debate.
Their aviation life exists solely within the periphery of amateur aviation, at a knowledge and experience level commensurate with private flying.
It is to those I address my comments:
You are guests on PPRuNe and your access is at our pleasure, only if you desist from your repetitious aggressive posts and subtle and not so subtle threats to other users.
Otherwise, history will repeat itself and you will again be seeking another aviation forum to destroy.
Don’t say you have not been warned!
Tail Wheel
They have a long history of contributing to the demise of various aviation bulletin boards but have never been given the same opportunity on PPRuNe. Because they destroyed other similar forums and have no where else to go, they are again back voicing their ill informed, bigoted opinions on PPRuNe.
They are back under a variety of pseudonyms and they and I know who they are. They are easy to detect: persistently aggressive, bigoted and biased "expert opinion" posts; inability to accept other’s perspectives; inability to debate an issue in a calm professional manner. They exhibit very little real knowledge or experience of the subjects they debate.
Their aviation life exists solely within the periphery of amateur aviation, at a knowledge and experience level commensurate with private flying.
It is to those I address my comments:
You are guests on PPRuNe and your access is at our pleasure, only if you desist from your repetitious aggressive posts and subtle and not so subtle threats to other users.
Otherwise, history will repeat itself and you will again be seeking another aviation forum to destroy.
Don’t say you have not been warned!
Tail Wheel