CASA premature ADS-B mandate will result in even more pilots losing jobs
You still haven't bitten yet, joker10 and Francis. You grammatic frogs!
Do you understand the difference between Cross-Industry Funding and Subsidy?
Do you need an definition?
Oooops, Joker10 is the grammatic frog. Francis can still show some humour
Do you understand the difference between Cross-Industry Funding and Subsidy?
Do you need an definition?
Oooops, Joker10 is the grammatic frog. Francis can still show some humour
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Excellently observed," answered Candide; "but let us cultivate our garden."
BTW my name is Francois. You may all call me Frank to aid in simplicity of expression.
BTW my name is Francois. You may all call me Frank to aid in simplicity of expression.
howabout???? Do you refer to me, or the other two frogs?
Yes, Joker10. Please play the ball, the difference between Cross-Industry Funding and Subsidy, when you're ready.
Ahhhh Crikey! Howabout, talk about finger trouble
A DEFINITION arghhh.
Yes, Joker10. Please play the ball, the difference between Cross-Industry Funding and Subsidy, when you're ready.
Ahhhh Crikey! Howabout, talk about finger trouble
A DEFINITION arghhh.
Last edited by OZBUSDRIVER; 9th Jun 2009 at 11:30.
Ozbusdriver
Fact - airlines senior management never agreed to forgo saving - I assume you have some idea of the way AA and their two major customers do business??
Fact --- Treasury and Finance never agreed to forgo any demand for dividends from Airservices --- and are quite careful about GBE accounting, quite apart from any attention by the Australian National Audit Office, ANAO.
Quite apart from the very high probability that the alleged "savings" were somewhat overstated, see above, neither major airlines nor the Government, then or now, agreed to a major variation in the status quo, to make any cross industry funding/subsidy/underwriting/financial support/description of choice available to fit ADS-B to aircraft.
At the level the JCP and preparatory work was done, it all sounded so simple, but that is far, far from airlines and the Government forgoing cold hard cash, by whatever name.
Where did it all spring from ----- the totally unrealistic vision thing --- a vision from a bunch of ATC techos, of a brave new world of complete control (hilariously called Freeflight --- despite being the complete antithesis of the original Freeflight concept) of just about everything flying ----- again, it's all in the public records, if you want to dig them out ----
---- at one stage "pilotless aeroplanes" even got a run, in this brave new world of ATC supercomputers, seamless datalinks and perfect knowledge, all operating without fault in hardware, firmware and software, making pilots redundant ---
----- those of us who have been there, all know just how perfect and faultless all this wonderful technology actually is --- don't we???don't we???don't we???don't we???
Just like the faultless hardware, firmware and software called A330/AF447, really.
Hardly a week goes by, in the popular media, without some expert telling us how modern technology has made pilots redundant ----- presumably leaving only a need for ATC "systems monitors" ---- but no controllers, of course, because "the computer" is going to do all that?? Right???
It can't be stated too often, there is nothing fundamentally wrong with the high level ADS-B proposal, as long as the airline pay the freight, but the low level program never really had legs --- no matter how fanatically devoted the cheer squad.
Tootle pip!!
PS: There is nothing particularly innovative about ADS -B, nothing technologically new or unique, and to tie it to a transponder, essentially WWII technology, is really dumb. My oppo. mates and I demonstrated our first ADS-B IN/OUT ACAS more than 10 years ago --- but not using a transponder.
Maybe, just maybe, the GFC will force a rethink, and we might, after all, get ADS-B/C/next iteration carried on a broadband datalink, which was the original ICAO intention about 15 years ago --- not to keep a very bandwidth restricted and ancient piece of technology, IFF, as in parrot (hence Squawk) on life support.
At least "Squawk Standby" sounds a little more aeronautical than "strangle the parrot".
As we now know, in the retrofit market, it is much cheaper to fit UAT/VDL-4, than retrofit 1090ES/ADS-B --- if a decision on UAT or VDL-4 could be forced, maybe sense might prevail ---- but I'm not holding my breath.
Tootle pip!!
Opinion on the subject of ADS-B funding was along the line of airlines forgoing SAVINGS over radar replacment costs.
The government's bit was forgoing collecting the DIVIDEND of those savings
The funding of the rollout was by the savings on fitment and maintenance of the radar heads.
At the level the JCP and preparatory work was done, it all sounded so simple, but that is far, far from airlines and the Government forgoing cold hard cash, by whatever name.
Where did it all spring from ----- the totally unrealistic vision thing --- a vision from a bunch of ATC techos, of a brave new world of complete control (hilariously called Freeflight --- despite being the complete antithesis of the original Freeflight concept) of just about everything flying ----- again, it's all in the public records, if you want to dig them out ----
---- at one stage "pilotless aeroplanes" even got a run, in this brave new world of ATC supercomputers, seamless datalinks and perfect knowledge, all operating without fault in hardware, firmware and software, making pilots redundant ---
----- those of us who have been there, all know just how perfect and faultless all this wonderful technology actually is --- don't we???don't we???don't we???don't we???
Just like the faultless hardware, firmware and software called A330/AF447, really.
Hardly a week goes by, in the popular media, without some expert telling us how modern technology has made pilots redundant ----- presumably leaving only a need for ATC "systems monitors" ---- but no controllers, of course, because "the computer" is going to do all that?? Right???
It can't be stated too often, there is nothing fundamentally wrong with the high level ADS-B proposal, as long as the airline pay the freight, but the low level program never really had legs --- no matter how fanatically devoted the cheer squad.
Tootle pip!!
PS: There is nothing particularly innovative about ADS -B, nothing technologically new or unique, and to tie it to a transponder, essentially WWII technology, is really dumb. My oppo. mates and I demonstrated our first ADS-B IN/OUT ACAS more than 10 years ago --- but not using a transponder.
Maybe, just maybe, the GFC will force a rethink, and we might, after all, get ADS-B/C/next iteration carried on a broadband datalink, which was the original ICAO intention about 15 years ago --- not to keep a very bandwidth restricted and ancient piece of technology, IFF, as in parrot (hence Squawk) on life support.
At least "Squawk Standby" sounds a little more aeronautical than "strangle the parrot".
As we now know, in the retrofit market, it is much cheaper to fit UAT/VDL-4, than retrofit 1090ES/ADS-B --- if a decision on UAT or VDL-4 could be forced, maybe sense might prevail ---- but I'm not holding my breath.
Tootle pip!!
Last edited by LeadSled; 9th Jun 2009 at 11:41.
Leadsled, thanks for the reply. Everything I could trawl off the net had senior managment of both DJ and QF backing the technology to the government during a white paper enquiry last year....and that was to THIS government.
That was posted months ago, chapter and verse.
I read between the lines on the ownership issue to see that the government were not interested in missing out on EXTRA dividend from any savings on radar to ADS-B replacment.....see GREED! or rather funds to spend on government handouts to the unwashed. So what really did scuttle the ADS-B rowboat?
Note earlier post...paid from real savings, not projected. Government departments are much loved on using extraordinary figures to boost a project or destroy it.
The rest of your post has been done to death. UAT lost out as did VDL-4 regardless of Marines opting for VDL-4 and GA in the US (Now there is THE ultimate "someone else paying for a system for GA to use for free" argument) for UAT roll-out. Rest of the planet is going for ES.
Dilemma, how do you interface with the hard paint requirment of primary radar terminal airspace with SSR?...has to be a modeS...other iterations require two transponders to be carried. ModeS and whatever flavour you fancy. Not very cost effective.
What chance do you think there is of ever meeting the ministerial requirment for regional approach radar services into those ten towered airports around the country with hard iron radar, Leadsled? ADS-B would make it a doddle.
So, what would you say if the CASA mandates for safety reasons that a new transponder must be carried within that airspace?
Sorry to say, The Parrot has no comparison to ADS-B. ADS-B doesn't require an interrogation to do it's thing. ADS-B supplies an update twice a second compared to once every eight to twelve seconds that it takes for that iron to spin around. ADS-B doesn't require a ground station of any flavour to do its thing aircraft to aircraft.(UAT loses out!)
Primary radar will always have a place around terminal and defence airspace. ADS-B and WAMLAT for close in and ADS-B for regionals and en-route.
Now before you go crazy with the C word....you better tell the plebs what you need to run ADS-C and not very likely to happen in a bugsmasher 172.
Datalinks cost money, the more bandwidth the more cost. If you want bandwidth, just piggyback on the back of NextG and see how much it costs.
Stay tuned! Howabout ES/UAT Rx/Tx in the one box. The yanks would have to go for that!
Please tell me how VDL-4 is a cheap fit. I am yet to see any version available as cheap as the European ModeS ES units.
That was posted months ago, chapter and verse.
I read between the lines on the ownership issue to see that the government were not interested in missing out on EXTRA dividend from any savings on radar to ADS-B replacment.....see GREED! or rather funds to spend on government handouts to the unwashed. So what really did scuttle the ADS-B rowboat?
Note earlier post...paid from real savings, not projected. Government departments are much loved on using extraordinary figures to boost a project or destroy it.
The rest of your post has been done to death. UAT lost out as did VDL-4 regardless of Marines opting for VDL-4 and GA in the US (Now there is THE ultimate "someone else paying for a system for GA to use for free" argument) for UAT roll-out. Rest of the planet is going for ES.
Dilemma, how do you interface with the hard paint requirment of primary radar terminal airspace with SSR?...has to be a modeS...other iterations require two transponders to be carried. ModeS and whatever flavour you fancy. Not very cost effective.
What chance do you think there is of ever meeting the ministerial requirment for regional approach radar services into those ten towered airports around the country with hard iron radar, Leadsled? ADS-B would make it a doddle.
So, what would you say if the CASA mandates for safety reasons that a new transponder must be carried within that airspace?
Sorry to say, The Parrot has no comparison to ADS-B. ADS-B doesn't require an interrogation to do it's thing. ADS-B supplies an update twice a second compared to once every eight to twelve seconds that it takes for that iron to spin around. ADS-B doesn't require a ground station of any flavour to do its thing aircraft to aircraft.(UAT loses out!)
Primary radar will always have a place around terminal and defence airspace. ADS-B and WAMLAT for close in and ADS-B for regionals and en-route.
Now before you go crazy with the C word....you better tell the plebs what you need to run ADS-C and not very likely to happen in a bugsmasher 172.
Datalinks cost money, the more bandwidth the more cost. If you want bandwidth, just piggyback on the back of NextG and see how much it costs.
As we now know, in the retrofit market, it is much cheaper to fit UAT/VDL-4, than retrofit 1090ES/ADS-B --- if a decision on UAT or VDL-4 could be forced, maybe sense might prevail ---- but I'm not holding my breath.
Please tell me how VDL-4 is a cheap fit. I am yet to see any version available as cheap as the European ModeS ES units.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think we have been through this before, but to speed things up I'll post the link below. Is this what you are talking about Owen Stanley?
Perhps an update about accurate price, futment, conformality to standard, availability, etc would help?
It would also help if you can catagorize the price into fitting within a "subsidy" or "cross industry funding" or a free handout by The Salvo's.
Products Enigma Avionics
Perhps an update about accurate price, futment, conformality to standard, availability, etc would help?
It would also help if you can catagorize the price into fitting within a "subsidy" or "cross industry funding" or a free handout by The Salvo's.
Products Enigma Avionics
Last edited by Frank Arouet; 10th Jun 2009 at 03:40.
OZBUSDRIVER,
Agreed, the 1090ES versus the rest had been done to death, but US based "little birds" tell me there is a possible "re-evaluation" in the wind, seeing that the ATA/NBAA have jacked up at the cost of retrofitting 1090ES/ADS-B, compared to the much cheaper ( for airlines, at least) of UAT or VDL-4 ---- and given most will have to fit VDL-2 for most North America/Europe operations, anyway.
For the ground stations, that is already the case, same manufacturer as the ground stations for AA. From ground station to ATC computers, the "system" is agnostic as to whether the airborne end was/is UAT or VDL-4.
If you buy the currently (or almost about to be) available GARMIN GTX 330 with ADS-B option, including antenna diversity, the GPS feed comes from a GDL 90, which currently has a TSO 145A/DO229C gps sensor, but it is Garmin's UAT box, so you are carrying around (in Australia) a dead UAT --- So you have virtually the hardware, at least, to have dual 1090ES/UAT.
All priced accordingly, plus, if you want ADS-B IN, add $$$$ for a compatible box, Garmin 430 up. For reason I do not know, Garmin don't seem to offer a feed from the C146A gps in a 43W/530W.
I haven't checked the latest prices, but last time I did, if you wanted ADS-B IN/OUT, including the 430, as above, you were looking at not a lot of change from AUD$40,000.
The UAT boxes can talk to each other, and we are stuck with having a full function A/C transponder (and in US) so TCAS aircraft can still see "most" aircraft.
Owen Stanley,
Grow up, and learn to read.
Please advise me what ENIGMA equipment I can buy now, at what price, and what are the certification standards, and what guarantees will I have of long term maintenance support.
Not some time in futureland.
All the relevant stuff is all going to be certified and available some time in the future ----- maybe ----- but given my direct experience in this area, maybe not.
Talk is cheap, but certification costs for any kind of avionics is anything but.
Microair have been developing a Mode S transponder for a long time, years so far, with lots of external $$ support, it is still not certified.
Tootle pip!!
Agreed, the 1090ES versus the rest had been done to death, but US based "little birds" tell me there is a possible "re-evaluation" in the wind, seeing that the ATA/NBAA have jacked up at the cost of retrofitting 1090ES/ADS-B, compared to the much cheaper ( for airlines, at least) of UAT or VDL-4 ---- and given most will have to fit VDL-2 for most North America/Europe operations, anyway.
Stay tuned! Howabout ES/UAT Rx/Tx in the one box
If you buy the currently (or almost about to be) available GARMIN GTX 330 with ADS-B option, including antenna diversity, the GPS feed comes from a GDL 90, which currently has a TSO 145A/DO229C gps sensor, but it is Garmin's UAT box, so you are carrying around (in Australia) a dead UAT --- So you have virtually the hardware, at least, to have dual 1090ES/UAT.
All priced accordingly, plus, if you want ADS-B IN, add $$$$ for a compatible box, Garmin 430 up. For reason I do not know, Garmin don't seem to offer a feed from the C146A gps in a 43W/530W.
I haven't checked the latest prices, but last time I did, if you wanted ADS-B IN/OUT, including the 430, as above, you were looking at not a lot of change from AUD$40,000.
The UAT boxes can talk to each other, and we are stuck with having a full function A/C transponder (and in US) so TCAS aircraft can still see "most" aircraft.
Owen Stanley,
Grow up, and learn to read.
Please advise me what ENIGMA equipment I can buy now, at what price, and what are the certification standards, and what guarantees will I have of long term maintenance support.
Not some time in futureland.
All the relevant stuff is all going to be certified and available some time in the future ----- maybe ----- but given my direct experience in this area, maybe not.
Talk is cheap, but certification costs for any kind of avionics is anything but.
Microair have been developing a Mode S transponder for a long time, years so far, with lots of external $$ support, it is still not certified.
Tootle pip!!
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Owen Stanley;
The link has been posted before but,
, and what LeadSled said in elaboration of my unanswered questions.
The link has been posted before but,
Perhps an update about accurate price, fitment, conformality to standard, availability, etc would help?
Folks,
Our mate Owen Stanley's last post, in my opinion, just about says it all, about Owen Stanley: Bluff, Bluster and Bile, but nary a fact.
All you will find on the Enigma (what a great name for this exercise) site are forecasts for a truly impressive range of equipment, all to the relevant standards ----- some time in the future. ADS-GunnaB, maybe??
Nothing concrete, no prices, nothing to cause heartburn around the ACCC.
For their US "technology partner", a single page web site, suggesting a rather more corporeal, rather than a corporate existence of serious substance.
Where uncertified/non-TSO equipment is acceptable, there is an impressive array of wonderful electronic equipment available, mouthwatering prices, as we all know, but!!
When it come to Transponders of any type, and ADS-B (and Australia is no exception) TSO'd is the requirement, "approved" installations and "approved" maintenance are the order of the day.
FLARM is easy, various passive "traffic SA" devices (in the technological sense) are easy, certification or making a $$$ to stay in business, not so easy.
In addition to the uncertainties in time and cost, of achieving certification, production certification etc., there are no "economies of scale" in avionics manufacturing, it's "cottage industry" scale, when the cost of marketing and after sales support in a market easily defined, are added, it is all to easy to see why many wonderful ideas fall by the wayside.
Best of luck to Enigma, and the various European based startups with all sorts of you beaut gear, but commercial history is not on their side.
Tootle pip!!
Our mate Owen Stanley's last post, in my opinion, just about says it all, about Owen Stanley: Bluff, Bluster and Bile, but nary a fact.
All you will find on the Enigma (what a great name for this exercise) site are forecasts for a truly impressive range of equipment, all to the relevant standards ----- some time in the future. ADS-GunnaB, maybe??
Nothing concrete, no prices, nothing to cause heartburn around the ACCC.
For their US "technology partner", a single page web site, suggesting a rather more corporeal, rather than a corporate existence of serious substance.
Where uncertified/non-TSO equipment is acceptable, there is an impressive array of wonderful electronic equipment available, mouthwatering prices, as we all know, but!!
When it come to Transponders of any type, and ADS-B (and Australia is no exception) TSO'd is the requirement, "approved" installations and "approved" maintenance are the order of the day.
FLARM is easy, various passive "traffic SA" devices (in the technological sense) are easy, certification or making a $$$ to stay in business, not so easy.
In addition to the uncertainties in time and cost, of achieving certification, production certification etc., there are no "economies of scale" in avionics manufacturing, it's "cottage industry" scale, when the cost of marketing and after sales support in a market easily defined, are added, it is all to easy to see why many wonderful ideas fall by the wayside.
Best of luck to Enigma, and the various European based startups with all sorts of you beaut gear, but commercial history is not on their side.
Tootle pip!!
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: australia
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Geez Owen you are doing well, you destroyed the other forum no posts there for a week dead as a dodo, now you are working on this one.
Got to agree with Leadsled, lots of bile in your ramblings, too much red maybe ??????
Got to agree with Leadsled, lots of bile in your ramblings, too much red maybe ??????
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Alice Springs
Posts: 1,744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This has been a very informative thread which has lots of information about the magic electronics that are available (or nearly available) and what we can expect them to do. And who is doing what.
But it is deteriorating into a slanging match by a few.
Please try to keep it sensible so that this forum can maintain it's value. It can be a valuable resource, or a hopeless worthless ego boosting competition.
It's up to you.
(no, I am not a moderator)
But it is deteriorating into a slanging match by a few.
Please try to keep it sensible so that this forum can maintain it's value. It can be a valuable resource, or a hopeless worthless ego boosting competition.
It's up to you.
(no, I am not a moderator)
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: australia
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bushy well said, seems the Air Traffic Controller has difficulty controlling his outbursts.
Back to the rational discussion.
BTW Lead Sled is right on the money, without starting a slanging match the nigger in the wood pile for ADSB in any useable form will be TSO approval, not something that comes easily.
Back to the rational discussion.
BTW Lead Sled is right on the money, without starting a slanging match the nigger in the wood pile for ADSB in any useable form will be TSO approval, not something that comes easily.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: australia
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For the less educated, the saying "Nigger in the wood pile" refers to a preburt log and was used politically to refer to people in the political arena who were generically being challenged as pre experienced in some matter under discussion.
It has absolutely nothing to do with race, colour or creed.
It has absolutely nothing to do with race, colour or creed.
Really ? Joker 10, really ??
That phrase may have that meaning to you, but most other people would intepret it very differently.
and what the heck is a 'breburt log' ?. is it an enabler to make my old 430 work with ADSB ?
That phrase may have that meaning to you, but most other people would intepret it very differently.
and what the heck is a 'breburt log' ?. is it an enabler to make my old 430 work with ADSB ?