james michael, I'm sure Airservices will be releived to know that.

Before we get too carried away with aircraft equipment we better make sure it will work.

In the proposed GPS/ADS-B dependant airways, what will be the back-up system for the ADS-B unit when the GPS system fails, for whatever reason ??? Has it been planned for ???

And remember Airservices do not own the GPS system and the 'guarantees' of continued access are vague at best.

In my little four seat aircraft I already have a traffic aviodance system (TAS) that works off other aircraft transponders. There is no requirement for an unreliable third party input via GPS to make my TAS work.

Many Australian aircraft already have transponders, and most of the light aircraft that mix it with the big jets have transponders (Those pesky Tiger moth drivers) Near all of the pax jets have transponder reading TAS. (There are some pax jets that dont have TAS which is covered in another thread) It probably wouldnt cost much to supply transponders to the very few aircraft that operate around pax-jet airports.

To qoute again from Scurvys reference re NO GPS signal -
..."a signal change could make an already weak economy worse. Collectively it could have a substantial effect on industries as diverse as aviation, agriculture and municipal transportation," says Frost & Sullivan's Stearns...

Chuckles

http://www.microair.com.au/admin/upl...cation01R1.pdf

Read the linked (again) document Chuck! :ok:

The GPS engine unit

The TXPDR

Re: installation and maintenance

STC <5700kg

:ok:

Now, for those that want the nice NAV ... plug a 430W or 530W into the T2000ACS-S .... voila .... 146a NAV, A,C,S,ADS-B TXPDR and CDTI 'IN' to a/the display

If a VFR owner wanted the good NAV and 'in' could it be packaged (similar to the above) to fit within 10K?? or does the subsidy need some tweeking?

The only way to really know is to start trying out some of the combinations of gear, preferably before the 'mandate' decision is taken in Canberra!?

Thoughts :ooh:

Edit to add:

It is logical to assume Microair will (at some point) certify a 146a unit similar to their 129a Navigator. Those two compact units driving a map (either PDA or installed), well isn't that the end state folks are looking for?

As far as audible 'traffic' alerts, anyone care to bet folding stuff that someone won't be flogging that too (bit like Binghi's TAS system :E) before too long!

Binghi

Re: GPS and AsA not owning it ... mate what does that matter ... or are you suggesting that GPS use for IFR in lieu of DME (which happens now, and has done for some time) should be canned because AsA does not own the GPS constellation??? :hmm:

Dick,

I'm not sure why you think that I need an FAA lesson on E Airspace...

Your statement that I vectored the QF A330 20NM off track is false. The A330 was given a traffic statement on the VFR aircraft and requested it's callsign. The VFR aircraft did not respond to VHF calls from myself and the A330 because it was on "the appropriate frequency", a frequency that was not know to anyone. The absence of monitoring and broadcasting on a control frequency was exactly as per your desire that VFR aircraft in Class E airspace do not monitor or make calls on VHF... something you have suggested on a number of occasions. The A330 then requested to divert "up to 20NM right of track". I approved the diversion in accordance with the procedures published and the training provided.

Dick, could you please publish from your lawyers a legal opinion as to what my reply to the A330 should have been... in your lawyers opinion... under Australian law... Was I correct to comply with the published procedures and training provided? Or, should I have acted contrary to the published procedures and training provided?

Then a statement as to whether you consider it acceptable that the arrivals sequence into Perth is disrupted as a result of an IFR aircraft diverting to avoid an unidentified VFR aircraft...

...and by the way Dick, I don't have a closed mind in respect of E Airspace. In fact, I have been quite happy to provide the service anywhere that it doesn't infringe on the descent profiles of IFR aircraft into Primary Airports where a FLOW control service is required, and is being provided. The effect of IFR/VFR separation on FLOW control in Class E Airspace is a subject that you consistently avoid. Perhaps now would be a good opportunity for you to state whether it is acceptable or not?

Flying Binghi

I am still uncertain of this 4 seater TCAS.

You tell me Can you please advise make and model. As already I have said on here, I am unaware of cheap systems that work off other aircraft transponders WITHOUT monopulse radar ping or equivalent. My understanding that aircraft transponders are passive and only respond to MSSR or equivalent pulse. I understand full airline TCAS works because it pings other aircrafts transpondrs.

I have read JCP. In event of GPS failure there is backup by ADF/VOR/DME navaids retained and primary radar in terminal areas of major airport.

If GPS turned off, I suspect mushroom cloud more to my worry than GPS.

Chicken Little, and still sounding like a broken record.

If the GPS system did ever fail or a proposal is made to turn it off, I dare say amongst others the American public would have something to say about it. All those street navigators, vehicle trackers, time check systems etc. etc all affected?

Do we not get pay TV (or terrestrial TV for that matter) in case a satellite fails or someone turns one off?

I ask everyone to look at my first post again. The Airservices ADSB project is clearly another Seasprite in the making -but with a far greater downside.

I have just read again the Transports Dept, "JCP" on this proposal. It's undoubtly one of the most dishonest missives from a Government Department of all times.

Look at the way it just spruiks the positives without mentioning the downsides.

There is no way I and others will allow the removal of the en-route SSR network until the ADSB system is totally operational and proven.This will then throw the "subsidy" figures on the scrap heap!

They won't take any notice of us? Don't you believe it -watch the media.

And despite misleading statements from others, the FAA is keeping all SSR's to provide a service above FL180 after their planned ADSB introduction date of 2020.

http://www.routertech.org/images/smiles/dummyspit.gif
http://www.clicksmilies.com/s1106/gr...smiley-010.gif
.
.
.
http://www.clicksmilies.com/s1106/gr...smiley-044.gif ah dear ... tis like a 'fire side' with Sir Murray Rivers :}

Mr Dick Smith

I have read you first post as you suggest to us all, and will await your media release.

This issue is very clouded by our many comments and distractions herein.

Could you pleas advise what is your hoped outcome if you intervene, and what the benefits and/or expenses may accrue due to intervention or non-intervention? Or is this matter to complex?

Dick, ADS-B has already been proven. The trial at Bundaberg (or thereabouts) led to the approval of 5nm lateral separation standard using ADS-B alone.

The only reason the standard is not being applied with other ground stations is a lack of comms infrastructure.

Now you're just being obstructionist.

Ummm Dick, the time for commenting on that JCP has long passed.(31OCT07) was the reply date)

The transition from the old system to TAAATS didn't happen overnight so why would ADS-B be any different. AirServices is going to have a tleast six years of data on how the system works BEFORE any ADS-B transition starts today plus 4 years time. The last SSR will be decommissioned six years after that time.

Dick I am sure you read pageiii of the intro of the JCP-
Is this your aim, Mr Smith?

Scurvy.D.Dog, I've made no comment on GPS us apart from re ADS-B.

I would ask what would happen if GPS was turned off today ? probably not too trumatic compared to if our entire airspace system was reliant on the GPS system as it would be under ADS-B :hmm: And yes, I use GPS - I have a garmin 530 and 430 in my aircraft.


james michael, The unit is an Avidyne TAS600. It is at the low end of the certified transponder reading Traffic Aviodance Systems (TAS). The four seats I mentioned has nothing to do with the TAS, just the size of the aircraft -i.e. small. To pre-emt the question - No, I am NOT sugesting all aircraft have one fitted. For a full discription of the unit and what it can, or can-not do, please visit www.avidyne.com
(please note, I have NO financial interest in any avionics sales or manufacturer)

CaptainMidnight, you've not made any reference to terrorist miss-us of the system...:hmm: whats your thoughts there ?

My thoughts are you should take off your tin foil hat:rolleyes:

Hmmm... one thing I've noted, is that nobody has come up with a serious rebuttal to my terrorist miss-us of GPS scenario :hmm:

Flying Binghi

I admire your unit as it is active not passive. You are obviously a cautious pilot and to be commended.

Without acting derogatory to your effort, this unit must be $10,000 plus and is range limited in comparison to ADS-B IN (but one accepts that the range of your unit is more than adequate for avoidance).

In analysis, if $15,000 enables a GPS and ADS-B IN, I feel is a good alternative for many owners.

I am intrigued at this terroruist misuse of GPS. Spoofing is not restricted to GPS. Turn off transponder, spoof MSSR radar - and primary radar when beyond range. If GPS is turn off, we are probably at war.

With ADS-B spread around, surely ADS-B is more protected than radar - one shoulder launch misile takes out radar aerial more easily than takes out ADS-B multiple stations. Can you be specific of your concerns?

Terrorists can make use of the mobile phone network to detonate IED’s – do we turn it off?

They make use of the satphone network & internet - do we turn it off?

In Cold War times, the Ruskies could (and no doubt did on Oz overflights) make use of the VOR NDB & Omega networks – did we turn them off?

Criminals use cars to commit crimes – do we ban cars?

No. The greater good outweighs those who will attempt to misuse them, and measures are taken to mitigate or prevent the misuse.

In the case of aviation, measures are taken to address GPS & ADS-B outage & degradation, as they are when other navaids are off. Spoofing is addressed in the Airservices system. ‘nuf said on that.

Sleep safely in your bed.

Gary, Was the Bundaberg trial certified by CASA? Need I say any more! They don't appear to have the skills to monitor a small airline let alone the skills and expertise to certify the worlds first stand alone ADSB system.

I understand even the airborne equipment was never fully certified as it consisted of boxes from different companies strung together with a few wires. And of course, it didn't include the ADSB "in" part.

The Bundaberg trial was as proven as the Super Seasprites were in 2001. That is to say a demonstation of a few experimental units is totally different to a fully certified safe operational system.

James, the media release will not be comming from me.

Commonsense alone is all that is necessary to know that the system as proposed will not go ahead- I bet the two systems- existing SSR and the completed ADSB system- will co-exist for at least 5 years before a properly informed Minister would allow even one SSR to be de-commissioned.

This means that a major SSR refurbishment or replacement decision will need to be made and this has the implication of tens of millions of dollars of unplanned Airservices expenditure.

This of course means the $100 mil. will not be available for the subsidy for GA.-which then means the whole proposal will need to be looked at again.

Hopefully they will involve competent people next time.

You've rebutted it yourself. You are saying that shutting off GPS will cause havok. That's precisely the argument that others are using to say that it won't be shut off...(even in the event of terrorist use) because it would cause havok, and not only to aviation.

You have raised a valid point, but the risk is low and the safety consequences to aircraft are not major.

Using Dick's affordable safety argument, it appears that the cost benefit of shutting off secondary radar and using ADSB is compelling. It's already being used in areas that previously had no radar like coverage.

To answer your question, if the GPS signal is interupted,(which is unlikely), then we will revert to procedural separation where ADSB is being used to separate. Aircraft will be delayed but safety will not be compromised. There is certainly no doomsday argument to be made here.

I am not in favour or against replacing secondary radar with ADSB, but I don't find your argument a compelling reason to stop ADSB introduction.

All valid pionts you raise CaptainMidnight. I agree with you on the banning of cars, phones etc, will not stop an 'in-house' event. Unforetunatly, the scenarios you raise are all 'in house', or within Australia.

My scenario 'starts' outside Oz, outside of the control of our 'people' who work to stop terrorist threats.

Re Spoofing, I will leave that to Dick Smith.

james michael, After near 25 years of successfully flying without a TAS, I just got the unit so I could speak with at least some personal experience of these systems.

Flying Binghi, re spoofing,if you run the two systems in parallel(ie SSR and ADSB) for 5 or preferably 10 years you would be able to see what the problems are.

Yes, it will cost a few dollars but safety will not be compromised.

Pera, think WW2 London... Think buzz bombs (Hitlers UAV) ... Think about the then public concerns with these 'dumb' bombs.......................

...think about the publics concerns with a Buzz bomb with a delivery accuracy of 30 metres...................................................... .... :(


These modern 'buzz bombs' i.e. UAVs could be manufactured for a couple of hundred dollars. Thats one scenario any way...

Quokka, it's not your fault that you were not trained in the proper procedures for class E or that the proper procedures were never introduced in Australia.

This situation existed because your bosses at Airservices never bothered to ask the FAA how class E worked.

And now 6+ years since class E was introduced in Australia they are still ignorant.

Qantas fly in class E everyday in other parts of the world and never ask ATC the callsign of a VFR aircraft they have been given traffic on.

Why is this so? I suggest you talk to Qantas or any FAA ATC as I am sure you will not accept my explanation.

Flying Binghi,
What is your reasoning behind installing a TAS unit?
Surely everyone is using See and Avoid.

Errrr..... max1, didnt you read my previous post ? here it is again -
After near 25 years of successfully flying without a TAS, I just got the unit so I could speak with at least some personal experience of these systems.

ok, now we're in never never land

Yes Pera, I know Australia is much like the U.S...

.....and who would off thought TWO jets would of been flown into the world trade centre towers :hmm: ... fairy tale stuff

.........and Bushs reaction (and little johny and blair) ...invade Iraq :eek:

... mind altering stuff eh :ooh:



............time for another beer.

OZBUSDRIVER,Sorry for the delay in replying to your post.

My aim is simple- to prevent Australia from rushing ahead with an ADSB proposal which fails and wastes millions of dollars.

Why do I believe it could fail? Because it's been driven by people who appear to have a similar culture to those who lost us over one billion dollars on the seasprite order.

This culture is one of never asking advice, never copying the success of others and never allowing a broad range of capable experienced experts to be involved.

It's also a culture of believing it's own "spin" ie that everything is positive and beneficial about the project and there is no risk or downside.

It's a culture of never answering a critic- even when the criticisms are valid.

It's a culture of rushing ahead to be "first" rather than being conservative and following a proven system where others have already lost a fortune in finalising and perfecting the design!

I am not quite sure what you mean by that question.

Airservices ran the trial and the data acquired enabled CASA to approve the 5nm lateral separation standard. See CASR Part 172 MOS 10.5.5.2

As to certified ADS-B Out equiement. The current list of approved equipment for use in Australia is here. CAR 207 and CAO 20.18 Section 9B and Appendix XI give the regulatory head of power for this approval.

AC 21-45 contains the guidance needed to gain airwothiness approval the equipment.

ICAO Anex 10 and the RTCA DO - 260 document series also define the performance standards required for 1090ES ADS-B.

I don't think the properly constructed and "certified" ADS-B out equipment is as far fetched as you wish to portray it. In fact it is a reality, here and now.

The safety of traffic separation using only ADS-B information has been demonstrated and approved for operational use. Why does the En-route SSR network need to be maintained when this is so?

As to the contingency arrangments in the event of a loss of GNSS and therfore ADS-B signal, well what do we do now when there is a SSR failure? We revert to procedural. No big deal. Sure it will be inconvenient if you're in the air/at the console at the time but it can be done.

You are correct in that no ADS-B IN units have been "certified" however at this stage there are no procedures fully developed or approved that require ADS-B IN avionics. This is still no reason to delay decommissioning the En-route SSR facilities

The value of ADS-B IN will be in providing situational awareness to RPT/PTO crews when operating in Class E/F/G airspace. However, that value will only be realised when there is fleetwide (or close to it) equippage in much the same way that TCAS is only really useful when there is widespread/universal transponder equippage and use.

did they turn off GPS when this happenned!

I'm not discounting terrorist threats, but you haven't made an a clear case for your point of view. You are raising an extreme possibility but you are not applying risk assessment to your point of view.

Gary,what are the costs?

I wanted to get ADSB "out" certified equipment for my 2006 Cessna CJ3 and the quote from Collins was over $100,000.

Now this is for a modern aircraft and is I fear a little more than the $15,000 subsidy for smaller IFR aircraft.

If we in Australia are first in with mandated ADSB we will be ripped off by the rest of the world for sure.

There is no hurry- there is no immediate safety issue to be addressed by rushing into ADSB. It's all being driven by boffins wanting to be first and Airservices wanting to maximise profits.

Do you know of any aircraft owner who has actually installed a certified ADSB unit in an Australian aircraft and what the cost was?

Mr Dick Smith

Is not the Garmin GTX 330ES that was mentioned earlier compliant?

If so, it is nowhere near this $100,000 you quote. One suspects $5000?

You suggest there may be a little extra cost in running dual systems - I question who will pay that cost - does not Airservices raise its operating capital from fees to users?

It is of interest that this 1090ES is considered by you to be somehow at risk of reliability or expense yet is apparently the accepted standard at airline altitudes? Is it not now appearing on ATC screens around the world already?

It seems to me that this ADS-B is a technological development that provides radar equvalence at cheaper cost due to technology. Is not radar over 60 years old? Will we still be keeping our old mobile telefone each time we get a new one (at our cost) to ensure the new one works OK? How much 60 year old technology did you keep in your electronics shops?

I remain very puzzled about this opposition to this technology. On this debate there is much emotion and diversion.

James, the Garmin unit does not include a GPS.

Airservices imply that you just run a wire to a certified GPS and everything is approved.

This is not so.

If ADSB is so simple and proven and risk free why are Airservices spending millions of dollars of our industries money on a totally different system in Tasmania?

It's called "Multilateration" and works with standard transponders and keeps working if the GPS system has a fault.

Try and get that question answered!

More importantly' Airservices are having problems with the high level ADSB system with delays and cost overuns.

They can't even get the data transfer between the ADSB transceivers going without problems and I understand in mid-stream they have been forced to change contractors.

A similar situation occurred with the Seasprite contract before the Government stepped in and cancelled the project.

Their ADSB plan is totally based on the financial saving made by the early removal of the existing SSR units -and thats where the risk is. By not entering a contract now to refurbish or replace the radars(which is their stated plan) they have all their eggs in one basket. If the ADSB contract does not go as planned we are completely stuffed in Australia.

Remember when Australia led the world with the Microwave Landing System (MLS)?

Tens of millions of dollars were spent by the industry(mainly AWA) and the Government.

It was claimed that our country was leading the world and a fortune was going to be made.

Unfortunately not so.

The problem was that enough critical questions were not asked at the time. Those involved got carried away with their own B-S. I am afraid and all the money was lost

I totally support the concept of ADSB however I see substantial risk in moving too quickly without honestly looking at all of the complex issues in a totally open way.

And James, it's not just me that Airservices have kept out of the loop for the last 5 years- it appears to be anyone who may have a different view.

No Pera, they invaded Iraq.

Pera, I'm not going to make the scenario any clearer then I have. Perhaps you want me to write up a 'How To' manual ?

I guess you dont want a $500 bombed up UAV launched from a boat to interfere with Airservices implementing ADS-B. ...Talking it away does not make it go away.

Mr Dick Smith

My confusion is still with me.

I find re garmin that they say, as one example:
I put emphasis in red - this shows wire can be connect, and with market push perhaps bulk price be below $5000 USA?

I comprehend concern about unique Australian systems. But is not your quote about sole Australian system AWA MLS, but of ADS-B we speak of system already in use in many ICAO country and international aircraft?

Is there obstacle to Airservices moving to ADS-B soon without dismantle radar so radar is backup?

I see in my latest Flight mag that the USA is pushing ahead with ADS-B: flight testing of three stations in the Miami region has commenced, with a fully operational service in southern Florida by August. By late 2010, they'll have 40 stations running across the country, and 793 (!) ground stations by 2013.

Your scenario is quite clear, but your argument is a little murky. :ugh:

So Flying Binghi, in that case, is having the unit so you can speak with some personal experience of TAS units changing your perceptions at all.
Did it really cost $10K?

You've got to be kidding? Have you even looked at the traffic being dealt with outside of radar coverage across WA, SA and probably QLD?

Speaking from personal experience, the mining boom is making the WA mining traffic busier and busier. I've worked shifts over summer where it has taken 2 experienced controllers to run ONE sector....without weather diversions! How long do we go on increasing traffic numbers without surveillance being implemented? We work like crazy trying to get everyone a clearance and when it doesn't work they get stuck OCTA. From experience, the average Ba146 pilot does NOT like being stuck below F180 for long...let alone the F100/B717's.

Close calls? About 1 air-prox outside of controlled airspace every 6 months, that we know of.

Sure WAARP and 7nm cross track tolerances will help, but only so much.

Personally i don't give a crap if it's ADS-B or SSR, but i don't see anyone volunteering to pay for the 3+ SSR's it would take to cover the peak areas of WA alone.

You may see the "boffins" pushing this for "profits", i see a vast amount of our airspace lacking surveillance, and a long term alternative to radar being pissed on by the "chicken littlers" and conspiracy theorists!