Merged: ADSB
Do we really think that ADS-B would be mandated throughout the GA fleet ... without a subsidy?
Transponders are one thing ... but even I don't think ASA/CASA would go as far as mandating ADS-B. In the first place, how could they justify "giving away" $92M of the Industry's money to the Government ... and then turning around and charging each GA aircraft $10,000 for a black box. Can't see it.
If I've read them wrong, I'll be the first to hop in bed with Bob & Binghi !
Transponders are one thing ... but even I don't think ASA/CASA would go as far as mandating ADS-B. In the first place, how could they justify "giving away" $92M of the Industry's money to the Government ... and then turning around and charging each GA aircraft $10,000 for a black box. Can't see it.
If I've read them wrong, I'll be the first to hop in bed with Bob & Binghi !
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: in the bush
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is rumour that there is $1.4 billion Aussie dollars missing through some Delaware Corporation. I understand there are serious investigations under way at this time that may or may not impact upon any give away's for GA. As the Fereral Gov't is the only shareholder (other than us taxpayers), that stands to loose in this alleged loss, can anyone honestly see cash being chucked about until this mess clears up?
Now if those pushing for ADSB to be mandated achieve their aim before any subsidy materialises, why would anybody, especially Politicians who are prone to lie and reneig on deals, honour any verbal arrangements.
This poster will be financially handicapped, a lot who may benefit by installation in aircraft owned by their Boss won't be. What is really irksome is that some private GA pilots pushing this barrow the loudest are not aircraft owners. They can afford to be gullible.
Now if those pushing for ADSB to be mandated achieve their aim before any subsidy materialises, why would anybody, especially Politicians who are prone to lie and reneig on deals, honour any verbal arrangements.
This poster will be financially handicapped, a lot who may benefit by installation in aircraft owned by their Boss won't be. What is really irksome is that some private GA pilots pushing this barrow the loudest are not aircraft owners. They can afford to be gullible.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Perth
Posts: 841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FB, ASA.
Why then poo poo ADSB purely on the basis of not receiving a subsidy ?, that said I hope the subsidy does materialise.
Whether ADSB is a good system for Australian Aviation has little to do the perceived cost of installation, TSO GPS installation cost more than ADSB, many have embraced TSO GPS as the benefits outweigh the expense.
Is ADSB irrespective of any or no subsidy a good choice for Australia ?, I believe so, since obtaining my CPL pretty much all my flying has been in rural/designated remote area's, Mostly VHF coverage, occasionaly with good HF coverage and very very little RADAR, ADSB will make working in the bush safer.
I see no benefit from ground based stations being TSO'd, let alone the TSO'ing of aircraft ADSB equipment, in doing so considerably reducing the cost ?, thoughts ?.
Why then poo poo ADSB purely on the basis of not receiving a subsidy ?, that said I hope the subsidy does materialise.
Whether ADSB is a good system for Australian Aviation has little to do the perceived cost of installation, TSO GPS installation cost more than ADSB, many have embraced TSO GPS as the benefits outweigh the expense.
Is ADSB irrespective of any or no subsidy a good choice for Australia ?, I believe so, since obtaining my CPL pretty much all my flying has been in rural/designated remote area's, Mostly VHF coverage, occasionaly with good HF coverage and very very little RADAR, ADSB will make working in the bush safer.
I see no benefit from ground based stations being TSO'd, let alone the TSO'ing of aircraft ADSB equipment, in doing so considerably reducing the cost ?, thoughts ?.
Last edited by Lefthanded_Rock_Thrower; 9th Nov 2008 at 22:51.
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: in the bush
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ADSB will make working in the bush safer
Statistically there is no measurable risk of mid air collision in class G airspace. During NAS the risk assessment for class E airspace was (from memory), one in ten to the minus five. There is one death per year attributed to mid air collision of recent time in the whole of Australia. There is a requirement for the use of radio in the CTAF where applicable which gives alerted see and avoid. As with the gliders, the highest risk being in the near vicinity of aerodromes.
What risk exists en route Boulia to Alice Springs?
Airservices are the primary beneficiaries of this technology and do have the option to charge for an enroute service that is not needed. Avdata would also benefit.
The new generation ELT's cancell the SAR arguement even if Airservices were monitoring every VFR flight which they don't.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Perth
Posts: 841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How?
Statistically there is no measurable risk of mid air collision in class G airspace
The new generation ELT's cancel the SAR arguement even if Airservices were monitoring every VFR flight which they don't.
Will help with flow patterns into CTA and help lost travellers.
Last edited by Lefthanded_Rock_Thrower; 9th Nov 2008 at 23:28. Reason: more goodera spelling
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Oz
Age: 77
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The JCP money has nothing to do with ASA investments, it is cross industry funding by the airlines to gain the benefits of ADS-B. A much quicker potential than the USA where the reason Foundation has already highlighted that a "subsidy" would be the answer to NGATS.
ADS-B IN works anywhere and accidents happen anywhere. Particularly in non-radar environments.
ADS-B IN works anywhere and accidents happen anywhere. Particularly in non-radar environments.
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
Statistically there is no measurable risk of mid air collision in class G airspace. During NAS the risk assessment for class E airspace was (from memory), one in ten to the minus five. There is one death per year attributed to mid air collision of recent time in the whole of Australia.
There is a requirement for the use of radio in the CTAF where applicable which gives alerted see and avoid. As with the gliders, the highest risk being in the near vicinity of aerodromes.
... alerted see and avoid ONLY if the traffic is known, and is reporting accurately! 
.
And before you try it on, OCTA collisions are not comparable with high density GAAP, remembering that GAAP is (when VMC), a high volume traffic alerting and sequencing service ONLY, and only to airbourne traffic. The only separation provided in GAAP (in VMC) is runway separation!!!. In IMC, separation of arriving and departing traffic is timed one in one out (due the small CTR dimensions)!
.
Imagine GAAP without ATC?
...around in circles again - has'nt all this been covered.
Scurvy.D.Dog, so there will be a audio warning in this ADS-B unit eh. My experience with TAS in a GAAP is to mute it and ignore the screen - it is a dangerous distracter - eyes out it is.
When all those ADS-B 'IN' assisted loss of control deaths happen, that is probably how GAAP VFR will become - one in/out at a time.
------------------------------------------------------------
One thing I note - I've asked around in the real world, (outside of prunn) and have yet to hear any aircraft owner say they want ADS-B. I will note that a couple of the more wealthy owners have said they dont care if it happens or not. Mainly I get a lot of negative views/scenarios on the subject - some which I've posted.
It seems to me that there could very well be a self interested profit motive to the posters here promoting ADS-B.
Scurvy.D.Dog, so there will be a audio warning in this ADS-B unit eh. My experience with TAS in a GAAP is to mute it and ignore the screen - it is a dangerous distracter - eyes out it is.
In IMC, separation of arriving and departing traffic is timed one in one out
------------------------------------------------------------
One thing I note - I've asked around in the real world, (outside of prunn) and have yet to hear any aircraft owner say they want ADS-B. I will note that a couple of the more wealthy owners have said they dont care if it happens or not. Mainly I get a lot of negative views/scenarios on the subject - some which I've posted.
It seems to me that there could very well be a self interested profit motive to the posters here promoting ADS-B.
Lefthanded_Rock_Thrower
TCAS ? .....its been around for some time now.
If an aircraft owner truely believed that there was a risk - they would already have TCAS, TAS, or simular.
have you flown to the North and East of Perth when the push is on ?, lots of reasonably fast turboprops and jets in the one piece of airspace.
If an aircraft owner truely believed that there was a risk - they would already have TCAS, TAS, or simular.
ADS-B IN works anywhere and accidents happen anywhere. Particularly in non-radar environments.
If the gov-mint has 15K to spare - perhaps the fitment of an autopilot to those without will save more lives then yet another transponder.....remember, we already have TCAS, TAS, etc and transponders.
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: in the bush
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lefthanded Rock Thrower.
Quantify this as an average risk and then tell me are all these aircraft at the same altitude at the same time?
james michael.
Anything is possible, even in a radar environment. My question is what’s the probability?
Scurvy.D.Dog. The figures came from ATSB. Take your fits of denial up with them. They are an average.
-yes as with a transponder. If it works you are required to use it and, yes I can imagine Archerfield as a CTAF instead of a GAAP.
This debate is based on one side thinking ADSB is a necessary thing and the other the opposite. The thing is, for the concept to work, everyone has to be equipped and recalcitrant’s like me must be forced into compliance. Nobody forced me into a transponder, simply said if you want to fly in certain airspace you have to have one. Common sense shows that TCAS won't work without one, so owners saw the benefit and had them fitted.
If ADSB was such a good thing everyone would embrace it and there would be no need for a mandate. It is yet to prove any benefit to me. I am getting too old to be told what to do and how much to spend especially just to satisfy a mob of bureaucrats and vested interests. And especially when it is more PROBABLE than NOT that NO SUBSIDY will evolve. The proposed GA subsidy only involved TSO'd ADSB OUT anyway.
I am yet to be told what is plan B if the subsidy doesn't materialise. Nobody has shown me a document that shows any irrevocable guarantee. All I have seen and heard is verbal assurances that won't hold water if things go pear shaped.
Bollocks, have you flown to the North and East of Perth when the push is on ?, lots of reasonably fast turboprops and jets in the one piece of airspace.
james michael.
accidents happen anywhere. Particularly in non-radar environments.
Scurvy.D.Dog. The figures came from ATSB. Take your fits of denial up with them. They are an average.
A requirement? .. really?
This debate is based on one side thinking ADSB is a necessary thing and the other the opposite. The thing is, for the concept to work, everyone has to be equipped and recalcitrant’s like me must be forced into compliance. Nobody forced me into a transponder, simply said if you want to fly in certain airspace you have to have one. Common sense shows that TCAS won't work without one, so owners saw the benefit and had them fitted.
If ADSB was such a good thing everyone would embrace it and there would be no need for a mandate. It is yet to prove any benefit to me. I am getting too old to be told what to do and how much to spend especially just to satisfy a mob of bureaucrats and vested interests. And especially when it is more PROBABLE than NOT that NO SUBSIDY will evolve. The proposed GA subsidy only involved TSO'd ADSB OUT anyway.
I am yet to be told what is plan B if the subsidy doesn't materialise. Nobody has shown me a document that shows any irrevocable guarantee. All I have seen and heard is verbal assurances that won't hold water if things go pear shaped.
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
Bing
.
Yes it has all been covered in depth, however some folks are interested in re hashing one view of the equation, a view full of half truths and no technical or financial reality attached .. can’t have that go unanswered now can we!
.
GAAP as I said is different, however, perhaps even in that environ there is a role for aural alerting via ADS-B ‘IN’ .. now if you were the type to get off your arse and do some asking around you would know what the actual state of play is. Lets say for arguments sake, the algorithms being used scale target range with speed and calculate targets that will come within close (unsafe) proximity and ‘announce’ those only. The aural alerts (one imagines) would be ‘scheduled’ with VHF etc so that one does not squash the other … aside from that extremely valuable alerting, eyes out are enhanced by aural as pilots will not need to look at the screen, in fact most aircraft including training aircraft will likely not have a screen to look at!
.
As for your feedback from others …. I’ll raise you a broad spectrum of private owners through to and including charter and RPT! .. mind you, the difference between them I suppose is the folks I have spoken to know the technology and where it is at now, you more likely have sold the ADS-B system as you have in here .. that is of course if you have spoken to any owners at all about ADS-B! It will fit in a Victa you know!
.
ADS-B IN loss of control …. Fair dinkum … you really are clutching at straws!
.
Self interested profit motive? Really how so? .. sounds like horse feathers in the absence of any realistic objection! Now, if I were as petty and rude as you and the other two, I might be tempted to say something like:-
.
Have any share’s in RADAR or TAS companies Bing? .. or is this more about Part103 and the RADAR C directive? …. I suppose you vote National as well!!!
.
.... but I'm not, so I won't
.. 
... link thanks, then we will put the context to the average .. that might clarify how some would (in ingnorance) misuse it in a piss poor attempt to justify inaction!
.. IF IT WORKS ... pffffff 
.
Keep it up boys!
.
Yes it has all been covered in depth, however some folks are interested in re hashing one view of the equation, a view full of half truths and no technical or financial reality attached .. can’t have that go unanswered now can we!
.
GAAP as I said is different, however, perhaps even in that environ there is a role for aural alerting via ADS-B ‘IN’ .. now if you were the type to get off your arse and do some asking around you would know what the actual state of play is. Lets say for arguments sake, the algorithms being used scale target range with speed and calculate targets that will come within close (unsafe) proximity and ‘announce’ those only. The aural alerts (one imagines) would be ‘scheduled’ with VHF etc so that one does not squash the other … aside from that extremely valuable alerting, eyes out are enhanced by aural as pilots will not need to look at the screen, in fact most aircraft including training aircraft will likely not have a screen to look at!
.
As for your feedback from others …. I’ll raise you a broad spectrum of private owners through to and including charter and RPT! .. mind you, the difference between them I suppose is the folks I have spoken to know the technology and where it is at now, you more likely have sold the ADS-B system as you have in here .. that is of course if you have spoken to any owners at all about ADS-B! It will fit in a Victa you know!
.
ADS-B IN loss of control …. Fair dinkum … you really are clutching at straws!
.
Self interested profit motive? Really how so? .. sounds like horse feathers in the absence of any realistic objection! Now, if I were as petty and rude as you and the other two, I might be tempted to say something like:-
.
Have any share’s in RADAR or TAS companies Bing? .. or is this more about Part103 and the RADAR C directive? …. I suppose you vote National as well!!!
.
.... but I'm not, so I won't
Scurvy.D.Dog. The figures came from ATSB. Take your fits of denial up with them. They are an average.
... link thanks, then we will put the context to the average .. that might clarify how some would (in ingnorance) misuse it in a piss poor attempt to justify inaction!
If it works you are required to use it
.. IF IT WORKS ... pffffff .
Keep it up boys!
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Darwin, Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
3 Posts
Currently only a requirement to use radio in CTAF(R) always and in CTAF if using clear of cloud VMC below A030/1000AGL - the other requirements to use in CTAFs if fitted was dropped many years ago. There is currently a proposal to reintroduce this requirement (great idea).
Guest
Posts: n/a
One thing I note - I've asked around in the real world, (outside of prunn) and have yet to hear any aircraft owner say they want ADS-B. I will note that a couple of the more wealthy owners have said they dont care if it happens or not. Mainly I get a lot of negative views/scenarios on the subject - some which I've posted.
I'm also putting my money where my mouth is (in the process supporting a small and cleverly run Aussie business) and will be preparing my aircraft for the installation of the ADSB-IN/OUT unit that has been discussed here and elsewhere, during the upcoming avionics upgrade of my aircraft.
I think it is pretty much an undisputed fact that ADS-B represents a quantum leap for technology in GA, and quite frankly, I haven't seen a single argument put forward here or otherwise, that ADS-B will not increase situational awareness and safety.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Perth
Posts: 841
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FB,
Yes that is true.
A couple of weeks ago I flew from Newman to Jandakot, identified at 300 odd feet, previously would not see RADAR till some time after Meekatharra.
Not all aircraft have or are required to have TCAS/TAS.
If all aircraft had that level of ADSB coverage, most of these near misses in Class G that Jeta108 believe to be unquatifiable, would not occur.
If every aircraft had TCAS, this would considerably reduce the chances of aircraft collisions in all airspace.
OR
If every aircraft had ADSB, this would considerably reduce the chances of aircraft collisions in a very great deal of Australian Airspace, provide pseudo RADAR coverage pretty much Australia wide (at 10,000ft), help from FW is just a button press away.
There is no silver bullet to combating the size of Australia.
TCAS plus ADSB in/out is the best option = lots of money.
If the choice is TCAS or ADSB, IMHO ADSB offers more benefits.
TCAS ? .....its been around for some time now.
A couple of weeks ago I flew from Newman to Jandakot, identified at 300 odd feet, previously would not see RADAR till some time after Meekatharra.
Not all aircraft have or are required to have TCAS/TAS.
If all aircraft had that level of ADSB coverage, most of these near misses in Class G that Jeta108 believe to be unquatifiable, would not occur.
If every aircraft had TCAS, this would considerably reduce the chances of aircraft collisions in all airspace.
OR
If every aircraft had ADSB, this would considerably reduce the chances of aircraft collisions in a very great deal of Australian Airspace, provide pseudo RADAR coverage pretty much Australia wide (at 10,000ft), help from FW is just a button press away.
There is no silver bullet to combating the size of Australia.
TCAS plus ADSB in/out is the best option = lots of money.
If the choice is TCAS or ADSB, IMHO ADSB offers more benefits.
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: in the bush
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PlankBlender.
- How will this guarantee you improved safety if only 50% of the fleet is fitted with ADSB OUT. That other 50%, including me, who don't see a benefit, suffer because people like you support Big brother forcing us to install the equipment. Don't worry about my costs Digger, just so long as you feel warm and fuzzy about it.
Try telling our left leaning Government Minister for things flying, and the great unwashed in the mortgage belt, that you own an aeroplane and are not rich. There are people doing it tough for hospital treatment, rural assistance and manufacturing that can't get a Gov't handout, what makes you think you deserve a lifestyle grant?
I'm an aircraft owner, I'm not rich by any stretch of the imagination, and I absolutely want ADS-B IN and OUT in my aircraft ASAP.
Try telling our left leaning Government Minister for things flying, and the great unwashed in the mortgage belt, that you own an aeroplane and are not rich. There are people doing it tough for hospital treatment, rural assistance and manufacturing that can't get a Gov't handout, what makes you think you deserve a lifestyle grant?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Jet, the proposal would include much more than 50% of the flying fleet, if I understand the proposal document correctly, with VFR aircraft being added over time. Where do you get your figure from?
My decision to own an aeroplane is based mainly on a sound business case for reducing cost of professional pilot training, not on having an expensive and prestigious toy at my disposal.
Where wealth entered this discussion, I am really not sure. If you want to go down that way, you might want to consider that aircraft owners and operators are contributing extra taxes to the government coffers to the tune of dozens of millions of dollars every year in AsA profits
The subsidy makes sense in that it's a win-win for AsA and aircraft operators, the former getting rid of outdated, expensive to maintain radar technology, and the latter gaining a vast improvement in safety. What costs are you talking about, anyway? The proposed subsidy and the avionics being developed in Australia at the moment would ensure a cost neutral (and largely maintenance free) install for owners.
My decision to own an aeroplane is based mainly on a sound business case for reducing cost of professional pilot training, not on having an expensive and prestigious toy at my disposal.
Where wealth entered this discussion, I am really not sure. If you want to go down that way, you might want to consider that aircraft owners and operators are contributing extra taxes to the government coffers to the tune of dozens of millions of dollars every year in AsA profits
The subsidy makes sense in that it's a win-win for AsA and aircraft operators, the former getting rid of outdated, expensive to maintain radar technology, and the latter gaining a vast improvement in safety. What costs are you talking about, anyway? The proposed subsidy and the avionics being developed in Australia at the moment would ensure a cost neutral (and largely maintenance free) install for owners.
ADS-B IN loss of control
(GAAP) In IMC, separation of arriving and departing traffic is timed one in one out (due the small CTR dimensions)
I will repeat that my experience of 'Traffic' systems in a GAAP or simular well used VFR circuit, is they are a dangerous distractor.
Perhaps you care to tell us of your inflight experiences of these 'traffic' systems Scurvy.D.Dog.........
........oh, there is that little problem of terrorist miss-use of GPS - at least my eyes and TAS still works when the terrorist targeting system (GPS) gets turned off
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: in the bush
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Scurvy.D.Dog.
http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/2004/pdf/Review_of_midair_col.pdf
3.1 Number of collisions
The review identified 37 midair collisions involving general aviation aircraft in
Australia during the 1961-2003 period.5 Appendix A provides basic details on the 37
midair collisions.
37 collisions / 46 fatalities / 42 year period.
PlankBlender. I know what the proposal is and is based on 100% of the fleet being equipped. Thus to guarantee this happens you will have to mandate it because people like me and many others won't voluntarily embrace it.
You were the one who said you were not rich by any stretch of the imagination. I agree with your purpose for ownership, but simply say we, as in all aircraft owners are treated like 'silvertails' are seen to be rich. I'm certainly not in the same socio-economic bracket as some of the contributors here are.
You keep referring to the subsidy as if it is a 'done deal'. I maintain it is not and there is a better than average chance, (PROBABILITY), that it will amount to nothing.
"IF" ADSB is mandated and "IF" the subsidy amounts to zero, there will be costs that you and I will have to carry. Good luck to all if it goes the other way, It's just that I have been made promises by Governments and Bureaucrats that habitually have a habit of amounting to piss and wind.
Have you considered any plan B?
Have you seen anything written in blood by anyone that guarantees an irrevokable subsidy?
http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/2004/pdf/Review_of_midair_col.pdf
3.1 Number of collisions
The review identified 37 midair collisions involving general aviation aircraft in
Australia during the 1961-2003 period.5 Appendix A provides basic details on the 37
midair collisions.
37 collisions / 46 fatalities / 42 year period.
PlankBlender. I know what the proposal is and is based on 100% of the fleet being equipped. Thus to guarantee this happens you will have to mandate it because people like me and many others won't voluntarily embrace it.
You were the one who said you were not rich by any stretch of the imagination. I agree with your purpose for ownership, but simply say we, as in all aircraft owners are treated like 'silvertails' are seen to be rich. I'm certainly not in the same socio-economic bracket as some of the contributors here are.
You keep referring to the subsidy as if it is a 'done deal'. I maintain it is not and there is a better than average chance, (PROBABILITY), that it will amount to nothing.
"IF" ADSB is mandated and "IF" the subsidy amounts to zero, there will be costs that you and I will have to carry. Good luck to all if it goes the other way, It's just that I have been made promises by Governments and Bureaucrats that habitually have a habit of amounting to piss and wind.
Have you considered any plan B?
Have you seen anything written in blood by anyone that guarantees an irrevokable subsidy?