Business Issues ADSB (Now: Completely Off Topic Thread!)
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If there is also proof that the Minister can sign an instrument that allows Air Services to set up a fund to pay for installation in GA what was the purpose of "Corporatising" Airservicers in the first place? What is this proof?
Reading some threads here I get the impression that those in favour are "willing" it to come to fruition. I'm a bit of a pessamist and have never got anything for nothing from anyone. Whatever I have got came after years of hard work which put into dollars would put the win in the loss column.
I can't see how ADSB improves on anything I do, nor my friends who own light GA private aircraft who fly VFR below 10,000 ft and generally outside the J curve. I also fear the subsidy will not eventuate. Do you know what AOPA are going to do if that happens. It's probably too late to oppose it once it is mandated.
That's not to say Airservices or IFR traffic in the flight levels in congested airspace wouldn't benefit, but why burden me with the extra cost of buying carbon offsets because China is belching more than their share of the 0.38% of carbon in the atmosphere.
Sorry went off thread there, must be the heat.
Reading some threads here I get the impression that those in favour are "willing" it to come to fruition. I'm a bit of a pessamist and have never got anything for nothing from anyone. Whatever I have got came after years of hard work which put into dollars would put the win in the loss column.
I can't see how ADSB improves on anything I do, nor my friends who own light GA private aircraft who fly VFR below 10,000 ft and generally outside the J curve. I also fear the subsidy will not eventuate. Do you know what AOPA are going to do if that happens. It's probably too late to oppose it once it is mandated.
That's not to say Airservices or IFR traffic in the flight levels in congested airspace wouldn't benefit, but why burden me with the extra cost of buying carbon offsets because China is belching more than their share of the 0.38% of carbon in the atmosphere.
Sorry went off thread there, must be the heat.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oz Bus Driver I can't see what a mode S transponder has to do with NEEDING ADSB !!!!!!!
Autralia simply DOES NOT NEED low level ADSB yes I fly in the U.S. and there I DON'T NEED ADSB.
I just crossed Australia in a 40 year old War Bird and I DIDN"T NEED ADSB, got to Perth no hassles and only used the VHF for CTAF entries, my trusty 406 EPIRB was with me, no need for any ATC services what so ever other than Bankstown GAAP to say goodbye, Parafield for transit and Jandakot to say hello.
Autralia simply DOES NOT NEED low level ADSB yes I fly in the U.S. and there I DON'T NEED ADSB.
I just crossed Australia in a 40 year old War Bird and I DIDN"T NEED ADSB, got to Perth no hassles and only used the VHF for CTAF entries, my trusty 406 EPIRB was with me, no need for any ATC services what so ever other than Bankstown GAAP to say goodbye, Parafield for transit and Jandakot to say hello.
No, I am just a little puzzled you had changed your position. If AirServices had offered UAT you would have been at the front of the que, boots and all. 1090ES without the other goodies and you are treating the whole system like a dose of the 
.
.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Because you simply don't need it out in the GAFA, traffic at Mildura = nil Port Augusta = nil Ceduna = nil Forrest = nil Kalgoorlie one other aircraft doing touch and goes.
Traffic density overall bugger all !!!!!!!! in flight did not see one other aircraft, nil, nada , none.
That is the joy of free movement in G airspace below 10,000 at VFR hemispherical levels.
Now UAT weather up link in the Continental U.S. in tricky high latitude weather, now there is a sweet system, ADSB again no need just the uplink services, great safety tool on approach to Minneapolis/ St Paul on a dark Autmn night with CB's about.
Out in the Australian GAFA on a VFR gin clear day absolutely no use what so ever, in fact a distraction rather than a assist. Look out the window it just might keep you alive.
Traffic density overall bugger all !!!!!!!! in flight did not see one other aircraft, nil, nada , none.
That is the joy of free movement in G airspace below 10,000 at VFR hemispherical levels.
Now UAT weather up link in the Continental U.S. in tricky high latitude weather, now there is a sweet system, ADSB again no need just the uplink services, great safety tool on approach to Minneapolis/ St Paul on a dark Autmn night with CB's about.
Out in the Australian GAFA on a VFR gin clear day absolutely no use what so ever, in fact a distraction rather than a assist. Look out the window it just might keep you alive.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Golden Road to Samarkand
Posts: 443
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Autralia simply DOES NOT NEED low level ADSB
One of, if not the most, scariest events a controller can encounter... a very afraid and very lost pilot in a very dangerous situation. Out in the GAFA... ADS-B coverage... supervisor gets the call, looks at his screen and finds the aircraft in seconds... unique hexadecimal code = instant identification... reports from other aircraft and ground stations to find a decent hole in the OVC... vectors to the hole and... every cent spent on, and saved by, installing ADS-B is justified.
But... hang-on a minute... VFR on top of OVC only ever happens in the J-curve.. within RADAR coverage... doesn't it?
T28D
How so ? Unless you have ADSB-IN then you won't know about any other traffic, therefore status quo.
A noble and sensible statement, but I would like it augmented with some form of alerting, either radio or ADSB-IN or even ATC if they know about me.
Just because I can't visually see other traffic does not mean that there is no nearby traffic.
Out in the Australian GAFA on a VFR gin clear day absolutely no use what so ever, in fact a distraction rather than a assist.
Look out the window it just might keep you alive.
Just because I can't visually see other traffic does not mean that there is no nearby traffic.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Oz
Age: 77
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is laughable really.
No traffic at KAL? Let's even forget the RPT at MIA.
This from a previous ACF moving KAL to Group 2 for assessment of risk
Must be single aircraft incidents 
Up to now the detractors have used the USA as a comparator to not proceed in Oz, claimed the subsidy was lunacy, and so on.
Now a prominent USA researcher suggests the subsidy and instead of noting that Oz - according to his theory - is bang on the mark, the detractors move back to the big sky theory.
It worked well when the DC3 was doing 120 kts and the Auster 70.
I sometimes wonder how NASA would ever have reached the moon had they been headed up by the detractors - more likely they would have reached 20000 leagues under the sea - they are far more writers of fiction than men of vision for aviation
No traffic at KAL? Let's even forget the RPT at MIA.
This from a previous ACF moving KAL to Group 2 for assessment of risk
Craig provided the example of Kalgoorlie which has seen a number of incidents but did not meet the quantitative trigger criteria.
Up to now the detractors have used the USA as a comparator to not proceed in Oz, claimed the subsidy was lunacy, and so on.
Now a prominent USA researcher suggests the subsidy and instead of noting that Oz - according to his theory - is bang on the mark, the detractors move back to the big sky theory.
It worked well when the DC3 was doing 120 kts and the Auster 70.
I sometimes wonder how NASA would ever have reached the moon had they been headed up by the detractors - more likely they would have reached 20000 leagues under the sea - they are far more writers of fiction than men of vision for aviation
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
james michael,- man of vision;
There was NO RPT traffic at Mildura. There was NO traffic at Mildura. I was there.
Perhaps you can answer the question I asked OZBUSDRIVER? Based on your RESEARCH you would have noted AOPA have made a submission to the effect that they support the ADSB concept if the subsidy materialises.
If the subsidy fails to materialise will that organisation oppose it's introduction, and if it does, how would you feel about being at odds with their policy and their responsibility of acting in the best interests of the members.
There was NO RPT traffic at Mildura. There was NO traffic at Mildura. I was there.
Perhaps you can answer the question I asked OZBUSDRIVER? Based on your RESEARCH you would have noted AOPA have made a submission to the effect that they support the ADSB concept if the subsidy materialises.
If the subsidy fails to materialise will that organisation oppose it's introduction, and if it does, how would you feel about being at odds with their policy and their responsibility of acting in the best interests of the members.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There you go peuce, it's not laughable at all.
I regularly fly between Griffith and Gladstone, some 600 nm and except for CTAF I rarely speak to anybody, simply because there is nobody to talk to.
Just prior to Mildura with T28D, the only traffic we heard on the area frequency was some ultralights calling downwind, base and final at Naranderra, (some 200nm away), and some RPT in the flight levels.
I regularly fly between Griffith and Gladstone, some 600 nm and except for CTAF I rarely speak to anybody, simply because there is nobody to talk to.
Just prior to Mildura with T28D, the only traffic we heard on the area frequency was some ultralights calling downwind, base and final at Naranderra, (some 200nm away), and some RPT in the flight levels.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Oz
Age: 77
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Puts the posts by you and T28D into some semblance of understanding now we find you fly together Bob. Tell us who else met you at Parafield and far more will be revealed about posts on the ADS-B thread, no? Don't dick up your answer 
I cannot speak for an aviation organisation re the subsidy. Ask them yourself - although I note what you have quoted already is incomplete.
So you did not see traffic at the time you were there, so there's no risk. Have a look at the BTRE data for transport ops into MIA and KAL, Bob. Quack, quack
Better still, use the might of you and your colleagues to block CASA OAR from increasing prescriptive measures to protect RPT at CTAF R. I'd like to see that - but, just tell 'em it weren't there when you were - so obviously there's no risk
Peuce, Quok, KKK -
I cannot speak for an aviation organisation re the subsidy. Ask them yourself - although I note what you have quoted already is incomplete.
So you did not see traffic at the time you were there, so there's no risk. Have a look at the BTRE data for transport ops into MIA and KAL, Bob. Quack, quack
Better still, use the might of you and your colleagues to block CASA OAR from increasing prescriptive measures to protect RPT at CTAF R. I'd like to see that - but, just tell 'em it weren't there when you were - so obviously there's no risk
Peuce, Quok, KKK -
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are the research Guru, You point out that my quote is incomplete, so one can assume You know the answer to my question. Your own enthusiasm for the concept and the blind disregard for opposing opinion makes it important to know how you will react if "the peak GA aviation body" decides as per it's submission to withdraw their support if the ADSB if it is not subsidised.
Data is like statistics, you can make a case each way if it be your way. There is no safety case on a cost benefit scale, Australia wide, that justifies the introduction of this technology.
If you are so concerned about running into someone else, you probably can't hold a heading or an altitude to take advantage of the hemispherical rule and you really should stay in bed for absolute safety.
A number of people met us at Parafield, I may even post a photo if you are concerned or paranoid about it being dick.
quack quack quack
Data is like statistics, you can make a case each way if it be your way. There is no safety case on a cost benefit scale, Australia wide, that justifies the introduction of this technology.
If you are so concerned about running into someone else, you probably can't hold a heading or an altitude to take advantage of the hemispherical rule and you really should stay in bed for absolute safety.
A number of people met us at Parafield, I may even post a photo if you are concerned or paranoid about it being dick.
quack quack quack
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Adrift upon the tides of fate
Posts: 1,840
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok, Bob, who said that ADSB is being introduced for safety? Did you put that straw-man argument up because you believe it, or you need to keep twisting and turning (in true Dick style) because you are running another agenda?
How many times does this have to be spelled out? THE MONEY THAT COULD BE SPENT ON ADS-B IS GOING TO BE PISSED DOWN THE DROWN REPLACING OLD-TECHNOLOGY RADARS, WITH MORE OLD-TECHNOLOGY RADARS. The money could be used to fit a better technology, but for that technology to be inclusive, everybody needs to carry it. Doing so, EVEN IF YOU CAN'T SEE A BENEFIT TO YOURSELF, is being offered via a subsidy.
As for the perpetuation of the "I'm all right Jack" thinking displayed by the likes of T28D, maybe YOU didnt see or think you needed any of the benefits afforded by ads-b, but there may have been benefits to others. For example- maybe the RPT s who go into some of the places mentioned (even though they didn't happen to be there on those particular occasions mentioned) might have received a better SA from your ads-b fitment. Maybe the controllers at those controlled airports you visited may have had an easier time had you been ads-b fitted (and by that, I mean provided a more efficient service to all customers- yourself included). Maybe the SAR people might be able to find you easier if it all goes wrong. THEY ARE ALL MIGHTS. They are certainly not essential. But if everyone (else) is moving to ADS-B anyway, and the part of the industry that is going to receive the biggest benefit is going to pay for your ADS-B, then it really does seem very short-sighted/blinkered to oppose it.
Couldn't agree more that if the subsidy somehow does not materialise, then go for your life. Your lawyers will have a field day- if exclusionary rules/fitment requirements appeared.
How many times does this have to be spelled out? THE MONEY THAT COULD BE SPENT ON ADS-B IS GOING TO BE PISSED DOWN THE DROWN REPLACING OLD-TECHNOLOGY RADARS, WITH MORE OLD-TECHNOLOGY RADARS. The money could be used to fit a better technology, but for that technology to be inclusive, everybody needs to carry it. Doing so, EVEN IF YOU CAN'T SEE A BENEFIT TO YOURSELF, is being offered via a subsidy.
As for the perpetuation of the "I'm all right Jack" thinking displayed by the likes of T28D, maybe YOU didnt see or think you needed any of the benefits afforded by ads-b, but there may have been benefits to others. For example- maybe the RPT s who go into some of the places mentioned (even though they didn't happen to be there on those particular occasions mentioned) might have received a better SA from your ads-b fitment. Maybe the controllers at those controlled airports you visited may have had an easier time had you been ads-b fitted (and by that, I mean provided a more efficient service to all customers- yourself included). Maybe the SAR people might be able to find you easier if it all goes wrong. THEY ARE ALL MIGHTS. They are certainly not essential. But if everyone (else) is moving to ADS-B anyway, and the part of the industry that is going to receive the biggest benefit is going to pay for your ADS-B, then it really does seem very short-sighted/blinkered to oppose it.
Couldn't agree more that if the subsidy somehow does not materialise, then go for your life. Your lawyers will have a field day- if exclusionary rules/fitment requirements appeared.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Oz
Age: 77
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tried to get this up at 15:14 Brissy time but I think the pprune glitch TW mentioned was on the go.
Bob
I don't have a crystal ball about the subsidy or the outcome and I'll alter my thoughts based on fact not babblefactor from naysayers.
No safety case? - don't waste your time on here, go earn a consulting quid and convince the Reason foundation in the USA, the FAA and AOPA USA.
Stay abed? - safety is not always realised in bed Bob - accidents cause people
Don't really care who you met at Parafield, or whether they fit the bill, what I do laugh at is the claim that because you did not see any conflicting aircraft on that trip that they don't exist. So if you drive the car today without a prang you will never have one on that reasoning.
Roll on subsidised ADS-B - a far better choice than when it is mandated without subsidy. Ask the USA.
Bob
I don't have a crystal ball about the subsidy or the outcome and I'll alter my thoughts based on fact not babblefactor from naysayers.
No safety case? - don't waste your time on here, go earn a consulting quid and convince the Reason foundation in the USA, the FAA and AOPA USA.
Stay abed? - safety is not always realised in bed Bob - accidents cause people
Don't really care who you met at Parafield, or whether they fit the bill, what I do laugh at is the claim that because you did not see any conflicting aircraft on that trip that they don't exist. So if you drive the car today without a prang you will never have one on that reasoning.
Roll on subsidised ADS-B - a far better choice than when it is mandated without subsidy. Ask the USA.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ferris:
I have heard all that before. I have already stated that I am a pessamist, don't see any hope of a subsidy, so simply ask, if the subsidy does not materialise, will those organisations that supported the concept based on that premise, then take to oppose it afterwards.
My agenda is to fly safely, legally, and as inexpensively as possible with the bare minimum of interference from regulators and scaremongering snake oil salesmen who have been trying to shove something I don't want down my neck.
james michael keeps using the word "risk". Isn't that synonomous with safety?
Next you will be telling me all Politicians, Bureaucrats and Advisors are honest, that Airservices don't have an agenda, and the cheque's in the mail.
james michael;
Didn't see or hear from anyone enroute that should be communicated with. It was a VFR flight, you know eyes and ears. The transponder was swept once so somebody saw us on their TCAS I suppose.
You rabbitted on about meeting someone at Parafield that was a revelation of ADSB posts, I assumed you did own a crystal ball.
As for the outcome I hope it comes together for you. Us pessamists are just happy when surprised with good news and we are never never disappointed.
I have heard all that before. I have already stated that I am a pessamist, don't see any hope of a subsidy, so simply ask, if the subsidy does not materialise, will those organisations that supported the concept based on that premise, then take to oppose it afterwards.
My agenda is to fly safely, legally, and as inexpensively as possible with the bare minimum of interference from regulators and scaremongering snake oil salesmen who have been trying to shove something I don't want down my neck.
james michael keeps using the word "risk". Isn't that synonomous with safety?
Next you will be telling me all Politicians, Bureaucrats and Advisors are honest, that Airservices don't have an agenda, and the cheque's in the mail.
james michael;
Didn't see or hear from anyone enroute that should be communicated with. It was a VFR flight, you know eyes and ears. The transponder was swept once so somebody saw us on their TCAS I suppose.
You rabbitted on about meeting someone at Parafield that was a revelation of ADSB posts, I assumed you did own a crystal ball.
As for the outcome I hope it comes together for you. Us pessamists are just happy when surprised with good news and we are never never disappointed.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Oz
Age: 77
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bob
You have probably answered your own question in the comment
If you support something conditionally and the condition is breached then it seems likely the support is automatically cancelled.
But, don't ask we researchers - ask the organisations.
I do keep using the word "RISK" as you well state. When I buy a car I don't buy it to prang so why should I pay for ABS, airbags, seatbelts, traction control, etc if I use your philosophy. These technological advances don't affect we safe drivers on Class G roads and i haven't seen any cars coming at me yesterday so that proves it.
Fact is ADS-B opens up a whole raft of risk mitigators and via ADS-B IN gives the PIC another tool to reduce risk. Bit like the "Terrain" on my Garmin 495 given I have no intention of CFIT - who needs it.
Your arguments have no sound basis except that dinosaurs once roamed the earth.
You have probably answered your own question in the comment
if the subsidy does not materialise, will those organisations that supported the concept based on that premise, then take to oppose it afterwards.
But, don't ask we researchers - ask the organisations.
I do keep using the word "RISK" as you well state. When I buy a car I don't buy it to prang so why should I pay for ABS, airbags, seatbelts, traction control, etc if I use your philosophy. These technological advances don't affect we safe drivers on Class G roads and i haven't seen any cars coming at me yesterday so that proves it.
Fact is ADS-B opens up a whole raft of risk mitigators and via ADS-B IN gives the PIC another tool to reduce risk. Bit like the "Terrain" on my Garmin 495 given I have no intention of CFIT - who needs it.
Your arguments have no sound basis except that dinosaurs once roamed the earth.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
james michael;
I was talking about your organisation.
As for thread drift, I believe ACROBATIC came forth with the childish barb. May I also suggest the title "Business isasues ADSB" should be inclusive of "Industry issues" of which you and I are part, unless of course you have a business interest as a catalyst for your "research" that rejects opposing comment?
This Dinosaur flies VFR. What has changed in technology that does anything my current set up doesn't. Has Bernouli's theorum changed, has the 1:60 changed as an examination question, is English still the preferred language and do we still need to look out the window for visual clues?
I was talking about your organisation.
As for thread drift, I believe ACROBATIC came forth with the childish barb. May I also suggest the title "Business isasues ADSB" should be inclusive of "Industry issues" of which you and I are part, unless of course you have a business interest as a catalyst for your "research" that rejects opposing comment?
This Dinosaur flies VFR. What has changed in technology that does anything my current set up doesn't. Has Bernouli's theorum changed, has the 1:60 changed as an examination question, is English still the preferred language and do we still need to look out the window for visual clues?
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Oz
Age: 77
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bob
I don't have an organisation and I'm not ACROBATIC. I say again - contact the organisation to which you belong if you have an organisational concern and contact ACROBATIC if you have a concern re his posts.
Keep looking out the window - those of us who have proved the species can move past Darwin's theory will take advantage of the safety benefits offered by technology like ADS-B.
Actually, why look out the window - closed cockpits cost more and are now mandated by most manufacturers. Didn't need them in the old days - no proof they add to safety. Start a campaign, Bob - back to rag and string and goggles.
Now how about you get back on thread instead of trying to use this forum for your anti-organisation vendetta that no-one wants to know about or, like T28D, you will continue to be in error.
ADS-B IN - the future cometh. What news on the "NO SUBSIDY"?
I don't have an organisation and I'm not ACROBATIC. I say again - contact the organisation to which you belong if you have an organisational concern and contact ACROBATIC if you have a concern re his posts.
Keep looking out the window - those of us who have proved the species can move past Darwin's theory will take advantage of the safety benefits offered by technology like ADS-B.
Actually, why look out the window - closed cockpits cost more and are now mandated by most manufacturers. Didn't need them in the old days - no proof they add to safety. Start a campaign, Bob - back to rag and string and goggles.
Now how about you get back on thread instead of trying to use this forum for your anti-organisation vendetta that no-one wants to know about or, like T28D, you will continue to be in error.
ADS-B IN - the future cometh. What news on the "NO SUBSIDY"?
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 478
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am "on thread",- I didn't say you were ACROBATIC,- why would I want to contact him,- and I am not on any anti organisation vendetta.- The subject is ADSB not any of my afiliations.
You cometh before the horth if no cart thubsidy cometh.
That's desphicable.
You cometh before the horth if no cart thubsidy cometh.
That's desphicable.