Latest Price for ADSB US$163,000 AU$213,252
Thread Starter
Latest Price for ADSB US$163,000 AU$213,252
I havent been able to sell my Citation so I thought Id look again at the cost of fitting ADSB hoping that it had come down.
It appears that if you purchase a unit that will be accepted in the United States you have to go to a DO260-B.
The latest quote from Aeromil at Bankstown to do this is US$163,000 that is AU$213,252.
Of course, this is all coming about because we are 4 years ahead of the US they keep telling me the price is going to come down dramatically but when?
In the meantime, if I want to fly and see Aussie Helpers at Charleville, I am forced to drop down to flight 290, sometimes into bad weather, to meet the applicable current Australian/Airservices/CASA regulations.
No wonder the CJ3 mainly sits in the hangar!
I do have ADSB in the C208 but at most places Airservices don't have ADSB ground stations - so a waste of money.
I am not complaining just informing.
It appears that if you purchase a unit that will be accepted in the United States you have to go to a DO260-B.
The latest quote from Aeromil at Bankstown to do this is US$163,000 that is AU$213,252.
Of course, this is all coming about because we are 4 years ahead of the US they keep telling me the price is going to come down dramatically but when?
In the meantime, if I want to fly and see Aussie Helpers at Charleville, I am forced to drop down to flight 290, sometimes into bad weather, to meet the applicable current Australian/Airservices/CASA regulations.
No wonder the CJ3 mainly sits in the hangar!
I do have ADSB in the C208 but at most places Airservices don't have ADSB ground stations - so a waste of money.
I am not complaining just informing.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Here and there.
Posts: 447
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Everyone is feeling the pain Dick. Whilst within the 'J' curve you can operate in RVSM airspace without ADSB. However once outside your limited to FL280 as FL290 is in RVSM airspace.
D
D
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: YMMB
Age: 58
Posts: 703
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The upside of being a homeless person, or even a starving refugee in Africa, is not being burdened with expensive and possibly unnecessary avionics upgrades.
Keep things in perspective.
Keep things in perspective.
Thread Starter
Peter. Agree. That's why I said I was not complaining.
Then again when all small Aussie aviation businesses are effected by these high cost it probably results in less being donated to charity to help those less well off.
And I think it's important that the people in Canberra know about these high costs.
Then again when all small Aussie aviation businesses are effected by these high cost it probably results in less being donated to charity to help those less well off.
And I think it's important that the people in Canberra know about these high costs.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Southern Sun
Posts: 417
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
However, those who take the risk, provide the capital and do the work can afford the toys whilst, along the way they provide jobs, salaries, security which effectively improves the lives and lifestyle of the homeless who are prepared to work.
Often there is a flow on effect to many countries including Africa which slowly provides an improvement to lifestyle, living standards in these countries. This is often not as great as it should be as the politicians and top echelon in these countries are ripping off as much as they can from the Aid and revenue flowing in enabling them to buy the toys whilst surrounding themselves with nubile maidens (or boys if that is your bent).
Apart from ensuring the revenue flows to where it should instead of claiming to be a `refugee' but an `economic migrant' the starving African refugee (or insert country here) should concentrate on fixing their own country first and foremost.
Rather than an `Academic' perspective solutions will be found with a `real world`and truthful perspective!
Often there is a flow on effect to many countries including Africa which slowly provides an improvement to lifestyle, living standards in these countries. This is often not as great as it should be as the politicians and top echelon in these countries are ripping off as much as they can from the Aid and revenue flowing in enabling them to buy the toys whilst surrounding themselves with nubile maidens (or boys if that is your bent).
Apart from ensuring the revenue flows to where it should instead of claiming to be a `refugee' but an `economic migrant' the starving African refugee (or insert country here) should concentrate on fixing their own country first and foremost.
Rather than an `Academic' perspective solutions will be found with a `real world`and truthful perspective!
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Dick,
If it was my CJ, I think I would wait a few years for the price to come down.
I don't know how much time you have spent studying the specific fuel consumption of your jet at optimum cruise altitude vs FL280. As a reasonably wealthy man, I'm just speculating you may not have bothered in the past.
But if you do, you might find that cruising at max range speed vs max speed at FL280 gives you a much lower flight fuel. You might even find it's only marginally more than cruising at optimum altitude. Yes it will take longer to get there.
If you don't fly often, the increased fuel burn plus lower future upgrade cost may more than offset the cost of upgrading now. Would be interested in your figures if you care to calculate and post them.
For what's worth, I am a narrow body domestic airline pilot, not a private jet pilot, but working for an airline mandates a high awareness of fuel vs schedule decisions when cruising at lower levels. I often cruise at lower levels for headwind or turbulence reasons, and at lower levels your cruising mach/IAS makes a big difference to fuel burn.
Keep up the dedication to the cause. Fred.
If it was my CJ, I think I would wait a few years for the price to come down.
I don't know how much time you have spent studying the specific fuel consumption of your jet at optimum cruise altitude vs FL280. As a reasonably wealthy man, I'm just speculating you may not have bothered in the past.
But if you do, you might find that cruising at max range speed vs max speed at FL280 gives you a much lower flight fuel. You might even find it's only marginally more than cruising at optimum altitude. Yes it will take longer to get there.
If you don't fly often, the increased fuel burn plus lower future upgrade cost may more than offset the cost of upgrading now. Would be interested in your figures if you care to calculate and post them.
For what's worth, I am a narrow body domestic airline pilot, not a private jet pilot, but working for an airline mandates a high awareness of fuel vs schedule decisions when cruising at lower levels. I often cruise at lower levels for headwind or turbulence reasons, and at lower levels your cruising mach/IAS makes a big difference to fuel burn.
Keep up the dedication to the cause. Fred.
Thread Starter
Derfred. Really sensible rational reasoning.
I have been putting of a flight from Bankstown to Broome and Christmas Island and back because of the fuel burn.
I will work out the difference in fuel cost - may take a little while as I am supposed to be obsessed with airspace and I can't let blogs down!
I have been putting of a flight from Bankstown to Broome and Christmas Island and back because of the fuel burn.
I will work out the difference in fuel cost - may take a little while as I am supposed to be obsessed with airspace and I can't let blogs down!
Originally Posted by Dick
may take a little while as I am supposed to be obsessed with airspace and I can't let blogs down!
Thread Starter
Cleared. Its plus GST.
The separate transponder way would not be accepted in other countries as its not 260B
Only 260A.
I have asked them to quote the cheapest install even if it means ripping it out before I sell overseas .
Complete Avionics at the Gold Coast have a cheaper way however they can't get approval to work on Citations above 12,500 lbs.. Work that out!
The separate transponder way would not be accepted in other countries as its not 260B
Only 260A.
I have asked them to quote the cheapest install even if it means ripping it out before I sell overseas .
Complete Avionics at the Gold Coast have a cheaper way however they can't get approval to work on Citations above 12,500 lbs.. Work that out!
The separate transponder way would not be accepted in other countries as its not 260B
Only 260A.
I have asked them to quote the cheapest install even if it means ripping it out before I sell overseas .
Only 260A.
I have asked them to quote the cheapest install even if it means ripping it out before I sell overseas .
Thread Starter
Problem is that if I used the aircraft to earn an income I would clearly go broke as there is no saving in operational costs from fitting the expensive equipment.
No wonder the BK charter business's have nearly all closed down.
No wonder the BK charter business's have nearly all closed down.
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: SYDNEY AUSTRALIA
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The CJ3 like our ERJ aircraft are fitted with TCAS 2. You cant just bang in another independant transponder as it interferes with the TCAS equipment. We too investigated this after a $200 000 plus installation into 1 of our aircraft. The only aircraft that can take a GTX33 type stand alone transponder are GA aircraft with out sophisticated full EFIS cockpits such as the CJ3 and ERJ
The current Airservices mandate ( 1090 Squitter out) does not even match the USA equipment, so the fact is that when we sell our fleet they may be have to be modded again! Thanks Airservices for forcing Australian operators into a upgrade years before the manufactures themselves have even come up with a economical solution. The reason? It saves Airservices billions in not having to upgrade ground based radar systems the same as the US.. Our aircraft are already fitted with Mode S 'Enhanced" which is fairly new and way ahead of just Mode C... No wonder we do it tough here
The current Airservices mandate ( 1090 Squitter out) does not even match the USA equipment, so the fact is that when we sell our fleet they may be have to be modded again! Thanks Airservices for forcing Australian operators into a upgrade years before the manufactures themselves have even come up with a economical solution. The reason? It saves Airservices billions in not having to upgrade ground based radar systems the same as the US.. Our aircraft are already fitted with Mode S 'Enhanced" which is fairly new and way ahead of just Mode C... No wonder we do it tough here
Here's an idea for you Dick.
Have your CJ3 valued. RFDS in Qld is looking for a jet, so donate your CJ3 to this iconic Australian charity, and claim the valuation as a tax deduction. I'm sure the RFDS would pony up a couple hundred thousand for an avionics upgrade that would give them the capacity to do their life-saving work further, higher and faster. Use the tax advantage to buy yourself another already compliant jet, like a Premier or Mustang.
You will get instant credibility with the aviation fraternity by supporting such a worthy organisation. They will get a jet without having to sell a billion lamingtons. You will have a shiny new jet with all the bells and whistles.
Everyone wins.
Have your CJ3 valued. RFDS in Qld is looking for a jet, so donate your CJ3 to this iconic Australian charity, and claim the valuation as a tax deduction. I'm sure the RFDS would pony up a couple hundred thousand for an avionics upgrade that would give them the capacity to do their life-saving work further, higher and faster. Use the tax advantage to buy yourself another already compliant jet, like a Premier or Mustang.
You will get instant credibility with the aviation fraternity by supporting such a worthy organisation. They will get a jet without having to sell a billion lamingtons. You will have a shiny new jet with all the bells and whistles.
Everyone wins.
The CJ3 like our ERJ aircraft are fitted with TCAS 2. You cant just bang in another independant transponder as it interferes with the TCAS equipment. We too investigated this after a $200 000 plus installation into 1 of our aircraft. The only aircraft that can take a GTX33 type stand alone transponder are GA aircraft with out sophisticated full EFIS cockpits such as the CJ3 and ERJ
The current Airservices mandate ( 1090 Squitter out) does not even match the USA equipment, so the fact is that when we sell our fleet they may be have to be modded again! Thanks Airservices for forcing Australian operators into a upgrade years before the manufactures themselves have even come up with a economical solution. The reason? It saves Airservices billions in not having to upgrade ground based radar systems the same as the US.. Our aircraft are already fitted with Mode S 'Enhanced" which is fairly new and way ahead of just Mode C... No wonder we do it tough here
The current Airservices mandate ( 1090 Squitter out) does not even match the USA equipment, so the fact is that when we sell our fleet they may be have to be modded again! Thanks Airservices for forcing Australian operators into a upgrade years before the manufactures themselves have even come up with a economical solution. The reason? It saves Airservices billions in not having to upgrade ground based radar systems the same as the US.. Our aircraft are already fitted with Mode S 'Enhanced" which is fairly new and way ahead of just Mode C... No wonder we do it tough here
Dick, maybe you should contact the above poster to manage your online identity and releases, you'd probably win a whole lot more support with these style of responses than the general "oh dear, he's started another thread to complain about something". Both posts have the same intent and I think we can all see there is no malice in either post, but it's amazing how much better people will respond to this sort of post.
Just my 2 cents!
Thread Starter
Al. You seem to think I could buy another aircraft from the "saving" I would make as a tax deduction.
Wow. I wish it worked like that! It doesn't. Still losing money from any donation- just not as much.
But good idea re donating all the money.
I will donate all the money from the sale , but to various charities inc the RFDS. But I have to sell the aircraft first! If prune enthusiasts have suggestions on what aviation charities should be supported please advise me . I like Angel Flight and the RFDS as well as others .
Worked out the extra fuel cost of the trip to Christmas Island and back. It's a little over $8,000 of sheer waste plus a couple of extra landing charges.
Poor commercial side of the industry- will be sent to bankruptcy - especially the IFR trainers who from Feb next year will have to fit ADSB to any aircraft that operates IFR.
Wow. I wish it worked like that! It doesn't. Still losing money from any donation- just not as much.
But good idea re donating all the money.
I will donate all the money from the sale , but to various charities inc the RFDS. But I have to sell the aircraft first! If prune enthusiasts have suggestions on what aviation charities should be supported please advise me . I like Angel Flight and the RFDS as well as others .
Worked out the extra fuel cost of the trip to Christmas Island and back. It's a little over $8,000 of sheer waste plus a couple of extra landing charges.
Poor commercial side of the industry- will be sent to bankruptcy - especially the IFR trainers who from Feb next year will have to fit ADSB to any aircraft that operates IFR.
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: SYDNEY AUSTRALIA
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If prune enthusiasts have suggestions on what aviation charities should be supported please advise me
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jetgo at least your outfit is a legitimate business, rather than a business masquerading as a charity.
If Dick did give them his CJ, they'd just bid for commercial contracts using their Tax free status and government subsidies to undercut legitimate business.
If Dick did give them his CJ, they'd just bid for commercial contracts using their Tax free status and government subsidies to undercut legitimate business.
Jetgo Management wrote
Who is this "Airservices" and how are they funded?
That's right, this "Airservices" is funded by Industry.
Replacing (and expanding) the ground based radar systems would be funded by Industry, which would mean higher charges.
It saves Airservices billions in not having to upgrade ground based radar systems
That's right, this "Airservices" is funded by Industry.
Replacing (and expanding) the ground based radar systems would be funded by Industry, which would mean higher charges.