Sheer Incompetence? Why would CASA and Airservices go for a less safe ADS-B system?
Thread Starter
Sheer Incompetence? Why would CASA and Airservices go for a less safe ADS-B system?
I am still attempting to get ADS-B for the Citation – which I haven’t been able to sell, and I am now finding out the CASA standard is an inferior ADS-B system without a special warning light on the panel. This warning light is required in the USA and other leading aviation countries.
Why would CASA do this? To lead the world by 3-5 years but then to have an inferior, less safe unit. Surely this special annunciator panel, that is mandatory in other leading aviation countries, must be there for safety reasons.
It appears that if any of us fit an Australian approved unit, we will not be able to sell our aircraft back to the USA or other countries in the Northern Hemisphere without having the equipment removed.
This is an absolute disaster!
Can anyone give any sense to this stupidity?
Why would CASA do this? To lead the world by 3-5 years but then to have an inferior, less safe unit. Surely this special annunciator panel, that is mandatory in other leading aviation countries, must be there for safety reasons.
It appears that if any of us fit an Australian approved unit, we will not be able to sell our aircraft back to the USA or other countries in the Northern Hemisphere without having the equipment removed.
This is an absolute disaster!
Can anyone give any sense to this stupidity?
Sorry mate....You'll get no reasonable response from the ex RAAF / CASA
'decision makers' who have never had to put their hand in their own pocket to finance any of their own 'decisions'.....
And the other services' mentality is not exempt either....a certain Navy helicopter comes to mind....and wait for it......dare I mention, submarines..???
No Cheers
'decision makers' who have never had to put their hand in their own pocket to finance any of their own 'decisions'.....
And the other services' mentality is not exempt either....a certain Navy helicopter comes to mind....and wait for it......dare I mention, submarines..???
No Cheers
Dick,
What does this annunciatior annunciate?
I ask as the jets I fly have ads-b out and you wouldn't know by looking at the centre console or instrument panel.
The ads-b is controlled by the transponder control head and that makes no mention of ads-b, there are no ads-b specific messages on the ecam that I am aware of, and there are no ads-b specific lights/annunciation on any panel.
These jets are not modified in any way for Australia and the same applies to the 737, 777 and other Boeing jets as far as I am aware.
It seems odd that rpt jets have no requirement for an annunciate relating to ads-b but other aircraft do.
What does this annunciatior annunciate?
I ask as the jets I fly have ads-b out and you wouldn't know by looking at the centre console or instrument panel.
The ads-b is controlled by the transponder control head and that makes no mention of ads-b, there are no ads-b specific messages on the ecam that I am aware of, and there are no ads-b specific lights/annunciation on any panel.
These jets are not modified in any way for Australia and the same applies to the 737, 777 and other Boeing jets as far as I am aware.
It seems odd that rpt jets have no requirement for an annunciate relating to ads-b but other aircraft do.
Methinks Dick is referring to the Garmin requirement for an ADS-B status annunciator for certain systems.
Best I can tell, the FAA doesn't require it for everyone. Certainly the RV crowd in the US don't have them!
Why do they require it? Because if you taxi before the GPS has started navigating, you'll confuse the heck out of TAATS as the onboard ADS-B system "thinks" you are in the air and broadcasts as such, until such time as it realizes you aren't in the air. This can cause much angst for ATC'ers and 737 captains who suddenly get an RA on finals to 16L because Dick is taxiing at the GA apron.
Here's a link to the Garmin SB describing it
Best I can tell, the FAA doesn't require it for everyone. Certainly the RV crowd in the US don't have them!
Why do they require it? Because if you taxi before the GPS has started navigating, you'll confuse the heck out of TAATS as the onboard ADS-B system "thinks" you are in the air and broadcasts as such, until such time as it realizes you aren't in the air. This can cause much angst for ATC'ers and 737 captains who suddenly get an RA on finals to 16L because Dick is taxiing at the GA apron.
Here's a link to the Garmin SB describing it
Last edited by KRviator; 17th May 2016 at 01:43. Reason: ed Garmin SB
Thread Starter
To clarify the above – it appears in Australia the approved unit is DO260A.
Whereas for the USA and other leading aviation countries in the Northern Hemisphere a DO260B unit is required.
The B unit requires an extra annunciator that shows that the ADS-B is working correctly.
I understand that AOPA in the USA have agreed that the B unit is the only way to go to enable the required level of safety.
So why would we be taking shortcuts and reducing safety in this way?
Of course, if we wait until one year after the ADS-B mandate comes into the USA, the prices will no doubt drop dramatically - just as they did after the CB radio 40 channel change came into the USA. Prices in that case dropped by 50%.
Whereas for the USA and other leading aviation countries in the Northern Hemisphere a DO260B unit is required.
The B unit requires an extra annunciator that shows that the ADS-B is working correctly.
I understand that AOPA in the USA have agreed that the B unit is the only way to go to enable the required level of safety.
So why would we be taking shortcuts and reducing safety in this way?
Of course, if we wait until one year after the ADS-B mandate comes into the USA, the prices will no doubt drop dramatically - just as they did after the CB radio 40 channel change came into the USA. Prices in that case dropped by 50%.
I'd be asking your dealer to upgrade the software. The transponder I have was initially a DO260A-compliant device, which, with a firmware upgrade, now complies with DO260B.
Thread Starter
It's not a Garmin requirement. The extra indicator is a certification requirement. All US units have to be - B. Why doesn't CASA require this safety item? Surely someone must have an answer or was it caused because of the rushed decision!
Originally Posted by Dick Smith
The extra indicator is a certification requirement. All US units have to be - B.
Oh, BTW, the FAA allows non-certified position sources to be used for ADS-B. Non-certified!
We don't. Does that mean we are better than they are because we forbid it?!? 
Would you really trust a hockey-puck GPS with no certification or proof-of-compliance-to-anything to keep your Citation and my RV separated in cloud? Perhaps CASA should simply mandate that any aircraft that requires this special-light-required equipment configuration be disallowed from Australian airspace? Surely that will be safer than a simple warning light (that is often overlooked - look at the numerous B200 climbing-while-unpressurised events and many others besides) to mitigate against a system limitation?
How will we know if the ADS-B failure annunciator light has itself failed after pre-flight test?
Surely we need an annunciator light failure annunciator light.
Surely we need an annunciator light failure annunciator light.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Queensland
Posts: 686
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting.
Does this tend to indicate that waiting a few more years may be the best option?
Does this tend to indicate that waiting a few more years may be the best option?
Thread Starter
Clear that by going early we get an inferior system.
Each quote I have received for the citation makes it clear that the system will not be approved for operation if the aircraft is sold back to the USA.
Remember , no existing safety issue is being addressed by going early on ADSB.
Any more info on the mandate being delayed as per the AOPA request as supported by Senator Xenophan ?
Each quote I have received for the citation makes it clear that the system will not be approved for operation if the aircraft is sold back to the USA.
Remember , no existing safety issue is being addressed by going early on ADSB.
Any more info on the mandate being delayed as per the AOPA request as supported by Senator Xenophan ?
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Queensland
Posts: 686
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Really, do you really believe that the money would be spend on more modern aircraft.
Thread Starter
Can someone from CASA or AsA come on this thread and advise what the differences are and why we went for ,the so called, less safe system?
Is their a measurable cost saving?
Or was this caused by Australia wanting to be first?
Is their a measurable cost saving?
Or was this caused by Australia wanting to be first?