SBAS
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SBAS has nothing to do with ADSB.
Although.. the WAAS enabled GPS you had to install for the mandate will allow vertically guided non precision procedures to LPV minima. Far better than the BARO VNAV band-aid solution that is nice for the airlines but not usable by most of the GA IFR fleet..
Although.. the WAAS enabled GPS you had to install for the mandate will allow vertically guided non precision procedures to LPV minima. Far better than the BARO VNAV band-aid solution that is nice for the airlines but not usable by most of the GA IFR fleet..
From Satellite Based Augmentation System - Geoscience Australia
and
What will be tested?
The SBAS test-bed will assess three specific technologies:
Single frequency service SBAS, which is equivalent to WAAS (USA SBAS) and EGNOS (Europe SBAS). This technology will improve positioning of stand-alone GPS from 5 metre accuracy to better than 1 metre accuracy.
Dual frequency/Multiple Constellation SBAS. This is the so-called next generation SBAS and will exploit the recent development of a civil frequency, known as L5 for GPS and E5a for Galileo. This capability will demonstrate significant performance improvements over single frequency SBAS, particularly in regions with dynamic ionosphere.
Precise Point Positioning (PPP). PPP is a method that provides highly accurately position solutions with accuracy better than 10 centimetres.
The SBAS test-bed will assess three specific technologies:
Single frequency service SBAS, which is equivalent to WAAS (USA SBAS) and EGNOS (Europe SBAS). This technology will improve positioning of stand-alone GPS from 5 metre accuracy to better than 1 metre accuracy.
Dual frequency/Multiple Constellation SBAS. This is the so-called next generation SBAS and will exploit the recent development of a civil frequency, known as L5 for GPS and E5a for Galileo. This capability will demonstrate significant performance improvements over single frequency SBAS, particularly in regions with dynamic ionosphere.
Precise Point Positioning (PPP). PPP is a method that provides highly accurately position solutions with accuracy better than 10 centimetres.
Will the SBAS test-bed be certified for aviation?
... IFR SBAS capable avionics will ignore the test-bed signal.
... IFR SBAS capable avionics will ignore the test-bed signal.
The fine print:
Here we go again. Nothing good can come from this. Again we become "a leader" and an "early adopter" which guarantees that this project will be an expensive failure even before it starts.
The reason for my dark prediction is that the "leaders" and the "early adopters" cop 100% of the technical, organisational and business risk associated with development and implementation of such a system, and believe me there are ALWAYS unforeseen risks and costs associated with any project.
The first and foremost is that technical specifications for products are in development but are not yet frozen. The aircraft products do not exist, or are very expensive, or both and the early adopters cop all the technical risk associated with driving the production cost down the learning curve.
For my Two cents, what is wrong with implementing WAAS/Egnos/Glonass right effing now?
There is no technical risk because its a mature technology and product costs are minimal.
In addition, has anyone bothered to factor in the huge opportunity costs associated with running a Two year trial followed by God knows how long for implementation? Then of course there is CASA and Airservices to contend with.
For goodness sake, use existing stuff!
By trialling next generation SBAS, Australia becomes a leader of SBAS technology in the Asia Pacific, particularly through the early adoption of this technology in emerging applications.
The reason for my dark prediction is that the "leaders" and the "early adopters" cop 100% of the technical, organisational and business risk associated with development and implementation of such a system, and believe me there are ALWAYS unforeseen risks and costs associated with any project.
The first and foremost is that technical specifications for products are in development but are not yet frozen. The aircraft products do not exist, or are very expensive, or both and the early adopters cop all the technical risk associated with driving the production cost down the learning curve.
For my Two cents, what is wrong with implementing WAAS/Egnos/Glonass right effing now?
There is no technical risk because its a mature technology and product costs are minimal.
In addition, has anyone bothered to factor in the huge opportunity costs associated with running a Two year trial followed by God knows how long for implementation? Then of course there is CASA and Airservices to contend with.
For goodness sake, use existing stuff!
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Goolwa
Age: 59
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Companies (overseas and local) know that Australia has an inferiority complex, all they have to do is use the words "World Class", "World First", "World Leader" etc and the government (Local, state and federal) all fall over themselves to sign the cheque book so they can grand-stand, until it all turns to poop in which case they blame it on the opposition, previous government etc.
