ADS-B mandate huge misallocation of resources
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: NowWhat
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thought I should correct a few things here.
Most approach units receive nearby ADSB feeds, but the information is presented to the controller in the same manner as a radar only track. It is not possible for approach to tell the difference and thus invisible to us. Enroute see different symbols or have a label indicator.
3NM can be used with ADSB for separation (its already in MATS).
Most approach units receive nearby ADSB feeds, but the information is presented to the controller in the same manner as a radar only track. It is not possible for approach to tell the difference and thus invisible to us. Enroute see different symbols or have a label indicator.
3NM can be used with ADSB for separation (its already in MATS).
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: YXXX
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thought I should correct a few things here.
Most approach units receive nearby ADSB feeds, but the information is presented to the controller in the same manner as a radar only track. It is not possible for approach to tell the difference and thus invisible to us. Enroute see different symbols or have a label indicator.
3NM can be used with ADSB for separation (its already in MATS).
Most approach units receive nearby ADSB feeds, but the information is presented to the controller in the same manner as a radar only track. It is not possible for approach to tell the difference and thus invisible to us. Enroute see different symbols or have a label indicator.
3NM can be used with ADSB for separation (its already in MATS).
