Many Not Going to Fit ADS-B
 

Lots of aircraft owners have told me that rather than keep their GA aircraft in the IFR category and go to the expense of fitting ADS-B when required by the unique Australian CASA ADS-B mandate in the next 18 months, they are going to change their aircraft so that it operates VFR only.

It’s not only the cost of ADS-B they are concerned about but it is also the fact that with an ADS-B equipped aircraft, the call sign and altitude information is transmitted to Airservices and recorded.

This means the slightest penetration of controlled or restricted air space gives a total record for CASA to take licence action. Even the exact altitude is recorded – no doubt resulting in enforcement action over so called populous areas for those pilots who even just make an error.

Remember in Australia alone, if you have an ADS-B extended squitter transponder, it is illegal to turn off the extended squitter, so the call sign must be shown at all times – even if flying VFR in remote areas.

By the look of it, this will mean a large number of pilots will no longer fly IFR and be forced to go scud running.

It is interesting that in the USA there is no requirement even in 2020 for ADS-B to be fitted to IFR or VFR aircraft if flying below 10,000 feet in D, E or G air space – unless within 30 nautical miles of a Class B airport such as Los Angeles or New York.

It is clear to most people I have spoken to that this unique ADS-B mandate, which is going to cost over $30 million to GA, will do nothing other than result in a reduction in safety.

My latest communication with people at CASA shows that they are not going to budge from this requirement and they won’t be giving any dispensations at all.

This is what happens when you have people from the military who have never really paid for anything in aviation in their life.

Not only will we get a further downturn in GA because of extra costs but we clearly have a reduction in safety because $30 million will not be available for real safety improvements like – dare I say it – purchasing more modern, safer aircraft.

Costs also increase because pilots now have to get renewals for IFR ratings in each different type of aircraft they require a type rating for.

One of the rescue pilots often flies my Agusta 109E to assist me in positioning and doing test flights. From now on he will not be able to do that because his renewal is done in a different type of twin engine helicopter.

As I have said to everyone, get out of aviation as soon as you can. In the next five or ten years there are going to be tens of millions of dollars, if not hundreds of millions of dollars losses as business becomes more unviable and aircraft values drop further.

I attempted to sell my CJ3 for a bargain US$4.6 – now it’s dropped to US$4.2 with still no takers because both ADS-B and a F.D.R. have to be fitted for use in Australia.

ADSB = Automatic infringement and punishment mechanism, nothing more.

When are we going to say NO !
 

Another very good post Dick = but who's in CASA is listening to you :( :( :(

Can we get the excellently versed legend Alan Jones onto this pls :ok: :ok: :ok:

Its worth repeating at every opportunity that:

Australia is the only country in the world that is mandating ADS-B for all IFR aircraft at all levels in all airspace types.

ADS-B is essentially a tax on IFR flying.

ADS-B does not increase safety because it does nothing to provide traffic information about VFR aircraft (which will now include more ex IFR pilots scud running).

ADS-B will absolutely definitely result in less IFR aircraft and less active pilots.

Dick, any chance any of your mates want to sell? I'm after a Baron or a late model Seneca. I'd consider other types. Ta

F@/k me what paranoia! Honestly if you fly properly you won't have anything to worry about!

Busting cta isn't a big deal. It's only a problem if your a ******** and don't own up. They can radar track you still and get a pretty damn good idea on who you were anyway, adsb or not!
So, really, how smart are you if thinking accidentally busting cta will result in a reprimand when you would prefer to scud run instead? If you think like that just stay out of the bloody sky, everyone else is better off without you.


I have adsb and I love it.

Does anyone actually have any examples of where ADSB has been used to prosecute?

It is far from the primary objective of the equipment...

Those "lots" don't appear to be supported by the fitment statistics, which are steadily climbing.

Table "Current percentage of flights fitted" on right hand side:

Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcast | Airservices

You need to red between the lines. 67% of all IFR flights had ADS-B fitted, but how many individual aircraft conducted those flights versus how many aircraft in the IFR category is what you really need to know. Just because an aircraft can fly IFR doesn't mean it actually does!

If you have 200 IFR-category aircraft, and only 20 filed & flew IFR last month, but of those 18 had ADS-B. YIPPEEEE! 90% of all IFR flights last month had ADS-B, when the reality is less than 10% of IFR-registered aircraft had it.....See the problem?

I think Dick is right. How many people will say "I'm not going to spend $15,000 on a GTN650 just to have IFR capability. Even that old TSO129 GPS will allow RNAV and I'll just say I'm VMC, that cloud looks far enough away" and downgrade to a NVMC-equipment fit, but still actually fly IMC, simply because they can? I reckon the answer to that'll be "Lots".

While what you have said is true it is also worth noting that the USA ads-b mandate extends to cover VFR aircraft too. When you factor in that their class C airspace covers a lot more airports because their class C is effectively any tower that also has radar you are likely to need ads-b in the USA in as many places as you are in Australia.

The big difference is the time frame and the cost of approving the installation. The USA mandate of 2020 means that industry is gearing up to provide solutions. The cost of compliance is dropping as new technologies are developed. Australia being earlier locks us into the higher cost of equipment. Coupled with a more expensive process for minor modifications to aircraft we have an overall higher impost.

If ADS-B cost $500 would you be opposed?

What rock have you been under? There are quite a few selling disturbingly cheaply at the moment. I know of one very nice Seneca that sold a few weeks ago specifically because the owner did not want to do the ADS-B upgrade.

Lies damned lies and statistics.

KR Aviator has it. The total number of IFR flights filed vs last year needs to be tracked. It would also be illuminating to know how many aircraft remain IFR certified.

Isn't it obvious that the aim is to eliminate all aviation but the airlines and military?

They are doing this without even a "Buyback" as happened with guns.

I recall mention at an industry meeting that the % of aircraft fitted is not too far different from the % of flights in the table (over half of the "all IFR" fleet and climbing were then fitted?), but that's a question to ask of CASA & Airservices.

The Enigma system as mentioned in other threads may be a cost effective solution. People need to do their research specific to their aircraft and not rely on scaremongering.

Enigma Avionics reveals Low-cost ADS-B System

Enigma is a VFR solution. The ADS-B tax is not applied to VFR aircraft. It is irrelevant to this thread.

Its biggest benefit is in areas outside radar or ADS-b ground coverage. An aircraft equipped with an ads-b receiver can see the position of your aircraft and avoid without the need to talk to you "old school".

Australia is implementing ADS-B OUT only. The US is implementing ADSB IN which allows full traffic visibility. We will not get the advantage of this traffic information.

AND it only applies to IFR aircraft. I have had 3 alarming traffic incidents. In each case I was IFR and the other aircraft was VFR. In one of these incidents I was IMC in Cloud and had a traffic advisory of opposite direction traffic at the same level!. ADS-B will not help this one iota. ADS-B does not improve safety. OCTA we get no improvement over the current situation while there is non ADS-B VFR aircraft. In CTA there is and has always been radar.

Old Arko,

You need to do a bit more research. An IFR aircraft fitted with the equipment required by CASA/Air services will broadcast its position via its mode S transponder and this information can be decoded and displayed on an in cockpit display. This equipment could be fancy Garmin GDL 88 or GDL 39D providing traffic to your GTN or G1000 or it could be by using an ipad + raspberry pi + DIY software to display the traffic overlaid on the ozrunways chart. There are many other option that will display this traffic. Some gliders have the powerflarm which can receive and display this information (as well as the flarm targets)

Even if the VFR aircraft is not broadcasting its position, many can receive and hence display the positions of other aircraft.

Now I am not saying that the safety benefit justifies the $20k cost to fit to most aircraft but saying that there is no benefit is not true.

No-one. Yep. Or you could get pretty much the same result with a Zaon unit linked to a Garmin 496 etc reading mode C returns.

no_one, if you don't mandate that VFR aircraft need to have ADS-B Out then how many will actually bother? Answer is probably not many. If not many have it fitted then even if all IFR Aircraft required to have ADS-B out get ADS-B IN as well. As such Old Akro is correct, the benefits are imagined.

Current Situations are as such with ADS-B

1. IFR and IFR Traffic CTA - On Radar and as such get traffic avoidance given.

2. IFR and IFR Traffic OCTA - Will be monitored by ATC and if they are in proximity will get a warning and avoidance

3. IFR and VFR Traffic CTA - Will mostly likely both be on Radar and as such get a traffic avoidance for the IFR

4. IFR and VFR Traffic OCTA - This is anyones guess as there is a likelihood the VFR traffic won't be on any radar and may not have made a radio call as required or simply is in a position where one isn't required

5. VFR and VFR CTA or OCTA - Are unlikely to get warnings or avoidance most of the time

Looking at those 5 options, which one will be improved by mandating ADS-B Out for IFR Aircraft, in Situations 1 and 2 there is already going to be warnings given, in situation 3 no real benefit as you're in CTA and should have transponders under current regs, Situation 4 you might get additional benefit if BOTH aircraft are fitted but the VFR isn't required to have either In or Out so probably not and even less chance of any change to situation 5 at all.

If they are going to tell us this is for Safety for all aircraft everywhere then they would have to mandate that ALL aircraft are fitted with both ADS-B In and Out. By only mandating ADS-B Out on IFR Aircraft only and especially at the current prices I doubt there is any demonstrable safety increase above and beyond having Transponders except that ASA and CASA save a bunch of money on not having to expand their Radars and instead put that cost to the Users.