Gaunty, it is fantastic for you to bring this to everyone’s notice. I’ve always supported ADS-B – I just don’t support Australian general aviation being guinea pigs for a system which is being rushed in to maximise profits and has not been looked at properly. For a start, privacy issues have not been properly looked at – nor have security issues.
Also, the FAA is looking at quite a different system for the low level airspace. It is not compatible with the system currently being proposed in Australia. The following quote is from Marion Blakey:
Quote:
|
Pilots would also benefit from more weather and flight information, such as temporary flight restrictions. |
As you probably know, a major part of the US ADS-B Capstone system is graphical weather information in the cockpit (at no charge) with the ADS-B unit. That is not part of the Australian system. It appears that the Mode S squitter system does not have enough capacity for graphics and other information. With the FAA UAT (Universal Access Transmitter) system there is plenty of capacity for lots of safety improving information.
To quote Phil Boyer:
Quote:
|
In the United States the FAA is working on a detailed 10-year plan to replace radar with ADS-B. This means that by the end of the next decade, if you fly IFR or VFR in certain classes of airspace you may have to purchase an ADS-B transceiver for your aircraft. |
Note Phil’s words “the end of the next decade”. That is 15 years away. I just spoke to Phil on the phone and he believes it will be at least 12 years before any ADS-B is mandated for GA aircraft in the USA. In the intervening 12 years it will be highly refined, reduced in price, and be made to work very safely.
Phil also says:
Quote:
|
This time the FAA is listening. To put it simply, ADS-B can bring benefits to GA in the form of traffic and weather datalink in the cockpit. That is why AOPA continues to insist that the FAA commit to providing traffic, graphical weather, and other information in the cockpit via ADS-B and a multifunction display … |
As you probably know (and as I’ve said above) the proposed Australian system cannot give graphical weather and other information.
Quote:
|
Our goal will be to bring the advantages of ADS-B to the cockpit 10 years from now at no greater cost than today's Mode C transponder — with weather and traffic displays as added bonuses. |
Gaunty, this sounds pretty fantastic. Why should we in Australia rush in with something to be in front of the Americans, when it is nowhere near as good? I’m sure you will agree that having graphical weather information in the cockpit could assist in reducing weather related accidents.
I once met Scotty Allan, one of the earlier Chief Executives of Qantas – and also a famous pilot in his own right. He told me how there was pressure from the Government for Qantas to be one of the first in the world to buy the Comet. He resisted this, said, “Let’s be conservative and get something that is more proven.” As we all know, Qantas went with Boeing – what a sensible decision. Imagine if Qantas had decided to lead the pack by designing our own Comet here in Australia to be first – then again, we did that didn’t we? It was called the Nomad.
Imagine being locked in again to something like the AWA unique Australian DME. This cost our country a fortune. I believe we should learn from our errors.
Most importantly, the USA has a proper objectively based airspace classification system. We need that to be in place before we can use the advantages of ADS-B. For example, we have jets flying around in uncontrolled airspace – the USA doesn’t allow this. Their ADS-B will slot in to a very well proven, scientifically based airspace system. That is why we need to go ahead and put in the proper airspace system so we can gain the benefits from a proven ADS-B system.
By the way, can you remember this? The Federal Government’s aviation policy dated 15 September 2004 – just before the last election:
Quote:
|
A Coalition Government will continue to modernise Australia’s airspace system through the continued staged implementation of the National Airspace System (NAS).
The National Airspace System has already been found by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority to be safer than the system we have today. Furthermore, it will deliver improved air traffic services and greater flexibility for instrument flight rules aircraft, especially in regional Australia, greater freedom of movement for visual flight rules flights, and simpler, standardised procedures that will make flying easier.
It will also encourage greater participation in the aviation industry, creating jobs in the aviation industry and in regional communities that depend on it. |
I don’t support rushing in a system that has never been thought out properly. I understand from talking to Phil Boyer that the FAA Capstone system is a lot more secure than the Mode S squitter – I personally believe that in the next few years they will come up with a system so that privacy and security are guaranteed. That is, an individual aircraft can’t be identified by non-approved people.
