Jabawocky

Sorry to Bust the Myth Joker......... but a plan in the system is nice for a VFR flight following, but its not essential.

And in times of high traffic density many ATC would rather a pop up VFR with very little info required to assign a code and "tracking A to B at A045........

It often makes their life easier when mixing IFR Jets around them. At least they are known and verified for altitude and are semi predictable.

I think you have missed the point on this and a few other traffic management points. One being surveillence, and not so they can increase charges.

J

PS ATC's please feel free to comment and criticises my post if I am out of order.

le Pingouin

Eh, no. We have a lovely function called RADTAG which allows us to attach a label to any radar paint we want, even primaries, no plan required. Pop up, request flight following, tell us where you're going & we'll either get you to squawk ident or a discreet code. The discreet code is better in case your radar return drops out temporarily.

A flight plan is handy in that it provides functions like automated conflict alerts, route & level monitoring - great for your protection, but it's not a requirement for flight following.

OZBUSDRIVER

Francis, read the reg 9B.5 again. It IS quite clear. Can you please direct me to the particular subpart that 9B.5 refers to that says "anywhere a transponder is required"??

Gear-down

I recently got back from spending most of last year in the UK. Having flown ADS-B equipped aircraft, I think its bloody great, however in the UK, with flight levels starting at 3,000', it can look a bit crowded on the display! I was flying out of an airport just 15Nm South of Gatwick.

It's also interesting walking into the local flying club or the aviation supplies store and seeing a computer screen showing all the aircraft in the vicinity and by clicking on any of them, showing full description including pictures!

GD.

Joker 10

So Airservices is going to resource such that all VFR traffic OCTA is going to be tagged with RADTAG and then what ???

I will be interesting at the first Coroners Inquest when someone goes missing in the GAFA.

I can hear the Coroner already, so if the aircraft was tagged why was there no flight plan and what services were being given to the tagged aircraft by Air Services. How did Air Services know where the aircraft was going and who was in it ?? Should be an interesting answer.

The current Flight Note system is smarter than that.

The comment from the U.K. is really interesting , a cluttered screen, go figure.

Frank Arouet

OZBUSDRIVER;

You quote my initial post on this thread at post #64 And then you ask, post #72, where "anywhere a transponder is required" is referred to in 9B.5.

I know you are too intelligent to be "ignorantly obtuse" so I can only assume you are creating mischief to confuse the "plebs".

You have until 12 December 2013 to get your low level ADSB mandate wish up. In the meantime, as I don't fly above FL290, I can fly along with my radio on and my transponder squarking 1200 knowing I am safe and legal in all airspace. If I happen to get my antique flying before I fall off the perch, I will carry a handheld radio, (as the aircraft doesn't have electrics), if and when I want to fly into a CTAF (R).

I hope this meets with your approval.

OZBUSDRIVER

So, now we have another attempt at diversion.

Joker, that is one very old argument. Now you want to link it to AirServices staffing problems? Methinks you are mixing up the requirments of CAO 20.18.9B5 as somehow meaning that AIrServices wants to see you EVERYWHERE. Could it also be that the CAO is directed at the idea of ADS-B Rx equipped aircraft being able to see those ADS-B Tx equipped aircraft when they are far outside the range of AIrServices provided DTI?

OZBUSDRIVER

Francis, you have kindly provided a link to a CAO which completely changes the argument as proferred within the JCP for ADS-B implimentation.

I am sorry but that CAO changes the thrust of even my argument. I expected the requirments only to go as far as "where transponder is required" as well. It makes no difference, I leave my transponder on (When prompted after T/O compliments of many reminders by Chief Galah and his mates) even when outside radar coverage....why would that be? TCAS equipped aircraft in vicinity heading into nearby CTAF?

Cripes, I use the same paragraph in a different reply...I am turning into DICK SMITH

Seriously Francis, think hard! What does and ADS-B transponder do as well as squit on 1090Mhz?

Frank Arouet

OZBUSDRIVER;

You are very wittly posting here and giving a running jaundiced commentary on that other forum for your cronies to diseminate. It would appear that you are not interested in any support for the ADSB concept unless that support is unconditional to your agenda which includes the whole industry being subjected to an immediate cost impost so a dozen or so PPL "enthusiasts" can feel warm and fuzzy about some perceived threat to their safety in class G airspace.

That other forum deserves you.

Gear-down;

Out of interest, and please take this as a genuine question, is there any class G airspace in the UK and if so, what proportion is "freeflight".

peuce

I can't work out whether the anti-ADSB brigade (although they say they are for it) have a problem with:

1. Being "surveilled"
2. The cost of the kit

If it's the surveillance philosophy, then lets debate that ... as it doesn't really matter if its done by radar, ADS-B, transponder, X-Box, Wiii or Commodore64 ....

If it's the money, then let's stop debating ADS-B ... and start debating who and how surveillance, and it's accompanying black boxes, will be paid for.

OZBUSDRIVER

You're not a very deep thinker, Francis.

What bothered me about the rollout of equipment was the potential costs. AirServices had offered $10,000 for VFR and $15,000 for IFR aircraft for fitment of ADS-B Tx equipment. Now, I am not singling out any manufacturer and indeed no manufacturer that I know of had done this but, business being business would set their prices at just a little more than what AirServices would stump up. That way they would get the maximum return for a product without any competition. AirServices would have set the floor price...being a bushie you would understand my fear when compared to the wool industry. no competition, no innovation...that was my fear of any cross-industry funding model.

Thanks to you guys and your lill frien, methinks the "subsidy" is dead. This is a good thing. Competition being competition will lead to more innovation at a more affordable price. The Europeans are already delivering equipment that is competitive with old technology prices...a good thing for those who must stump up...the owners.

If you just look at this a bit more dispassionately, the costs are much closer to what anyone would consider quite affordable. The price point for a Rx outfit is closer to $5,000AU than even your mob would begrudgingly conseed as cheap enough.

UAP, J-curve and ten regionals plus the mineral provinces as about as far as I am willing to bet 1090ES will penetrate. However, because of that little ability to communicate aircraft to aircraft projects ADS-B to where ever an aeroplane flies.....you could say along the same lines as the Qld Police used to define a road when chasing me and my mates on our off-road bikes...anywhere you can get a wheeled vehicle...and as far as the police was concerned that included a shopping trolley! ENJOY

That's the game, Francis. Stop trying to play the man. I am just wondering if my poor layman description is actually getting any traction with you.

Peuce, would I be very correct if I said you would have prefered to keep the old fuel levy based charging regime and remove the neccessity of paying a dividend to the sole shareholder?

Frank Arouet

OZBUSDRIVER;

Suffer the little children! There was never a subsidy and nobody offered anybody anything. The JCP was was the meandering thinking of a bunch of vested interests.

If it was never there in the first place how could "anybody" be blamed for killing it. The tooth fairy is not real. Everybody told you so.

What hypocrisy. I'd expect that from your very own "legend in his own lunchbox" the multi identity fraudster Mr James Michael.

And that sums up your agenda. (deliberately quoted out of text).

I have a good working relationship with sharks. They don't drink in my pub and I don't swim in their ocean. Why don't you play with your own kind in their sandpit? End of discussion with you. Report that back.

peuce

Geez ... James Michael ... there's a name I haven't heard for a while ...

Anyway, back to the question ...

OZBUSDRIVER ... I'm not quite sure what I prefer, but I do believe that:

1. In general, the more surveillance the better ... for everyone
2. The dividend back to the Government is, at best a tax, at worst a rort
3. The User should pay ... however, being able to define the "User" in aviation, is the biggest challenge

OZBUSDRIVER

Thanks for that, Peuce. I was hoping that was what you were thinking.

Right, Francis. Would you still support ADS-B ground receiver roll-out in the areas I have pointed out. EDIT to clarify...UAP, J-Curve, The ten major regional aerodromes and the mineral provinces.

OZBUSDRIVER

Francis, awaiting your reply

le Pingouin

Guess what Joker? The system I described is what we currently use. We don't RADTAG every VFR OCTA - only those who request flight following. The pilot tells us where he's going when he requests flight following & it's his responsibility to advise when it changes. Other than I have no idea what you're going on about. How exactly does that provide a traffic service? Joker, pay attention. Flight following is an on request service. We don't RADTAG every 1200 paint we see.

Joker 10

Pinguin,

So just how will ADSB out benefit VFR traffic OCTA if this is the level of service you say ATC are going to provide.

How exactly does that provide a traffic service? Joker, pay attention. Flight following is an on request service. We don't RADTAG every 1200 paint we see.

So if I an VFR at the edge of the Strezleki Desert, no note, no plan what benefit will ADSB out provide ??

Jabawocky

Depends which edge and where the radio receivers were to be based, but Birdsville, Innamincka, Willy Ck, Leigh Ck, Coober............. lots of places that may well have a ground station. They have ATC radio there now in the GAFA (mostly) so why not!

Cheers!

Frank Arouet

Jabawocky;

It was a question to which he already knows the answer and that is written at permalink #1 of this thread. I don't feel like responding to loaded questions that can and are be used on other forums to vilify and ridicule.

On another twist to the VFR "MK1 eyeball" being the first and last line of defence in the circuit, I note confirmation via another source;

It would appear he does not recognise any present safety issue that needs addressing by looking at anything inside the cockpit while in the circuit.

le Pingouin

About as much use as radio, ADF, omni, transponder & ELT. But you still carry those.