FAA ADS-B Propaganda Video

On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 18:10:51 +0000, Larry Dighera wrote:

Are you able to list ANY benefits to GA operators that will occur as a
result of implementation of the current FAA ADS-B OUT NPRM?

Any aircraft [owners] that choose to install ADS-B-in will benefit from
all the other aircraft having installed ADS-B-out.

- Andrew

On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 09:18:42 -0500, "John T"
wrote in
:

the only evidence of RNC misbehavior you showed was 30+ years old. Hardly
earth-shaking.

That was just to provide an example of the type of ruthless, arrogant
disregard for the rule of law members of the RNC have publicly
displayed in the past.

It's happening right under our noses now. Do you think there is the
slightest possibility, that the "Decider" used the dirty trick of
taking our nation into an unwinnable war in Iraq under false pretences
just so he might be reelected? Why do you think Carl Rove left
office? Gonzales, De Lay, Rumsfeld, Libby, ...; these people
perpetrate the same old RNC dirty Nixon tricks today. Or haven't you
noticed.

In article ,
Andrew Gideon wrote:

On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 18:10:51 +0000, Larry Dighera wrote:

Are you able to list ANY benefits to GA operators that will occur as a
result of implementation of the current FAA ADS-B OUT NPRM?

Any aircraft [owners] that choose to install ADS-B-in will benefit from
all the other aircraft having installed ADS-B-out.

Only in areas where air-to-air threats exist and see-and-avoid wouldn't
work.

--
Bob Noel
(goodness, please trim replies!!!)

On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 09:09:58 -0500, "John T"
wrote in
:

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message


Are you aware that the FAA's intent is to decommission most of their
radar once ADS-B is operational? ADS-B relies upon aircraft equipped
GPS receivers; radar relies on the physical reflection of radio waves
bouncing off of tangible objects. Which would you prefer to bet your
life on?

I'm not passing judgement on the ADS-B question, but relying on radar around
the DC area can get you in trouble (if not killed). Radar plots can be as
much as a mile off actual location, so I'm not convinced it's a superior
alternative to satellite tech (like GPS) despite the occasional solar
interference.

Upon what do you base that allegation? Radar has been good enough to
provide ATC positional information for decades. What has caused it to
suddenly become anathema?

When (not if) satellite communications go down, and the only means ATC
possesses to update aircraft positions on their scopes goes with it,
what will you say then?

Reliance upon less robust technology as the basis of "upgrading" ATC
only benefits those corporations that are in the business of fielding
that technology.

Try to look beyond the double-speak the Bush regime is vomiting, and
think for yourself. The American people will be left holding the bag,
something like draining our nation's treasure through the
non-competitive contracts gifted to Halliburton and Blackwater.

On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 16:55:56 -0800 (PST), "F. Baum"
wrote in
:

On Dec 22, 12:12*pm, Larry Dighera wrote:

I'm still waiting for you to list the benefits to GA aircraft owners
that the FAA's ADS-B NPRM will provide. *If you are unable to list
them, I'll have to conclude that you agree that there are none.

Yea, you are right.

Thank you for admitting that you are completely unable to provide
evidence of _ANY_ benefits to light GA operators who will be funding
the lion's share of this proposed ADS-B "airspace modernization"
boondoggle.

Lets not modernize our airspace.

Regardless of how much rhetoric is spewed about how NextGen ATC
modernization will reduce airline delays, or provide better safety,
the fact remains, that there is a _finite_ amount of airspace, so the
system is inherently limited. No modernization scheme can change that
fact. NextGen may enable reducing aircraft separation to some extent,
but it is inevitable that a limit will be reached if airline traffic
continues to burgeon.

If you take a
look at the NPRM and the FAA material on Next Gen you will see that it
benefits GA much more than the airlines.

I've looked at it, and I don't see what you are referring to. Perhaps
you'll be good enough to provide an example or two.

I dont know who you fly for,
but the airlines already have many of the Next Gen procedures are in
place.

Can you be a little more specific? To what "procedures" are you
referring?

I dont mean to be sarcastic Larry, but when you fly an RNAV or
RNP procedure do you long for the good old days of vectors and
holding patterns ?
FB

Do you believe that ADS-B and NextGen are necessary for those
procedures? I can recall using RNAV in the late '60s; it is not new.
RNP is a result of more accurate technology. It is funded by those
who use it, not those who don't. Incremental modernization like that
is welcome. But to scrap the world's best ATC system in favor of
large-corporation driven pie-in-the-sky marketing promises is foolish
in my opinion.

Bob Noel wrote:

Are you able to list ANY benefits to GA operators that will occur as a
result of implementation of the current FAA ADS-B OUT NPRM?

Any aircraft [owners] that choose to install ADS-B-in will benefit from
all the other aircraft having installed ADS-B-out.

Only in areas where air-to-air threats exist and see-and-avoid wouldn't
work.

Plus the cost to implement ADS-B In to include a suitable screen will
be very expensive IF the FAA projected cost of over $17,000 just for
ADS-B Out is even close to correct.

You will never have the case where all GA aircraft have ADS-B Out
installed.

I have yet to see a credible argment for mandating ADS-B Out for GA
aircraft. It is just emotional "we will all be safer" type comments
that are not justified.

Ron Lee

On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 14:20:43 +0000 (UTC), Andrew Gideon
wrote in :

On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 18:10:51 +0000, Larry Dighera wrote:

Are you able to list ANY benefits to GA operators that will occur as a
result of implementation of the current FAA ADS-B OUT NPRM?

Any aircraft [owners] that choose to install ADS-B-in will benefit from
all the other aircraft having installed ADS-B-out.


Exactly my point. The NPRM doesn't benefit those to whom it dictates
the expenditure of larges sums of cash; it's for others.

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message


I'm not passing judgement on the ADS-B question, but relying on
radar around the DC area can get you in trouble (if not killed).
Radar plots can be as much as a mile off actual location, so I'm not
convinced it's a superior alternative to satellite tech (like GPS)
despite the occasional solar interference.

Upon what do you base that allegation? Radar has been good enough to
provide ATC positional information for decades. What has caused it to
suddenly become anathema?

It's a repeat of what local controllers have told us in briefings and
discussions about the DC ADIZ. This is the basis for the advice to keep your
assigned transponder code for at least 3-5 miles when exiting the ADIZ
(since squawking VFR inside the ADIZ is an automatic violation). We have
been told there have been instances where pilots using GPS to identify the
ADIZ boundary and squawking VFR (even after being instructed by ATC) were
violated after "other sources" identified them as being inside the ADIZ.

When (not if) satellite communications go down, and the only means ATC
possesses to update aircraft positions on their scopes goes with it,
what will you say then?

Don't misinterpret my point. I'm merely pointing out that radar is not
infallible and not necessarily more robust.

Try to look beyond the double-speak the Bush regime is vomiting, and
think for yourself.

Ah, yes. The inevitable argument of many leftists. Just because I disagree
with one minor point, I'm automatically in lockstep with your hated enemy,
the Bush administration. Grow up, Larry.

...something like draining our nation's treasure through the
non-competitive contracts gifted to Halliburton and Blackwater.

More regurgitated left-wing propaganda. (Talk about vomit...)

--
John T
http://sage1solutions.com/blogs/TknoFlyer
http://sage1solutions.com/products
NEW! FlyteBalance v2.0 (W&B); FlyteLog v2.0 (Logbook)
____________________

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message


It's happening right under our noses now. Do you think there is the
slightest possibility, that the "Decider" used the dirty trick of
taking our nation into an unwinnable war in Iraq under false pretences
just so he might be reelected? Why do you think Carl Rove left
office? Gonzales, De Lay, Rumsfeld, Libby, ...; these people
perpetrate the same old RNC dirty Nixon tricks today. Or haven't you
noticed.

The beauty of conspiracy theory is that anything that happens is validation
of the theory.

--
John T
http://sage1solutions.com/blogs/TknoFlyer
http://sage1solutions.com/products
NEW! FlyteBalance v2.0 (W&B); FlyteLog v2.0 (Logbook)
____________________

On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 16:49:48 +0000, Larry Dighera wrote:

Exactly my point. The NPRM doesn't benefit those to whom it dictates
the expenditure of larges sums of cash; it's for others.

That's approximately correct. Since "others" can include those dictated
to spend that cash, it's not completely correct.

But where's the surprise supposed to be? I rarely need the ATC service
required by the airlines; my taxes pay for it anyway. Even at the
airports I use, think of the waste of my tax money spent on all that
extra runway I don't use (unless I desire several t-n-gs w/o bothering
with the traffic pattern {8^).

There are plenty of other examples, both government and corporate.

In fact, though, I'm not sure you're right at all. If ATC costs drop as
a result of this, then I get to see some savings in my taxes.
Admittedly, the political classes will likely find a new way to spend my
money, but they'd probably do that anyway (so I'm benefiting by having
less taken from me {8^).

Then there's the potential gain in safety in certain places. For
example, there've been a couple of mid-air collisions at my "home"
airport over the not-too-distant years. Most of the traffic pattern is
shadowed from local RADAR by geography.

But if the tower received an ADS-B-out generated "RADAR" display,
controllers might be in a better position to warn even those non-ADS-B-in
aircraft of collision threats.

- Andrew