horsefeathers

And Airservices didnt even consult with CASA about this proposal

Lets put some real world numbers for the Sky Echo 2 out there, just to inform the debate a bit. My SkyEcho is mounted on the top of my Jabiru windscreen, fyi. This morning, at 3,000 ft, I was able to see ADSB traffic approx 190 km away (using Ozrunways), from behind me. Also, we get a fair few Qantas Link aircraft overhead, approx 25,000 ft, typically coming out of Brisbane. Never have any problem picking them up I can see coastal traffic (about 50km away as the crow Jabiru flies), typically flying about 1,500/2,500 ft, with hills in between. Using FlightRadar 24, I can usually see my own aircraft while flying, or look at the tracking after i landed. I unfortunately don't know how good the reception is of my SkyEcho, and I'd love to be able to test it with another aircraft sometime. All in all, reception is brilliant, and more than sufficient for ADSB-IN, and so far with limited testing, ADSB-OUT seems more than adequate for a (say) 30Km safety zone

It's when you get down to the practicalities of this proposal, that it becomes apparent how totally nutty this proposal is - as well as totally unsafe. They apparently think it's OK to fly over tiger country at 1500 ft (I suppose you have to adjust your altitude for the various mountains and valleys), and then for example allow for clouds and fog. Seriously nutty thinking.

Totally agree Thruster. Now, if only CASA would tell us what was the intention of allowing the use of SkyEchos. Casa reps arent even aware of them (And, I heard with my own 2 pink shell like ears, that CASA has been blindsided by the Airservices proposal - the CASA rep said 0 - as in zero/ nada/none of CASA staff had heard of this proposal prior to the webinar, and as well, they are not too happy about the very short public response time for such a huge change)

Now, don't forget that one of the avowed aims is to align our airspace with American best practice. However, Class E in the US does NOT require a transponder, or even 2 way radio. Airservices is trying to sell us a pup

Welcome to the wonderful world of OneSKY

Proposed World Aeronautical Charts (WAC) Now Available https://engage.airservicesaustralia.com/lower-base-class-e-east-coast

Sorry KG - you are quite correct. I think I may have been carried away by the caring attitude exhibited by Airservices.

No. Their proposal does not mention low powered devices. They fall back on existing regs

I am now convinced that these guys (Airservices) have no day to day knowledge of flying. They lack knowledge and/or understanding of current technology, and give not a flying f*** about the impact their decisions will have

I have just had a response from AirServices (posted on their Q&A section --> https://engage.airservicesaustralia.com/lower-base-class-e-east-coast?tool=qanda) Question: I fly an RAA registered aircraft, and use a Sky Echo 2 to provide both ADSB-in and ADSB-out facilities. Using Ozrunways as my EFB, I can see other ADSB enabled traffic. Will I be allowed to transit Class E airspace at all, given I have a Sky Echo device (assuming I stay under 10,000 ft) Or am I going to be limited to flying no higher than 1500 Ft (not an ideal height safety wise) Response: Assuming that the Sky Echo 2 device meets the requirements for aircraft operations as detailed in AIP, then yes, you will be able to fly in the Class E airspace. IFR: ADS-B OUT equipment specified for IFR aircraft (IFR ADS-B OUT) VFR: 1. IFR ADS-B OUT; or 2. Mode S transponder; or 3. Mode A/C transponder; or 4. Integrated Traffic Awareness Beacon System (TABS) device I leave any interpretation to the reader, but it dont look good for SkyEcho And it seems from a casual reading of the response that Airservices doesnt know what a SkyEcho is

Yeah, I agree with the safety benefit, but... 1) The Airservices proposal (Q & A section --> https://engage.airservicesaustralia.com/lower-base-class-e-east-coast?tool=qanda) states This change is proposed to proceed with the current equipage requirements as per the existing regulations. This change does not require an ADS-B mandate for VFR aircraft in order to proceed. 2) In the same document under "Benefits" "Delivery of the AMP will ensure closer alignment to the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) system and proven United States practice of airspace management." The US requires Mode A transponders in Class E airspace 3) As per CASA advisory circular https://www.casa.gov.au/sites/default/files/advisory-circular-91-23-ads-b-enhancing-situational-awareness.pdf, page 18 For an EC device, under Transponder modal interactions, it has No transponder function Thus, an EC, by CASA's own definition, is not a transponder (And no, I am not going to get into an argument re the technical stuff about Integrated TABS - this is just my reading of the regs etc) Executive Summary? Airservices says there is no need to change ADS-B regs, and as per USA, assume they want (at least) Mode A transponders Sky Echo (EC device) is not recognised as a transponder Sky Echo thus does not meet the proposed changes to Class E Please tell me I'm wrong.

I agree. You make perfect sense, proposing a logical,simple and cheap solution which,if added to an increase (well, really a decrease) to Class E LL5000, would be acceptable. Anyone transponderless would still be able to have the 1000 ft separation when tracking opposite directions. Yeah, I know. Crazy talk

But WHERE does CASA say that an EC device fulfills the Class E requirements? Sky Echo is an EC device. It is nothing more.

Well, it seems no transponder ,no Class E flying. Bloody ridiculous proposal. I understand Michael Monk is putting a submission together, and would be grateful for feedback from RAA pilots as to how this proposal will affect them.

Well, I hope to be corrected, but I have always understood that the SkyEcho is only an EC device.

Sky Echo is optional in class E, but it is required to have ; 1. IFR ADS-B OUT; or 2. Mode S transponder7; or 3. Mode A/C transponder; or 4. integrated TABS. So it seems RAA without a transponder is limited to 1500 ft

From the Sky Echo "Conditions of Use" letter The SkyEcho2 portable ADS‐B transceiver has been accepted by CASA as an approved Electronic Conspicuity (EC) Device as an enhancement to "See and Be Seen" from 16th July, 2020. Conditions of Use Apply The SkyEcho2, and other EC devices, can be used voluntarily in aircraft operated to the Visual Flight Rules (VFR) below FL290. An EC device cannot be used instead of a transponder for operations in Class A, C, or E airspace or above 10 000ft AMSL in Class G airspace.

sooo, let me see if I have this correct. I will only be able to fly my 19 reg Jabiru above 1500ft IF i have a TSO'd transponder? Without a transponder, I would be limited to 1500ft for the majority of my flying around Gympie /Sunshine coast A trip from Gympie to Bundaberg would be limited to max altitude of 1500 ft? If so, this is an unbelievable proposal, and basically a nail in the coffin of RAA

Should VEC actually be VNC?? Cause you can get En route charts - low, and En Route Charts - high

Are you using a USB style charger for your electronics (eg an iPad)? Depending on the design of the charger, they can cause a problem with feedback thru the headphones

Respectfully, no more changes please. Increase existing "brand" recognition by any and all means, but dont go chopping and changing.

Hi Doc. Yes, Rolo is in business at Gympie airport - I'll get his number when I'm down at Gympie airport in the next day or two.

In the What's New (All) main page, there is no original creation date - there used to be a date showing when the topic (not replies) was originally created/ Can that be displayed, as I cant tell whether was created 2 weeks or 10 years previously

How's about this one https://www.aviationclassifieds.com.au/listing/5737