Consultation on a Proposed Electronic Conspicuity Mandate in the UK - The CAA’s Proposed Approach - Civil Aviation Authority

1. The CAA’s proposal is that the EC Mandate should apply to all civil general air traffic that is not already required to carry and use ADS-B equipment, operating below FL100 in UK sovereign airspace, subject to the exceptions for military and state aircraft and VLOS operations described in this chapter. Do you agree with that proposal?

Yes No Do not know

Please explain your reasoning and provide any supporting evidence. If you think the scope should be drawn differently, please explain why and what alternative you would propose.

2. Do the minimum performance requirements set out in CAP 3140 provide appropriate and workable technical requirements for the EC Mandate?

Yes No Do not know

Please explain your reasoning and provide any supporting evidence. If you think the scope should be drawn differently, please explain why and what alternative you would propose.

3. CAP 3140’s Position 6 sets out the ADS-B IN receive capability for crewed aircraft should remain a voluntary, operator-led choice rather than a mandatory requirement. Do you agree with this position?

Yes No Do not know

If no, please explain what approach you would propose and why, including the operational and safety implications. Please provide supporting evidence where available.

4. Do you think there are circumstances in which the objective of an EC Mandate could be met through means other than direct carriage of EC equipment by the aircraft?

Yes No Do not know

If so, please explain how any alternative approach would deliver the objectives of the EC mandate set out in Chapter 3. Please provide evidence on the operational contexts where this might apply.

5. The CAA and the Department for Transport are looking at how to balance clear rules with the flexibility needed as technology develops. This includes whether detailed technical requirements for EC equipment should be set out in guidance or other non-legislative documents, rather than in legislation. Is there anything you think we should take into account when considering this?

6. Is there anything you would like us to consider as we develop our oversight and compliance approach to support effective implementation of an EC Mandate across different aircraft categories and operational contexts?

Please provide examples where possible, including any aircraft categories where existing oversight mechanisms would not be appropriate or sufficient, and suggestions for how compliance might be assessed in those cases.