Michiganatc
Posts: 112
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2008 3:34 pm

UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Sat Dec 17, 2011 3:24 pm

I was excited last August when I learned that the FAA moved in a direction to CANCEL the BARR program. This is a program which allows aircraft owners to have their aircraft removed from the flight tracking websites and programs. It keeps the general public away from tracking their airplanes. The FAA said they want to get rid of this program with the exception of those who can prove a "valid security concern".

For my own personal benefit I thought this was great! Mostly because I've been trying for 2 years now to track N707JT (Travolta's Boeing 707) so I could get some good pictures. Well, I guess I'm out of luck, because as of December 16, 2011 the FAA has updated the Federal Registry Notice and the DOT has approved FULL CONTINUATION of the BARR program.

So my hopes were up, now they're shot back down again. As the link below explains, we (the general public) are blocked from tracking aircraft participating in the BARR program indefinately  http://www.nbaa.org/ops/security/barr/
 
DiamondFlyer
Posts: 2168
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 11:50 pm

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Sat Dec 17, 2011 4:10 pm

Quoting michiganatc (Thread starter):
As the link below explains, we (the general public) are blocked from tracking aircraft participating in the BARR program indefinately

As it should be. The day I can search online to see where every car in the country is, I would be willing to give up the blocking program for aircraft.

-DiamondFlyer
From my cold, dead hands
 
BP1
Posts: 133
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 4:39 am

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Sat Dec 17, 2011 4:29 pm

If the plane is blocked at the FAA source, then too bad - but if it is blocked a the internet level then there are programs that can still track "blocked" tails. Send me a message if you want details.

The FAA has 2 types of blocking

1 at the FAA level

1 at the internet level and codes can allow you to see the planes.

Cheers,
BP1
"First To Fly The A-380" / 26 October 2007 SYD-SIN Inaugural
 
User avatar
readytotaxi
Posts: 3328
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 2:09 am

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Sat Dec 17, 2011 4:43 pm

Quoting michiganatc (Thread starter):
The FAA said they want to get rid of this program with the exception of those who can prove a "valid security concern".

Okay, so when this aircraft is flown outside FAA control it is trackable,yes?
you don't get a second chance to make a first impression!
 
BP1
Posts: 133
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 4:39 am

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Sat Dec 17, 2011 4:48 pm

It is very easy to get your plane on BARR and to track a blocked plane!!
"First To Fly The A-380" / 26 October 2007 SYD-SIN Inaugural
 
Michiganatc
Posts: 112
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2008 3:34 pm

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Sat Dec 17, 2011 7:39 pm

Quoting DiamondFlyer (Reply 1):
As it should be. The day I can search online to see where every car in the country is, I would be willing to give up the blocking program for aircraft.

Comparing this to tracking all motor vehicles doesn't even make sense. That would require equiping every single vehicle with some sort of GPS tracking device. It would also require some sort of NEED, for safety reasons, to be tracked.

Where as ALL commercial and coorporate aircraft already "have" a transponder and the FAA already "has" tracking equipment (RADAR)...soon to be ADS-B. The safety need for the FAA to have this is to separate aircraft.

As far as the general public being allowed to take advantage of the FAA's flight tracking information and to track airplanes, there are many reasons and benefits:

- FBO's being allowed to track an inbound aircraft for planning & scheduling purposes
- ATC lost communication (NORDO) purposes to visually plot out course of aircraft to see what sectors they flew through.
- Airports to monitor ALL aircraft to collect landing fees from non-scheduled aircraft (These are occassionally NOT reported by the FBO). Some airports have to physically see the airplane on the field and have to document a tail number.
- Smaller airports plan runway closures for snow removal around projected inbound aircraft based on flight tracker systems. Airborn holding may result if an airport is unaware of an inbound (Yes, this happens, I work at a small airport).
- And people like me who need pictures!  
-
 
rolypolyman
Posts: 85
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 10:53 pm

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Sat Dec 17, 2011 8:42 pm

What we really need is for some innovative company to break SBS's monopoly (SBS is a passive radar system; there's no reason these can't be available for $100 a piece) and get the things networked.
 
Jerseyguy
Posts: 2027
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2005 12:05 pm

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Sat Dec 17, 2011 10:10 pm

Quoting michiganatc (Reply 5):
Comparing this to tracking all motor vehicles doesn't even make sense. That would require equiping every single vehicle with some sort of GPS tracking device. It would also require some sort of NEED, for safety reasons, to be tracked.

What he's saying is that a personal aircraft is basically someones transportation just like your car is to you. If there were some safety need for cars to be tracked would you want your cars location information available to ANYONE with an internet connection? I know I sure wouldn't. Also the FAA has a need to be able to track personal planes for as you said safety reasons. Whats your NEED (not want BTW) to be able to track someones plane?

Quoting michiganatc (Reply 5):
As far as the general public being allowed to take advantage of the FAA's flight tracking information and to track airplanes, there are many reasons and benefits:

- FBO's being allowed to track an inbound aircraft for planning & scheduling purposes
- ATC lost communication (NORDO) purposes to visually plot out course of aircraft to see what sectors they flew through.
- Airports to monitor ALL aircraft to collect landing fees from non-scheduled aircraft (These are occassionally NOT reported by the FBO). Some airports have to physically see the airplane on the field and have to document a tail number.
- Smaller airports plan runway closures for snow removal around projected inbound aircraft based on flight tracker systems. Airborn holding may result if an airport is unaware of an inbound (Yes, this happens, I work at a small airport).

All these companies with legimate needs can be given access to flight tracking by the FAA. They of course would have to register to be part of a program justifying their need.

Quoting michiganatc (Reply 5):
- And people like me who need pictures!

correction people like you who WANT pictures.

Lets allow people to track someone using their cellphone. Most cellphones have GPS because there is a need to be able to locate a 911 call. So why not just let people track everybody the technology is there? We can start with your cell phone, perhaps. I have a need to take pictures of self-serving people like you.

[Edited 2011-12-17 14:15:03]
Webmaster of an unoffical TTN page see profile for details
 
BMI727
Posts: 11123
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Sat Dec 17, 2011 10:53 pm

Quoting michiganatc (Thread starter):
As the link below explains, we (the general public) are blocked from tracking aircraft participating in the BARR program indefinately

Good. 'Bout time someone came to their senses.

Quoting michiganatc (Reply 5):
It would also require some sort of NEED, for safety reasons, to be tracked.

Aircraft are tracked for safety reasons. But the general public does not need to track them for safety reasons or any other reason. People who need to know can know, and people who don't (you and me) shouldn't be able to track anything if the owner so chooses.

Quoting michiganatc (Reply 5):
- FBO's being allowed to track an inbound aircraft for planning & scheduling purposes

They ways of getting in touch.

Quoting michiganatc (Reply 5):
- ATC lost communication (NORDO) purposes to visually plot out course of aircraft to see what sectors they flew through.

When did ATC become "the general public"?

Quoting michiganatc (Reply 5):
Some airports have to physically see the airplane on the field and have to document a tail number.

I've never physically seen a plane on FlightAware and I know you haven't either.

Quoting michiganatc (Reply 5):
Smaller airports plan runway closures for snow removal around projected inbound aircraft based on flight tracker systems. Airborn holding may result if an airport is unaware of an inbound (Yes, this happens, I work at a small airport).

Airports are not the general public.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
 
DiamondFlyer
Posts: 2168
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 11:50 pm

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Sat Dec 17, 2011 11:44 pm

Quoting michiganatc (Reply 5):
Comparing this to tracking all motor vehicles doesn't even make sense. That would require equiping every single vehicle with some sort of GPS tracking device. It would also require some sort of NEED, for safety reasons, to be tracked.

There is no need for the general public to track an airplane either. So, either everyone can track cars, planes, trains and boats, or they can track none. Pick your poison. I'm going for the non-police state.

Quoting michiganatc (Reply 5):
FBO's being allowed to track an inbound aircraft for planning & scheduling purposes

It's called a radio. The only thing an FBO needs to know is when a plane is 10-15 minutes out, at best, and radio's have that kind of range these days.

Quoting michiganatc (Reply 5):
Airports to monitor ALL aircraft to collect landing fees from non-scheduled aircraft (These are occassionally NOT reported by the FBO). Some airports have to physically see the airplane on the field and have to document a tail number.

Airports that collect a landing fee are most always large, commercial airports, which have a control tower than can track movements. You do realize that not every plane shows up on flightaware and the like. In fact, very few VFR aircraft end up on there. But again, that would assume you know that flight plans are not required in the United States. Oh the humanity!!!

Quoting michiganatc (Reply 5):
Smaller airports plan runway closures for snow removal around projected inbound aircraft based on flight tracker systems. Airborn holding may result if an airport is unaware of an inbound (Yes, this happens, I work at a small airport).

Smaller airports? Please, you mean airports that have commercial service. This country has nearly 18,000 landing facilities. The number of them which have snow removal capability 24/7 is extremely low, and those that do are again, ones with a control tower.

-DiamondFlyer
From my cold, dead hands
 
PHLapproach
Posts: 1056
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 6:37 am

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Sun Dec 18, 2011 1:37 am

It only made sense to restore BARR because after ALL the work and wasted time with this program being questioned in the House/ Senate and them changing the rules. The D-Heads figured out a way to just fly as DotCom by filing on fltplan.com.

It's ok... just like someone said up top. When hell freezes over and NexGen is fully implemented. People will just get a network of ADS-B Radars going and then what are the rich pricks gonna do? Fly around without their Transponders on...  
 
User avatar
clickhappy
Posts: 9042
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2001 12:10 pm

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Sun Dec 18, 2011 2:00 am

In August - for about 4 days, nothing was blocked, from a photography standpoint (I was in Las Vegas at the time) it was pretty sweet.
 
Jerseyguy
Posts: 2027
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2005 12:05 pm

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Sun Dec 18, 2011 3:05 am

Quoting PHLapproach (Reply 10):
then what are the rich pricks gonna do?

Those rich pricks are again going to have their privacy invaded because you think you have a right to do so.
Webmaster of an unoffical TTN page see profile for details
 
ltbewr
Posts: 12427
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Sun Dec 18, 2011 3:27 am

I would suggest that there may be sound privacy, political, security and business reasons, which we do not have to discuss the details why here, to not allow a flight, private or commercial, to be on the public areas of Flightaware.com and the ability for the operator to 'opt out', even in a blanket policy.
 
Mir
Posts: 19108
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Sun Dec 18, 2011 3:35 am

Quoting michiganatc (Reply 5):
It would also require some sort of NEED, for safety reasons, to be tracked.

Okay, here's a need: what if your car was used in a crime and the police needed to track it? Would make law enforcement's job a lot easier, and would help them ensure public safety by getting criminals off the streets faster. The solution? Make sure every car is equipped with a transmitter. And then cars can be tracked (don't think that this is too far off - the technology already exists, and it's only a matter of time before it becomes cost-effective; at that point, there will be a civil liberties fight).

Quoting michiganatc (Reply 5):
- FBO's being allowed to track an inbound aircraft for planning & scheduling purposes

FBOs are a legitimate business, and they can get access.

Quoting michiganatc (Reply 5):
- ATC lost communication (NORDO) purposes to visually plot out course of aircraft to see what sectors they flew through.

You're not saying that when ATC loses communication with an aircraft, they resort to Flightaware to see where it is and where it's been, right? Because they have plenty of other stuff that works better.

Quoting michiganatc (Reply 5):
- Airports to monitor ALL aircraft to collect landing fees from non-scheduled aircraft (These are occassionally NOT reported by the FBO). Some airports have to physically see the airplane on the field and have to document a tail number.

If they need to physically see the airplane on the field, a flight tracker isn't going to help them one bit.

Quoting michiganatc (Reply 5):
- Smaller airports plan runway closures for snow removal around projected inbound aircraft based on flight tracker systems. Airborn holding may result if an airport is unaware of an inbound (Yes, this happens, I work at a small airport).

Again, an airport is a legitimate business, and they can get access if they need it.

Quoting michiganatc (Reply 5):
- And people like me who need pictures!

You don't need pictures. It would be nice if you could get them, but you don't need them.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
Drewski2112
Posts: 78
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 2:02 pm

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Sun Dec 18, 2011 4:09 am

I was appalled when this programme was disbanded by bureaucrats and am glad it has been reinstated by congress. There are legitimate reasons to block flights from public tracking which have been properly argued above. Besides, the most reliable flight tracker is an airband radio. Always has been, always will be. Those who rely on internet flight tracking miss out big.
 
DashTrash
Posts: 1266
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2006 8:44 am

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Sun Dec 18, 2011 6:36 am

Quoting michiganatc (Reply 5):
The safety need for the FAA to have this is to separate aircraft.

FAA yes. General public, no.

Quoting michiganatc (Reply 5):
- FBO's being allowed to track an inbound aircraft for planning & scheduling purposes

That's why we make "in range" calls. Sometimes we do through AFIS or flight phone to really piss you guys off.

Quoting michiganatc (Reply 5):
- ATC lost communication (NORDO) purposes to visually plot out course of aircraft to see what sectors they flew through.

Has nothing to do with Flightaware.

Quoting michiganatc (Reply 5):
- Airports to monitor ALL aircraft to collect landing fees from non-scheduled aircraft (These are occassionally NOT reported by the FBO). Some airports have to physically see the airplane on the field and have to document a tail number.

Get a better tracking system. I have yet to go to an airport that charged fees and didn't get theirs one way or another.

Quoting michiganatc (Reply 5):
- Smaller airports plan runway closures for snow removal around projected inbound aircraft based on flight tracker systems. Airborn holding may result if an airport is unaware of an inbound (Yes, this happens, I work at a small airport).

Manure

Quoting michiganatc (Reply 5):
- And people like me who need pictures!

Pictures of what? Airplanes? Movie stars scratching their butt while waiting for bags? Business execs picking their nose waiting on limos? Get a life man....

Quoting PHLapproach (Reply 10):
The D-Heads figured out a way to just fly as DotCom by filing on fltplan.com.

Those "d-heads" keep a lot of us employed, and are no less entitled to their privacy than you are. I made a nice living flying them around until Madoff and the economy wiped many out. Now, we live check to check rather than being able to plan ahead. We also get to choose between retirement and paying for our son's college.

Quoting PHLapproach (Reply 10):
It's ok... just like someone said up top. When hell freezes over and NexGen is fully implemented. People will just get a network of ADS-B Radars going and then what are the rich pricks gonna do? Fly around without their Transponders on...

You really think people are gonna get their own radars? We pilots are a crafty bunch. If we don't want you to know who's on the airplane, you won't know.
 
BMI727
Posts: 11123
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Sun Dec 18, 2011 6:50 am

Quoting DashTrash (Reply 16):
Now, we live check to check rather than being able to plan ahead. We also get to choose between retirement and paying for our son's college.

Of course in the future they may be less likely to fly privately since the public has decided it was evil. Then again, they probably can't afford not to, something the general public does not understand.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
 
flyingturtle
Posts: 4622
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 1:39 pm

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Sun Dec 18, 2011 12:05 pm

Quoting Mir (Reply 14):
And then cars can be tracked (don't think that this is too far off - the technology already exists, and it's only a matter of time before it becomes cost-effective; at that point, there will be a civil liberties fight).

Not to hijack threads, but a technical detail: There are already (newly-built) cars that have either (or both) a GPS navigation system with a cell phone SIM card inside, or the car itself is equipped with one. Then you can track cars. Presto. In cities it's much more precise as in the countryside, though.
Keeping calm is terrorism against those who want to live in fear.
 
mmedford
Posts: 449
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 5:54 pm

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Sun Dec 18, 2011 12:35 pm

Quoting DashTrash (Reply 16):
Get a life man....

Sums up this entire thread...and many more like it on Anet.

You would be nuts to assuming ATC falls back to something such as flightaware for controlling aircraft, first and foremost they can't. It's not a certified piece of equipment (every piece of NAS equipment has to meet certification requirements and certified on a periodic basis).

Quoting PHLapproach (Reply 10):
It's ok... just like someone said up top. When hell freezes over and NexGen is fully implemented. People will just get a network of ADS-B Radars going and then what are the rich pricks gonna do? Fly around without their Transponders on...

Well they are going to have too after the NGVS gets implemented, no more liveatc...lol


seriously; some enthusiasts take this way too far...
ILS = It'll Land Somewhere
 
jcos15
Posts: 19
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2011 10:45 pm

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Sun Dec 18, 2011 2:34 pm

Besides government and military aircraft, what planes truly need to be "hidden?". If a few more enthusiasts found out Travolta's 707 was going to be somewhere and they simply wanted to see it, what's wrong with that? I would think QANTAS would invite that advertising exposure  .

And michiganatc, having a life is having passion. Don't give up yours and keep photographing those magnificent machines we all are passionate about!
 
Mir
Posts: 19108
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Sun Dec 18, 2011 3:13 pm

Quoting jcos15 (Reply 20):
Besides government and military aircraft, what planes truly need to be "hidden?".

Anyone who wants theirs to be. It's a privacy thing.

Quoting jcos15 (Reply 20):
If a few more enthusiasts found out Travolta's 707 was going to be somewhere and they simply wanted to see it, what's wrong with that?

It's not about the airplanes, it's about the people on them. You might only want a look at the airplane, and that's fine, but there are others who would want to harass the passengers.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
Western727
Posts: 1428
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 12:38 pm

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Sun Dec 18, 2011 3:17 pm

Quoting flyingturtle (Reply 18):

OnStar comes to mind as an example of a system that has been around for at least a few years.

Quoting jcos15 (Reply 20):

If I were Travolta, I'd definitely prefer NOT to be tracked. Less chance of paparazzi harrassment. Further, I speculate that CEOs and other executives on corporate jets would much prefer to stay under the radar (so to speak) so as not to give competitors an advantage.

EDIT: grammar. Mir beat me to the above too.  Smile

[Edited 2011-12-18 07:18:51]
Jack @ AUS
 
BMI727
Posts: 11123
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Sun Dec 18, 2011 3:33 pm

Quoting jcos15 (Reply 20):
Besides government and military aircraft, what planes truly need to be "hidden?".

You'd be surprised. But your question is a nonstarter anyway since need to be hidden is irrelevant. It is a question of wanting to be hidden, and if they wish to be hidden, they should be able to be hidden. There is simply no sane argument why aircraft owners shouldn't be afforded privacy like anyone else.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
 
jcos15
Posts: 19
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2011 10:45 pm

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Sun Dec 18, 2011 3:39 pm

Quoting Western727 (Reply 22):
Quoting Mir (Reply 21):

1. We don't know who's on the planes (by law), only who owns them.

2. Airports have the tightest security of almost any public facility, so the threat potential is extremely low and I would guess most FBO's don't allow papparrazi onto the tarmacs.

3. If I can use the logic from other comments in this thread, if FlightAware is how you find out about a competing company "making a move", then you probably have bigger problems at your company than what your competitors are doing.

4. If taxes are paid on property such as a car or house, that property's ownership is a matter of public record. Why should airplanes be excluded?

Privacy is about the person, not their property.
 
Western727
Posts: 1428
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 12:38 pm

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Sun Dec 18, 2011 3:49 pm

Quoting jcos15 (Reply 24):

Not sure I agree on the paparazzi thing. Who's stopping them from buzzing just outside the airport perimeter?

Furthermore, in certain industries, it's very cutthroat. Corporate espionage is a big problem. So, yes, it's very important for executives to stay under the radar regardless of the "problems" a company might or might not have.
Jack @ AUS
 
BMI727
Posts: 11123
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Sun Dec 18, 2011 3:54 pm

Quoting jcos15 (Reply 24):
1. We don't know who's on the planes (by law), only who owns them.

That doesn't help much in a lot of cases.

Quoting jcos15 (Reply 24):
2. Airports have the tightest security of almost any public facility, so the threat potential is extremely low and I would guess most FBO's don't allow papparrazi onto the tarmacs.

Yeah, because no papparazi ever got themselves a telephoto lens.   And it isn't always photography either. There is the small matter of competition in the case of companies and security threats. The airport might be reasonably secure (though even that is sometimes questionable) but what about the roads leading to it? Local motels? Restaurants? It's a lot easier to be safe when nobody knows you're there.

Quoting jcos15 (Reply 24):
If I can use the logic from other comments in this thread, if FlightAware is how you find out about a competing company "making a move", then you probably have bigger problems at your company than what your competitors are doing.

You'd be surprised. Business moves fast, which is part of the reason for having the jet in the first place.

Quoting jcos15 (Reply 24):
4. If taxes are paid on property such as a car or house, that property's ownership is a matter of public record. Why should airplanes be excluded?

They aren't. There is the registration which is shown in a database, and a lot of these planes are assets of publicly traded companies. Their existence and value is not, and was never intended to be, a secret. And yes, they do pay taxes on it. And as long as they pay the taxes, why does it matter to anyone where the plane is?

What you made is an apples to oranges comparison. Perhaps you wouldn't mind if just anyone could see who's at your house and what they're doing at any given time? How about tracking your car everywhere it goes in real time? It's not tracking you, just your car.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
 
Mir
Posts: 19108
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Sun Dec 18, 2011 4:21 pm

Quoting jcos15 (Reply 24):
1. We don't know who's on the planes (by law), only who owns them.

If 707JT shows up somewhere, you pretty much know who's on it. And there are plenty of other aircraft you could say that about.

Quoting jcos15 (Reply 24):
2. Airports have the tightest security of almost any public facility, so the threat potential is extremely low and I would guess most FBO's don't allow papparrazi onto the tarmacs.

It's actually very easy to get photographs at most general aviation airports. Not that you can actually get onto the ramp, but there are plenty of places from where it's easy to take a photo with even a regular lens (to say nothing of a telephoto lens, as BMI727 mentioned).

And it's not about threats. There is no physical threat to the aircraft, only threats to privacy of the passengers.

Quoting jcos15 (Reply 24):
4. If taxes are paid on property such as a car or house, that property's ownership is a matter of public record. Why should airplanes be excluded?

They shouldn't. But who owns the plane is a very different matter to where it's going at any particular time.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
DiamondFlyer
Posts: 2168
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 11:50 pm

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Sun Dec 18, 2011 4:23 pm

Quoting jcos15 (Reply 24):
2. Airports have the tightest security of almost any public facility, so the threat potential is extremely low and I would guess most FBO's don't allow papparrazi onto the tarmacs.

Sure, the 400 or so airports that are served commercially. Again, I say there are nearly 18,000 landing facilities in our country. A vast majority of them are secured with nothing more than a chain link fence, some don't even have that.

-DiamondFlyer
From my cold, dead hands
 
jcos15
Posts: 19
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2011 10:45 pm

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Sun Dec 18, 2011 4:29 pm

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 26):

Privacy and security is not absolute, of course if someone wants to do something badly enough (good or bad), they will. But, contrary to what the media portrays, there a very few people like this. Thus, I don't see the need for privacy for some and not for others in this instance.

And I have no problem with the general public knowing where my property is (though i have very little  . no one knows what i do in my house, in my car, and except for the other passengers on the plane with me, no one on the ground knows what I'm doing in the airplane. I believe much of this is due to an overabundance of paranoia in our society right now; but that is a matter for a different chat room.
 
User avatar
tb727
Posts: 1766
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 1:40 pm

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Sun Dec 18, 2011 4:33 pm

Quoting PHLapproach (Reply 10):
The D-Heads figured out a way to just fly as DotCom by filing on fltplan.com.

I thought it was pretty smart how they came up with that.

I used to fly blocked flights, the flights are still blocked for good reason as are many of the ones you can't track again.
Too lazy to work, too scared to steal!
 
bond007
Posts: 4423
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2005 2:07 am

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Sun Dec 18, 2011 4:37 pm

Quoting michiganatc (Reply 5):
Comparing this to tracking all motor vehicles doesn't even make sense. That would require equiping every single vehicle with some sort of GPS tracking device. It would also require some sort of NEED, for safety reasons, to be tracked.

Not every aircraft can be tracked, only those on flight plans, or if using ADS-B.

The comparison with cars is valid if we had access to all toll systems data ... in the same way we have access to the ASDI data ... it's no different. I have worked in the flight tracking business on/off for many years, and the statistics and reporting that some companies pay for from the aircraft data, is no different than different companies would pay for data on cars from toll systems and the like. It is very inconsistent ... because of the FOIA, we can see all (or almost all) IFR flights, but we can't see how many Ford F150s went Northbound on I-NN through the automated tolls in the past hour ... you might not want that data, but many do.


Jimbo
I'd rather be on the ground wishing I was in the air, than in the air wishing I was on the ground!
 
Mir
Posts: 19108
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Sun Dec 18, 2011 4:49 pm

Quoting jcos15 (Reply 29):
Thus, I don't see the need for privacy for some and not for others in this instance.

It's not a need for some and not for others. If anyone at all thinks they have a need, they can get their airplane blocked. If some people don't care about having their planes tracked, then they can leave them open. The government isn't deciding who has a need and who doesn't.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
ltbewr
Posts: 12427
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Sun Dec 18, 2011 4:53 pm

Some good reasons to block public access to flight info of private and some commercial aircraft.:

A number of years ago, I worked on a matter involving a well known CEO of a mega-corporation. He was required, even for personal travel, to use the corporate aircraft. He could be a target of kidnapping, murder by some anti-corporate wing-nut, pro-worker/union or environmental protests or attacked by someone who lost their job with them. A similar reason could be used by celebrities and certain political leaders and candidates, both foreign and domestic.

When Flightaware and other tracking programs first came out, flight ops of major banking and investment companies were being traced by investors and competitors to find out if some big deal was going down. They would use such otherwise non-public information as a tip to buy into stock of possible targets of a buyout, merger, takeover and make big bucks. Such movements can also be used if a mining or oil company wants to consider investment in an area, triggering locals to either fight them off or buying up the necessary land cheap to make money from. In both cases it gives an unfair edge and costs companies more money to do their planned investment.

Even with commercial aircraft, I think ELAL wants no public info as to their aircraft movements for obious reasons. Same could be said for those of countries with aircraft that have many enemies and could be terrorism targets.

I live near Teterboro (TEB), NJ airport, one of the most critical private biz aircraft airports in the USA, with major public and private companies like Sony, investment houses, banks, all having fleet bases there. Security is there but beyond it's gates and fences, is very limited. In such places, it may be appropiate and necessary to not allow public access to flight info.
 
NASCARAirforce
Posts: 2452
Joined: Sun Feb 27, 2005 7:27 am

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Sun Dec 18, 2011 5:39 pm

Quoting michiganatc (Reply 5):
Comparing this to tracking all motor vehicles doesn't even make sense. That would require equiping every single vehicle with some sort of GPS tracking device. It would also require some sort of NEED, for safety reasons, to be tracked.

Most cars built after a certain year already do - GM has it, its called Onstar.


As much as I would like to be able to track all the private jets coming in like Travolta's 707 (which I have seen show up on Flightaware at times) as well as a lot of the NASCAR driver's jets. Celebs and private plane owners do have a right to privacy as well as safety and security. Security is the #1 issue. Think about all the people pissed off at bankers, Wall Street people etc. Or Just imagine if you could track Kyle Busch's jet - there would be a lot of rednecks trying to shoot at it.
 
BMI727
Posts: 11123
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Sun Dec 18, 2011 6:18 pm

Quoting jcos15 (Reply 29):
Privacy and security is not absolute, of course if someone wants to do something badly enough (good or bad), they will.

...so people might as well make it easier for them. There is no defense for the invasion of privacy in such a manner.

Quoting jcos15 (Reply 29):
Thus, I don't see the need for privacy for some and not for others in this instance.

It isn't your privacy, so it isn't your or the government's place to decide who gets it. People should not have their movements tracked by the general public unless they expressly allow it. End of story.

Quoting jcos15 (Reply 29):
no one knows what i do in my house, in my car, and except for the other passengers on the plane with me, no one on the ground knows what I'm doing in the airplane.

A house is different since it doesn't move. Allowing tracking of private aircraft is basically seeing what one uses their property for. It's like tracking your car or keeping a real time record of who is at your house or why. In other words, it is a completely indefensible encroachment of individual privacy.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
 
DashTrash
Posts: 1266
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2006 8:44 am

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Sun Dec 18, 2011 10:07 pm

Quoting Western727 (Reply 25):
Not sure I agree on the paparazzi thing. Who's stopping them from buzzing just outside the airport perimeter?

Furthermore, in certain industries, it's very cutthroat. Corporate espionage is a big problem. So, yes, it's very important for executives to stay under the radar regardless of the "problems" a company might or might not have

You're exactly right. I've watched 50 or so cars full of paparazzi chase a group of passengers I was flying once. I was surprised they weren't on the other end of the flight as well.
 
fuelfool
Posts: 87
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2011 4:41 am

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Mon Dec 19, 2011 1:31 am

Quoting Mir (Reply 14):
FBOs are a legitimate business, and they can get access.

I guess the FBO I worked for was too cheap. I have no interest in taking pictures or knowing where a particular plane may be. It was very annoying to not know when there was something inbound, or have somebody decide to not come in and not pass along the information. I strictly wanted to track for work, nothing else.
I love the smell of jet fuel in the morning...Smells like victory!
 
BP1
Posts: 133
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 4:39 am

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Mon Dec 19, 2011 9:42 am

You can trick www.flightwise.com to show planes blocked at the internet level (send me a private message if you want to learn)

or

Just use Passur like I do.

[Edited 2011-12-19 01:45:53]
"First To Fly The A-380" / 26 October 2007 SYD-SIN Inaugural
 
BP1
Posts: 133
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 4:39 am

RE: UPDATE: Blocked Flights On Flightaware.com

Mon Dec 19, 2011 9:48 am

Everything you wanted to know about the BARR program.

http://www.nbaa.org/ops/security/barr/faq/security-concern-faa.php

A. 2 Types of blocking

1. FAA level

2. Internet level

The FAA level 100% blocks the tail numbers - even if you own the plane you cannot track it. Even FBO's cannot track it.

The internet level is where most are blocked. This really means that the FAA asks internet providers to not display the data unless it it just to that flight department. However, that can be "tricked" in some programs.
"First To Fly The A-380" / 26 October 2007 SYD-SIN Inaugural

Who is online