Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
c933103
Posts: 6416
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Tue Jan 04, 2022 8:00 pm

An interesting observation, three years ago, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... nce_issues random people on the internet editing Wikipedia already noticed that the 5G technology's spectum could have impact on commercial aviation, but it was discussed as part of 5G's impact on weather forecast, and such statement openly sitting on the Wikipedia page for almost 3 years doesn't appears to have triggered anyone in the commercial aviation world thinking it could cause problem until the past month or so.
 
User avatar
c933103
Posts: 6416
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Tue Jan 04, 2022 8:14 pm

exFWAOONW wrote:
two things I see here:
1. How can the FCC justify profits of a few over the potential safety of many? Who do they work for? Certainly not the average American who flies once in a while. Just because there might be more end users than fliers, doesn't tip the balance in their favor.
2. what about prior rights? Someone earlier mentioned the issue of the house with the single-pane windows next to the neighbor with a loud sound system. Well, to cite a real-world example, anyone remember all the lawsuits by the people who bought cheap houses next to the airport? The aviation industry (anyone who buys a ticket) were forced to pay for the noise insulation upgrades. Not the homeowner with the bad insulation. So why should the aviation industry pay for the problem created by the new guy setting up a transmitter in a sensitive area?

As indicated in previous posts, there are still 200MHz guard band between aviation's radio altimeter, and those new 5G bands that mobile carriers are going to use, and all parties deemed it more than enough back then. To the telecommunication industry, such complain despite the existence of guard band is akin to Indian farmer complaining Concorde noise affecting the health and value of sheep in their farm, and doesn't appears to be reasonable.
-----
http://blogofmobile.com/article/131017
Japan have already started approving installation of equipment and operation of 5G at 4000-4100 MHz frequency band, since 2020, and this band is closer to radio altimeter's frequency than those frequency bands to be used by the US operators, being below 4000 MHz. Did airlines in the US do anything special when they fly into Japan to prevent their aircraft radio altimeter from malfunctioning? What make aircraft within US so special that they will be affected when flying domestically but isn't facing problems when flying overseas?
 
kalvado
Posts: 3664
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Tue Jan 04, 2022 8:37 pm

c933103 wrote:
exFWAOONW wrote:
two things I see here:
1. How can the FCC justify profits of a few over the potential safety of many? Who do they work for? Certainly not the average American who flies once in a while. Just because there might be more end users than fliers, doesn't tip the balance in their favor.
2. what about prior rights? Someone earlier mentioned the issue of the house with the single-pane windows next to the neighbor with a loud sound system. Well, to cite a real-world example, anyone remember all the lawsuits by the people who bought cheap houses next to the airport? The aviation industry (anyone who buys a ticket) were forced to pay for the noise insulation upgrades. Not the homeowner with the bad insulation. So why should the aviation industry pay for the problem created by the new guy setting up a transmitter in a sensitive area?

As indicated in previous posts, there are still 200MHz guard band between aviation's radio altimeter, and those new 5G bands that mobile carriers are going to use, and all parties deemed it more than enough back then. To the telecommunication industry, such complain despite the existence of guard band is akin to Indian farmer complaining Concorde noise affecting the health and value of sheep in their farm, and doesn't appears to be reasonable.
-----
http://blogofmobile.com/article/131017
Japan have already started approving installation of equipment and operation of 5G at 4000-4100 MHz frequency band, since 2020, and this band is closer to radio altimeter's frequency than those frequency bands to be used by the US operators, being below 4000 MHz. Did airlines in the US do anything special when they fly into Japan to prevent their aircraft radio altimeter from malfunctioning? What make aircraft within US so special that they will be affected when flying domestically but isn't facing problems when flying overseas?

I suspect newer long haul frames have newer avionics packages. Well, if 486 processor in ALA-52B for 777 qualifies as "newer"
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 27445
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Tue Jan 04, 2022 8:53 pm

kalvado wrote:
I suspect newer long haul frames have newer avionics packages. Well, if 486 processor in ALA-52B for 777 qualifies as "newer"

It's really not about the processor, right? It's more about strong adjacent signals causing aliases in band or desensitizing the receiver. A lot of this depends on the details of the RADALT's design, but without knowing the specifics, most of the problems are more in the analog domain rather than the digital so the processor's age isn't likely to be an important factor.
 
kalvado
Posts: 3664
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Tue Jan 04, 2022 8:57 pm

Revelation wrote:
kalvado wrote:
I suspect newer long haul frames have newer avionics packages. Well, if 486 processor in ALA-52B for 777 qualifies as "newer"

It's really not about the processor, right? It's more about strong adjacent signals causing aliases in band or desensitizing the receiver. A lot of this depends on the details of the RADALT's design, but without knowing the specifics, most of the problems are more in the analog domain rather than the digital so the processor's age isn't likely to be an important factor.

It's really about decay of professional ethics and engineering skill.
https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/1027530485 ... 0Parte.pdf

Throughout the TWG-3 process and in the comment process on the draft RTCA report, the wireless industry repeatedly requested access to the list of tested altimeters and the underlying AVSI test data....
Aviation stakeholders, however, declined to provide altimeter information, stating:
“RTCA SC-239 received summary data from AVSI and is not able to provide individual altimeter performance data.”12 In TWG-3 discussions, CTIA was told that AVSI’s confidentiality agreements with altimeter manufacturers did not permit them to disclose the identity of altimeters and the underlying test data, even in an anonymized fashion.

How about bankrupting Honeywell over this crap?
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 27445
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Tue Jan 04, 2022 9:05 pm

kalvado wrote:
Revelation wrote:
kalvado wrote:
I suspect newer long haul frames have newer avionics packages. Well, if 486 processor in ALA-52B for 777 qualifies as "newer"

It's really not about the processor, right? It's more about strong adjacent signals causing aliases in band or desensitizing the receiver. A lot of this depends on the details of the RADALT's design, but without knowing the specifics, most of the problems are more in the analog domain rather than the digital so the processor's age isn't likely to be an important factor.

It's really about decay of professional ethics and engineering skill.
https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/1027530485 ... 0Parte.pdf

Throughout the TWG-3 process and in the comment process on the draft RTCA report, the wireless industry repeatedly requested access to the list of tested altimeters and the underlying AVSI test data....
Aviation stakeholders, however, declined to provide altimeter information, stating:
“RTCA SC-239 received summary data from AVSI and is not able to provide individual altimeter performance data.”12 In TWG-3 discussions, CTIA was told that AVSI’s confidentiality agreements with altimeter manufacturers did not permit them to disclose the identity of altimeters and the underlying test data, even in an anonymized fashion.

How about bankrupting Honeywell over this crap?

Interesting. I will say that in my previous engineering gig the busiest guy in the company was the one balding guy who really understood RF. I always wondered why the company didn't give him his own staff of assistants to do the grunt work. Pretty much every project in the building needed his support.
 
kalvado
Posts: 3664
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Tue Jan 04, 2022 9:10 pm

Revelation wrote:
kalvado wrote:
Revelation wrote:
It's really not about the processor, right? It's more about strong adjacent signals causing aliases in band or desensitizing the receiver. A lot of this depends on the details of the RADALT's design, but without knowing the specifics, most of the problems are more in the analog domain rather than the digital so the processor's age isn't likely to be an important factor.

It's really about decay of professional ethics and engineering skill.
https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/1027530485 ... 0Parte.pdf

Throughout the TWG-3 process and in the comment process on the draft RTCA report, the wireless industry repeatedly requested access to the list of tested altimeters and the underlying AVSI test data....
Aviation stakeholders, however, declined to provide altimeter information, stating:
“RTCA SC-239 received summary data from AVSI and is not able to provide individual altimeter performance data.”12 In TWG-3 discussions, CTIA was told that AVSI’s confidentiality agreements with altimeter manufacturers did not permit them to disclose the identity of altimeters and the underlying test data, even in an anonymized fashion.

How about bankrupting Honeywell over this crap?

Interesting. I will say that in my previous engineering gig the busiest guy in the company was the one balding guy who really understood RF. I always wondered why the company didn't give him his own staff of assistants to do the grunt work. Pretty much every project in the building needed his support.

With my limited understanding of RF (I just did a post-doc with GHz equipment, angd got just a single GHz related patent), issue is with lack of expertise on aero side. Likely that bald guy's equivalent retired, and that is the biggest secret Honeywell hides.
 
USAirKid
Posts: 1116
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 5:42 am

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Tue Jan 04, 2022 10:42 pm

exFWAOONW wrote:
two things I see here:
1. How can the FCC justify profits of a few over the potential safety of many? Who do they work for? Certainly not the average American who flies once in a while. Just because there might be more end users than fliers, doesn't tip the balance in their favor.
2. what about prior rights? Someone earlier mentioned the issue of the house with the single-pane windows next to the neighbor with a loud sound system. Well, to cite a real-world example, anyone remember all the lawsuits by the people who bought cheap houses next to the airport? The aviation industry (anyone who buys a ticket) were forced to pay for the noise insulation upgrades. Not the homeowner with the bad insulation. So why should the aviation industry pay for the problem created by the new guy setting up a transmitter in a sensitive area?


1. The FCC works for the American people, but their remit is to facilitate communication. Aviation safety isn't their concern.
2. I think you're arguing adverse possession/squatters rights, that airplanes have been using this bandwidth for decades, so don't they own it? However they haven't been using that bandwidth. A better metaphor is that you put a sundial at the edge of your property and it works fine because nothing is built next to your property. Then the property next to yours is sold, and the new owner follows the laws and builds a new building on their property. This building blocks the sun from reaching your sundial. Its upto you to move your sundial to a spot that it works, or just use a mechanical clock.

As for the noise insulation, I think there were some federal laws that came into play on this. In any case, it might've just bee cheaper to pay for insulation upgrades and/or buying out those houses than to fight or deal with the negative PR.

Revelation
 
sadde
Posts: 44
Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2016 8:46 pm

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Wed Jan 05, 2022 5:34 pm

N47 wrote:
sadde wrote:
As someone in frequent contact with the FAA on both related and totally unrelated air carrier matters it’s evident to me that leadership at the DOT and FAA are asleep at the wheel at best, and non existent at worst. Sure, the FCC represents profit hungry companies, but it’s 2022, cmon. These standards have been anticipated for years and the FAA just now wakes up to them? Completely inept leadership on the DOT/FAA side.


As someone is in even more frequent contact with the FAA i have to disagree. While i do agree that there are some leadership and staffing challanges that the agency faces, its not as bad as you are making out to be. There is a lot of behind the scene work that the agency is doing amongst its various offices regarding this issue that members of the public are just not privy too.

Regarding this issue, the FAA/DOT do not have the authority over these frequencies to enforce or do anything, that power lies with the FCC. The only thing they can do near term is put out ACs ADs raise approach minima put out NOTAMs.

In hindsight, the agency could have potentially required more robust equipment (steeper filters etc.) from manufacturers in the past so we wouldn’t have run into this issue but then the manufacturers would have complained that requirements are too tough. Who would have known in the past what the spectral landscape would be like today.

Long term, the RA system can be modified to make
It more immune to interference perhaps using multiple pulses to do the ranging similar to how DMEs use 2 pulses instead of 1. That would be a major effort though not trivial.

I don’t necessarily disagree, but this is a very tactical view that avoids the strategic ineptitude particularly in the DOT. The timing itself should make this obvious
 
CanukinUSA
Posts: 186
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2020 5:06 pm

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Wed Jan 05, 2022 5:54 pm

Here is a link to the latest information on 5G around airports. I presume that the 5G providers decided they would not be in a good situation legally if they started up 5G today. That is probably why they suddenly reversed their stand on 5G.

Apparently the NTIA failed to put a 2020 letter from the FAA over concerns raised by Boeing about 5G into the docket it submitted to the FCC over 5G. For details go to:

https://www.aviationtoday.com/2022/01/0 ... 2515289G7F
 
USAirKid
Posts: 1116
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 5:42 am

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Wed Jan 05, 2022 9:48 pm

Looks like there is a resolution to this issue:
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/202 ... d-verizon/

The Federal Aviation Administration tentatively agreed not to seek any more 5G delays from AT&T and Verizon, potentially ending a battle over the aviation industry's unproven claim that 5G transmissions on C-Band frequencies will interfere with airplane altimeters.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 27445
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Wed Jan 05, 2022 10:05 pm

USAirKid wrote:
Looks like there is a resolution to this issue:
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/202 ... d-verizon/
The Federal Aviation Administration tentatively agreed not to seek any more 5G delays from AT&T and Verizon, potentially ending a battle over the aviation industry's unproven claim that 5G transmissions on C-Band frequencies will interfere with airplane altimeters.

Finally, some adults in the room...

The deal incorporates voluntary commitments that AT&T and Verizon previously made, including "C-Band radio exclusion zones" around airports for six months. The aviation industry will give carriers "a list of no more than 50 priority airports" where the exclusion zones will apply.

AT&T and Verizon will provide data on base stations, operating characteristics, and planned deployment locations. They will also "continue to work in good faith with aviation stakeholders to support the technical assessment of individual altimeters and airport environments," the deal says. The FAA previously said it "will safely expedite the approvals of Alternate Means of Compliance (AMOCs) for operators with high-performing radio altimeters to operate at those airports," signaling that airlines may already be using altimeters that can co-exist with C-Band transmissions.
Airlines threatened mass flight cancellations

AT&T and Verizon's C-Band spectrum licenses are for the frequencies from 3.7 GHz to 3.98 GHz, but the companies don't plan to deploy between 3.8 GHZ and 3.98 GHz until 2023. The radio altimeters used to determine airplane altitudes rely on spectrum from 4.2 GHz to 4.4 GHz.

Brinksmanship may have worked for the airlines, in that FAA now is expediting Alternate Means of Compliance for various existing RADALTs rather than the airline industry just buying every airplane new RADALTs.
 
User avatar
exFWAOONW
Posts: 761
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 10:32 pm

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Wed Jan 05, 2022 10:20 pm

USAirKid wrote:
exFWAOONW wrote:
two things I see here:
1. How can the FCC justify profits of a few over the potential safety of many? Who do they work for? Certainly not the average American who flies once in a while. Just because there might be more end users than fliers, doesn't tip the balance in their favor.
2. what about prior rights? Someone earlier mentioned the issue of the house with the single-pane windows next to the neighbor with a loud sound system. Well, to cite a real-world example, anyone remember all the lawsuits by the people who bought cheap houses next to the airport? The aviation industry (anyone who buys a ticket) were forced to pay for the noise insulation upgrades. Not the homeowner with the bad insulation. So why should the aviation industry pay for the problem created by the new guy setting up a transmitter in a sensitive area?


1. The FCC works for the American people, but their remit is to facilitate communication. Aviation safety isn't their concern.
2. I think you're arguing adverse possession/squatters rights, that airplanes have been using this bandwidth for decades, so don't they own it? However they haven't been using that bandwidth. A better metaphor is that you put a sundial at the edge of your property and it works fine because nothing is built next to your property. Then the property next to yours is sold, and the new owner follows the laws and builds a new building on their property. This building blocks the sun from reaching your sundial. Its upto you to move your sundial to a spot that it works, or just use a mechanical clock.

As for the noise insulation, I think there were some federal laws that came into play on this. In any case, it might've just bee cheaper to pay for insulation upgrades and/or buying out those houses than to fight or deal with the negative PR.

Revelation

USKid,

My point 2 wasn't very well articulated
Why should I have to move my sundial? It worked fine until you built the building that shadowed it. I have done nothing wrong, but am being punished (forced to move something) because of something YOU DID. You have taken something from me (enjoyment and use of the sundial) whether your building was legal or not. You are at fault. It should be up to you to supply the remedy, not me.
My point is if AT&T et al want to use band C they cannot stop/interfere with prior users, especially if it compromises flight safety. I can't believe I have to argue this point on an aviation web-site.
 
USAirKid
Posts: 1116
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 5:42 am

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Wed Jan 05, 2022 10:44 pm

exFWAOONW wrote:
USAirKid wrote:
exFWAOONW wrote:
two things I see here:
1. How can the FCC justify profits of a few over the potential safety of many? Who do they work for? Certainly not the average American who flies once in a while. Just because there might be more end users than fliers, doesn't tip the balance in their favor.
2. what about prior rights? Someone earlier mentioned the issue of the house with the single-pane windows next to the neighbor with a loud sound system. Well, to cite a real-world example, anyone remember all the lawsuits by the people who bought cheap houses next to the airport? The aviation industry (anyone who buys a ticket) were forced to pay for the noise insulation upgrades. Not the homeowner with the bad insulation. So why should the aviation industry pay for the problem created by the new guy setting up a transmitter in a sensitive area?


1. The FCC works for the American people, but their remit is to facilitate communication. Aviation safety isn't their concern.
2. I think you're arguing adverse possession/squatters rights, that airplanes have been using this bandwidth for decades, so don't they own it? However they haven't been using that bandwidth. A better metaphor is that you put a sundial at the edge of your property and it works fine because nothing is built next to your property. Then the property next to yours is sold, and the new owner follows the laws and builds a new building on their property. This building blocks the sun from reaching your sundial. Its upto you to move your sundial to a spot that it works, or just use a mechanical clock.

As for the noise insulation, I think there were some federal laws that came into play on this. In any case, it might've just bee cheaper to pay for insulation upgrades and/or buying out those houses than to fight or deal with the negative PR.

Revelation

USKid,

My point 2 wasn't very well articulated
Why should I have to move my sundial? It worked fine until you built the building that shadowed it. I have done nothing wrong, but am being punished (forced to move something) because of something YOU DID. You have taken something from me (enjoyment and use of the sundial) whether your building was legal or not. You are at fault. It should be up to you to supply the remedy, not me.
My point is if AT&T et al want to use band C they cannot stop/interfere with prior users, especially if it compromises flight safety. I can't believe I have to argue this point on an aviation web-site.


I got it.. The point is you were using something that you didn't own or have a right to. In the case of the sundial, that is the unobstructed view of the sun. In the case of the radio altimeters, aviation was poorly filtering the input, relying on the fact that no one else was using the spectrum next to their assigned spectrum. So aviation got free use of something that wasn't theirs for 40+ years. The prior users had no right to use the adjacent spectrum that they were using.

I'd be singing a different tune if the airlines and FAA were bringing this up earlier and needed more time to adjust, instead of the last damn minute.
 
USAirKid
Posts: 1116
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 5:42 am

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Wed Jan 05, 2022 10:49 pm

One of the questions I've been pondering is can GPS replace what radio altimeters have been doing?

From my brief research, they probably could, but only barely.

https://www.gps.gov/systems/gps/performance/accuracy/

or example, the government commits to broadcasting the GPS signal in space with a daily global average user range error (URE) of ≤2.0 m (6.6 ft.), with 95% probability, across all healthy satellites in constellation slots. Actual performance is typically much better. On April 20, 2021, the global average URE across all satellites was ≤0.643 m (2.1 ft.), 95% of the time.


But its probably a bit too tight. (And yes, GPS can do altitude as well in addition to latitude and longitude.)
 
kalvado
Posts: 3664
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Wed Jan 05, 2022 10:57 pm

USAirKid wrote:
One of the questions I've been pondering is can GPS replace what radio altimeters have been doing?

From my brief research, they probably could, but only barely.

https://www.gps.gov/systems/gps/performance/accuracy/

or example, the government commits to broadcasting the GPS signal in space with a daily global average user range error (URE) of ≤2.0 m (6.6 ft.), with 95% probability, across all healthy satellites in constellation slots. Actual performance is typically much better. On April 20, 2021, the global average URE across all satellites was ≤0.643 m (2.1 ft.), 95% of the time.


But its probably a bit too tight. (And yes, GPS can do altitude as well in addition to latitude and longitude.)

Problem is you need very detailed terrain maps to match radalt functions. I am not sure 8f replacing radio altitude with above-runway altitude would help more (for clear approaches) or hurt more (false security over terrain)
 
CanukinUSA
Posts: 186
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2020 5:06 pm

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Wed Jan 05, 2022 11:09 pm

If you read my link above, you will realize that the FAA was bringing this up earlier with concerns from the aerospace manufacturers but the submission letter to the FCC was not forwarded on by the National Telcommuncations and Information Administration (NTIA) when it was being decided whether to auction off the spectrum for use for 5G by the FCC. One has to ask who and why did this not get submitted on to the FCC. Was it in error or was it a deliberate act by someone within the NTIA who may have been in bed with the telcommunications industry?
The NTIA is an agency within the Executive Branch of the US government apparently run by appointees of the president at the time. The other question should be is why is an agency in the Executive Branch of the US Government controlling what information is forwarded on to the FCC about radio frequency spectrum allocation and possible interference issues?
 
zuckie13
Posts: 499
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2018 8:23 pm

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Sun Jan 09, 2022 11:36 pm

The list of the 50 airports https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/airports-5g-buffers

I'll note none of the three DC area airports are on it. Fear not though, HVN made the cut even though I don't see BDL on there. Interesting prioritization there.
 
MO11
Posts: 2063
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2017 5:07 pm

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Mon Jan 10, 2022 1:16 am

CanukinUSA wrote:
?
The NTIA is an agency within the Executive Branch of the US government apparently run by appointees of the president at the time.


NTIA is Department of Commerce. The Assistant Secretary would be an appointee.
 
Atlwarrior
Posts: 510
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2012 3:42 am

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Mon Jan 10, 2022 2:42 am

zuckie13 wrote:
The list of the 50 airports https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/airports-5g-buffers

I'll note none of the three DC area airports are on it. Fear not though, HVN made the cut even though I don't see BDL on there. Interesting prioritization there.


Just a quick additional explanation. The two of the three DC airports are probably like Atlanta and don't have any 5G C-Band transmitters installed on the flight paths to the airport installed within the buffer zone yet and likely won't happen for a while. This list is only of impacted airports where there is 5G C-Band transmitters installed somewhere along the flight path into the airport within the buffer.

ATL is fortunate that the flight paths are mostly less densely populated suburban areas of our city that border being more exurban in character.


I found one additional tidbit on this, Atlanta, Denver, and DC are areas where the C-Band frequencies haven't been auctioned off for use for cell phones services yet. They are locations with Satellite ground equipment still using parts of the spectrum. So at the current time, these markets are only using the mmWave and the common range that is also used by previous generations' cell phone services (4G LTE).
 
alpine1989
Posts: 104
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2019 2:13 am

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Mon Jan 10, 2022 11:38 am

zuckie13 wrote:
The list of the 50 airports https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/airports-5g-buffers

I'll note none of the three DC area airports are on it. Fear not though, HVN made the cut even though I don't see BDL on there. Interesting prioritization there.


HVN? They only have ILS CAT1 and RNAV GPS approaches. Shouldn’t be any negative 5G impact there.
 
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 27445
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Sat Jan 15, 2022 3:39 pm

alpine1989 wrote:
Now performance impacts on the B787.

https://www.reuters.com/technology/faa- ... 022-01-14/

From faa.gov:

Continued Airworthiness Notification to the International Community - Boeing 787 Altimeter and 5G
CAN-2022-01.pdf

This message advises of the FAA’s ongoing continued operational safety activities related to 5G C-Band interference with airplane systems using radio (also known as radar) altimeter data during landing on Boeing Model 787-8, 787-9, and 787-10 airplanes.

The operative section reads:

The FAA determined anomalies on Boeing Model 787-8, 787-9, and 787-10 airplanes due to 5G C-Band interference which may affect multiple airplane systems using radio altimeter data, regardless of the approach type or weather. These anomalies may not be evident until the airplane is at low altitude during approach. Impacted systems include, but are not limited to: autopilot flight director system; autothrottle system; engines; thrust reversers; flight controls; flight instruments; traffic alert and collision avoidance system (TCAS); ground proximity warning system (GPWS); and configuration warnings.

During landing, this interference could prevent proper transition from AIR to GROUND mode, which may have multiple effects. As a result, lack of thrust reverser and speedbrake deployment and increased idle thrust may occur; and brakes may be the only means to slow the airplane. Therefore, the presence of 5G C-Band interference can result in degraded deceleration performance, increased landing distance, and runway excursion

I wonder what the airlines and their insurance companies will make of this?
 
kalvado
Posts: 3664
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Sat Jan 15, 2022 6:17 pm

Revelation wrote:
alpine1989 wrote:
Now performance impacts on the B787.

https://www.reuters.com/technology/faa- ... 022-01-14/

From faa.gov:

Continued Airworthiness Notification to the International Community - Boeing 787 Altimeter and 5G
CAN-2022-01.pdf

This message advises of the FAA’s ongoing continued operational safety activities related to 5G C-Band interference with airplane systems using radio (also known as radar) altimeter data during landing on Boeing Model 787-8, 787-9, and 787-10 airplanes.

The operative section reads:

The FAA determined anomalies on Boeing Model 787-8, 787-9, and 787-10 airplanes due to 5G C-Band interference which may affect multiple airplane systems using radio altimeter data, regardless of the approach type or weather. These anomalies may not be evident until the airplane is at low altitude during approach. Impacted systems include, but are not limited to: autopilot flight director system; autothrottle system; engines; thrust reversers; flight controls; flight instruments; traffic alert and collision avoidance system (TCAS); ground proximity warning system (GPWS); and configuration warnings.

During landing, this interference could prevent proper transition from AIR to GROUND mode, which may have multiple effects. As a result, lack of thrust reverser and speedbrake deployment and increased idle thrust may occur; and brakes may be the only means to slow the airplane. Therefore, the presence of 5G C-Band interference can result in degraded deceleration performance, increased landing distance, and runway excursion

I wonder what the airlines and their insurance companies will make of this?

That "fault tolerance" must be an alien concept for some design organizations...
 
User avatar
Thunderboltdrgn
Posts: 2413
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2012 5:39 pm

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Sat Jan 15, 2022 6:59 pm

Revelation wrote:
alpine1989 wrote:
Now performance impacts on the B787.

https://www.reuters.com/technology/faa- ... 022-01-14/

From faa.gov:

Continued Airworthiness Notification to the International Community - Boeing 787 Altimeter and 5G
CAN-2022-01.pdf

This message advises of the FAA’s ongoing continued operational safety activities related to 5G C-Band interference with airplane systems using radio (also known as radar) altimeter data during landing on Boeing Model 787-8, 787-9, and 787-10 airplanes.

The operative section reads:

The FAA determined anomalies on Boeing Model 787-8, 787-9, and 787-10 airplanes due to 5G C-Band interference which may affect multiple airplane systems using radio altimeter data, regardless of the approach type or weather. These anomalies may not be evident until the airplane is at low altitude during approach. Impacted systems include, but are not limited to: autopilot flight director system; autothrottle system; engines; thrust reversers; flight controls; flight instruments; traffic alert and collision avoidance system (TCAS); ground proximity warning system (GPWS); and configuration warnings.

During landing, this interference could prevent proper transition from AIR to GROUND mode, which may have multiple effects. As a result, lack of thrust reverser and speedbrake deployment and increased idle thrust may occur; and brakes may be the only means to slow the airplane. Therefore, the presence of 5G C-Band interference can result in degraded deceleration performance, increased landing distance, and runway excursion

I wonder what the airlines and their insurance companies will make of this?


So what does this mean in practical terms for the airlines and for Boeing and is the 787 only affected model? No other model from Boeing or Airbus?
 
User avatar
SuseJ772
Posts: 1090
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:13 am

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Sat Jan 15, 2022 7:12 pm

zuckie13 wrote:
The list of the 50 airports https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/airports-5g-buffers

I'll note none of the three DC area airports are on it. Fear not though, HVN made the cut even though I don't see BDL on there. Interesting prioritization there.


Even airports that aren’t on that list are getting NOTAM-ed. I flew into Tuscaloosa (TCL) on the way to St Pete (SPG) yesterday and they had a NOTAM for it. TCL only has a CAT-I ILS. Stranger yet, SPG doesn’t even have an ILS only RNAV.

Image
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 27445
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Sat Jan 15, 2022 7:43 pm

kalvado wrote:
That "fault tolerance" must be an alien concept for some design organizations...

Don't set the bar too high, the current staff just got schooled on electrical grounding and is now working through shimming.
 
kalvado
Posts: 3664
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Sat Jan 15, 2022 8:01 pm

Revelation wrote:
kalvado wrote:
That "fault tolerance" must be an alien concept for some design organizations...

Don't set the bar too high, the current staff just got schooled on electrical grounding and is now working through shimming.

Tripping hazards should be avoided throughout the facility
 
kalvado
Posts: 3664
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Sat Jan 15, 2022 8:07 pm

Thunderboltdrgn wrote:
Revelation wrote:
alpine1989 wrote:
Now performance impacts on the B787.

https://www.reuters.com/technology/faa- ... 022-01-14/

From faa.gov:

Continued Airworthiness Notification to the International Community - Boeing 787 Altimeter and 5G
CAN-2022-01.pdf

This message advises of the FAA’s ongoing continued operational safety activities related to 5G C-Band interference with airplane systems using radio (also known as radar) altimeter data during landing on Boeing Model 787-8, 787-9, and 787-10 airplanes.

The operative section reads:

The FAA determined anomalies on Boeing Model 787-8, 787-9, and 787-10 airplanes due to 5G C-Band interference which may affect multiple airplane systems using radio altimeter data, regardless of the approach type or weather. These anomalies may not be evident until the airplane is at low altitude during approach. Impacted systems include, but are not limited to: autopilot flight director system; autothrottle system; engines; thrust reversers; flight controls; flight instruments; traffic alert and collision avoidance system (TCAS); ground proximity warning system (GPWS); and configuration warnings.

During landing, this interference could prevent proper transition from AIR to GROUND mode, which may have multiple effects. As a result, lack of thrust reverser and speedbrake deployment and increased idle thrust may occur; and brakes may be the only means to slow the airplane. Therefore, the presence of 5G C-Band interference can result in degraded deceleration performance, increased landing distance, and runway excursion

I wonder what the airlines and their insurance companies will make of this?


So what does this mean in practical terms for the airlines and for Boeing and is the 787 only affected model? No other model from Boeing or Airbus?

As far as I understand, 777 and 787 use same model altimeter. And I don't think any altimeter is cleared as interference free.
So either 787 has a different logic, requiring the input without a way to MEL it, or this is the first completed review and all the types will be slammed with similar documents in coming days
 
SEAorPWM
Posts: 222
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2021 8:41 pm

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Mon Jan 17, 2022 8:25 pm

https://www.reuters.com/technology/excl ... 022-01-17/

Despite the clickbaity headlines, it looks like the industry is still in panic mode for Wednesday. If operations are affected even further, I hope the carriers have a case against these tech giants. This is not what the industry needs after the meltdowns over the last four weeks.

I have not heard any mention of the popular RJ types you see everywhere in the US also.
 
FlyingElvii
Posts: 2074
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2017 10:53 pm

Airline CEO’s Warn Of “Catastrophic” Travel Chaos Due To 5G Rollout Wednesday. May Permanently Ground some types

Mon Jan 17, 2022 10:16 pm

Major Airline CEO’s via AFA again reiterated that the 5G rollout is going to cause chaos for them.
There is a letter from then to the FAA and DOT explaining their position that was sent today. Can’t post it here, Daily Mail is unstable on my Apple device, but linked here.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... havoc.html

From Airlines For America:
“Air cargo and commercial air travel will likely cease at night and in any weather where the pilot cannot see the runway, if the interference issue isn’t addressed.”
https://www.airlines.org/5g/

I admit I haven’t been paying much attention to this. Could it be as bad as is being said?
I can see the insurance companies putting the brakes on affected aircraft and airports until this is resolved….
 
User avatar
Scoreboard
Posts: 60
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2021 4:06 pm

Re: Airline CEO’s Warn Of “Catastrophic” Travel Chaos Due To 5G Rollout Wednesday. May Permanently Ground some types

Mon Jan 17, 2022 10:30 pm

Am I right in thinking this is a problem specifically for the USA, because of the frequencies that have been allocated to 5G in the USA? 5G was rolled out in the UK some months ago without these problems.
 
FLYFIRSTCLASS
Posts: 21
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2022 7:41 pm

Re: Airline CEO’s Warn Of “Catastrophic” Travel Chaos Due To 5G Rollout Wednesday. May Permanently Ground some types

Mon Jan 17, 2022 11:29 pm

Forgive me for being an idiot, but hasn't Europe been on 5G for a couple of years and has not had any issues with it interfering with radio altimeter?
 
WkndWanderer
Posts: 434
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2017 6:36 pm

Re: Airline CEO’s Warn Of “Catastrophic” Travel Chaos Due To 5G Rollout Wednesday. May Permanently Ground some types

Mon Jan 17, 2022 11:53 pm

This Reuters article goes into more detail:

"Airplane manufacturers have informed us that there are huge swaths of the operating fleet that may need to be indefinitely grounded."

One area of concern is whether some Boeing 777s will be unable to land at some key U.S. airports after 5G service starts, as well as some Boeing cargo planes, airline officials told Reuters."


Does anyone know what is unique about the 777's altimeters or what it depends on them for compared to other types?

https://www.reuters.com/technology/excl ... 022-01-17/
 
FlyingElvii
Posts: 2074
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2017 10:53 pm

Re: Airline CEO’s Warn Of “Catastrophic” Travel Chaos Due To 5G Rollout Wednesday. May Permanently Ground some types

Tue Jan 18, 2022 12:45 am

WkndWanderer wrote:
This Reuters article goes into more detail:

"Airplane manufacturers have informed us that there are huge swaths of the operating fleet that may need to be indefinitely grounded."

One area of concern is whether some Boeing 777s will be unable to land at some key U.S. airports after 5G service starts, as well as some Boeing cargo planes, airline officials told Reuters."


Does anyone know what is unique about the 777's altimeters or what it depends on them for compared to other types?

https://www.reuters.com/technology/excl ... 022-01-17/

I guess we won't know until airplanes start crashing short of the runway....
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 9179
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Tue Jan 18, 2022 1:09 am

Here’s the FAA 5G website.

https://www.faa.gov/5g

Nobody is going to crashing short of the runway, either. They might not be landing, but not crashing.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 9179
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Airline CEO’s Warn Of “Catastrophic” Travel Chaos Due To 5G Rollout Wednesday. May Permanently Ground some types

Tue Jan 18, 2022 1:11 am

Scoreboard wrote:
Am I right in thinking this is a problem specifically for the USA, because of the frequencies that have been allocated to 5G in the USA? 5G was rolled out in the UK some months ago without these problems.


Yes, pretty much US issue, frequencies, telecoms trying to avoid adding new towers, so using much more power than in Europe/UK to avoid the tower issue.
 
kalvado
Posts: 3664
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: Airline CEO’s Warn Of “Catastrophic” Travel Chaos Due To 5G Rollout Wednesday. May Permanently Ground some types

Tue Jan 18, 2022 1:34 am

WkndWanderer wrote:
This Reuters article goes into more detail:

"Airplane manufacturers have informed us that there are huge swaths of the operating fleet that may need to be indefinitely grounded."

One area of concern is whether some Boeing 777s will be unable to land at some key U.S. airports after 5G service starts, as well as some Boeing cargo planes, airline officials told Reuters."


Does anyone know what is unique about the 777's altimeters or what it depends on them for compared to other types?

https://www.reuters.com/technology/excl ... 022-01-17/

Fault tolerance of logic. Think about this as altimeter going out if service on MEL. And looks like no dispatch without altimeter.
My impression is that technical difficulties at Boeing predate 787 and MAX.
 
32andBelow
Posts: 6165
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:54 am

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Tue Jan 18, 2022 1:48 am

SEAorPWM wrote:
https://www.reuters.com/technology/exclusive-major-us-airline-ceos-urge-action-avoid-catastrophic-5g-flight-2022-01-17/

Despite the clickbaity headlines, it looks like the industry is still in panic mode for Wednesday. If operations are affected even further, I hope the carriers have a case against these tech giants. This is not what the industry needs after the meltdowns over the last four weeks.

I have not heard any mention of the popular RJ types you see everywhere in the US also.

Against the tech giants? Didn’t the government auction the spectrum to them?

Also how was this never brought up on the years since the auction?
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 2969
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Tue Jan 18, 2022 2:09 am

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Here’s the FAA 5G website.

https://www.faa.gov/5g

Nobody is going to crashing short of the runway, either. They might not be landing, but not crashing.


And what happens when they cannot land and run out of fuel?
 
danman132x
Posts: 141
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 4:57 pm

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Tue Jan 18, 2022 2:27 am

My opinion is that the cell companies need to drop this frequency. Do we Really need this 5G spectrum. Our cell phones work fine as is. 5G works fine how it is now, we can make calls just fine and have been for years, why now? So we can browse Facebook faster or watch YouTube videos on the go in high speed? It's ridiculous honestly. Wait until the first plane crashes because this interference, or flights are constantly disrupted. Better hope it's not rainy or cloudy the day you want to fly. Going to be a lot of canceled flights. I would expect no less from the American government. All about the money instead of safety.
 
airtechy
Posts: 830
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 7:35 am

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Tue Jan 18, 2022 2:39 am

I'm a little surprised that the companies that make the radar altimeters aren't looking for a solution that doesn't require replacing the boxes .... maybe they are. As an engineer, my first thought would be a narrow bandpass filter to reject the 5G frequencies inserted in the coax antenna lead from the altimeter. Even if it worked, the question would obviously be who would foot the cost to test, certify, and build said filter. :scratchchin:
 
kalvado
Posts: 3664
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Tue Jan 18, 2022 2:45 am

airtechy wrote:
I'm a little surprised that the companies that make the radar altimeters aren't looking for a solution that doesn't require replacing the boxes .... maybe they are. As an engineer, my first thought would be a narrow bandpass filter to reject the 5G frequencies inserted in the coax antenna lead from the altimeter. Even if it worked, the question would obviously be who would foot the cost to test, certify, and build said filter. :scratchchin:

Looks like there is no expertise left at Honeywell. Same problem as with Boeing, if you think about it.
As for who pays.... By now US aviation industry seem to exhaust goodwill by plainly refusing to cooperate.
 
32andBelow
Posts: 6165
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:54 am

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Tue Jan 18, 2022 2:50 am

danman132x wrote:
My opinion is that the cell companies need to drop this frequency. Do we Really need this 5G spectrum. Our cell phones work fine as is. 5G works fine how it is now, we can make calls just fine and have been for years, why now? So we can browse Facebook faster or watch YouTube videos on the go in high speed? It's ridiculous honestly. Wait until the first plane crashes because this interference, or flights are constantly disrupted. Better hope it's not rainy or cloudy the day you want to fly. Going to be a lot of canceled flights. I would expect no less from the American government. All about the money instead of safety.

If they bought the frequency they are probably waiting for the government to decide. They aren’t just gonna eat billions in construction cus the government messed up
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 9179
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Tue Jan 18, 2022 3:23 am

WayexTDI wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Here’s the FAA 5G website.

https://www.faa.gov/5g

Nobody is going to crashing short of the runway, either. They might not be landing, but not crashing.


And what happens when they cannot land and run out of fuel?


There is alternate fuel, plus reserves, plus a dispatcher who plans the flight with the captain. They’re not stuck up there. At the very worst, fly to a VMC airport.
 
WkndWanderer
Posts: 434
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2017 6:36 pm

Re: Airline CEO’s Warn Of “Catastrophic” Travel Chaos Due To 5G Rollout Wednesday. May Permanently Ground some types

Tue Jan 18, 2022 3:45 am

kalvado wrote:
WkndWanderer wrote:
This Reuters article goes into more detail:

"Airplane manufacturers have informed us that there are huge swaths of the operating fleet that may need to be indefinitely grounded."

One area of concern is whether some Boeing 777s will be unable to land at some key U.S. airports after 5G service starts, as well as some Boeing cargo planes, airline officials told Reuters."


Does anyone know what is unique about the 777's altimeters or what it depends on them for compared to other types?

https://www.reuters.com/technology/excl ... 022-01-17/

Fault tolerance of logic. Think about this as altimeter going out if service on MEL. And looks like no dispatch without altimeter.
My impression is that technical difficulties at Boeing predate 787 and MAX.


It looks like all of the non-fly by wire Boeings have been cleared, do the 777 and 787 rely on a lower frequency, have a less resilient ADIRU or something compared to Airbus counterparts? It looks like the A340, A380, and RJ's haven't been cleared by the FAA either?
 
kalvado
Posts: 3664
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: Airline CEO’s Warn Of “Catastrophic” Travel Chaos Due To 5G Rollout Wednesday. May Permanently Ground some types

Tue Jan 18, 2022 3:58 am

WkndWanderer wrote:
kalvado wrote:
WkndWanderer wrote:
This Reuters article goes into more detail:

"Airplane manufacturers have informed us that there are huge swaths of the operating fleet that may need to be indefinitely grounded."

One area of concern is whether some Boeing 777s will be unable to land at some key U.S. airports after 5G service starts, as well as some Boeing cargo planes, airline officials told Reuters."


Does anyone know what is unique about the 777's altimeters or what it depends on them for compared to other types?

https://www.reuters.com/technology/excl ... 022-01-17/

Fault tolerance of logic. Think about this as altimeter going out if service on MEL. And looks like no dispatch without altimeter.
My impression is that technical difficulties at Boeing predate 787 and MAX.


It looks like all of the non-fly by wire Boeings have been cleared, do the 777 and 787 rely on a lower frequency, have a less resilient ADIRU or something compared to Airbus counterparts? It looks like the A340, A380, and RJ's haven't been cleared by the FAA either?

Frequency is the same for radio altimeters
My bet it has something to do with touchdown detection logic. If 777 and 787 use "weight on wheels" and "radio altitude less than...",landing automation is screwed - and that what I read in 787 limitations.
Looks like TCAS is also checking radio altitude. Makes some sense to check before ordering descent, after all.
I wonder if other types are happy with just "weigh on wheels", or have something else to double check ground contact.
 
sUAisDL
Posts: 19
Joined: Sat May 29, 2021 9:57 pm

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Tue Jan 18, 2022 4:08 am

Lol this has the potential to be epic.
 
SEAorPWM
Posts: 222
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2021 8:41 pm

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Tue Jan 18, 2022 4:43 am

32andBelow wrote:
SEAorPWM wrote:
https://www.reuters.com/technology/exclusive-major-us-airline-ceos-urge-action-avoid-catastrophic-5g-flight-2022-01-17/

Despite the clickbaity headlines, it looks like the industry is still in panic mode for Wednesday. If operations are affected even further, I hope the carriers have a case against these tech giants. This is not what the industry needs after the meltdowns over the last four weeks.

I have not heard any mention of the popular RJ types you see everywhere in the US also.

Against the tech giants? Didn’t the government auction the spectrum to them?

Also how was this never brought up on the years since the auction?


I've heard rumblings on this for about a year IIRC; it's now only going through the media cycle as we're at the deadline.

Like others have said, as an end user, I don't see the benefit. I surmise the real benefactors are data harvesting/advertising operations as a result of this rollout (hence term-dropping "big tech"), and it stings for me even more as I am part of the aviation industry and am fed up after 2 years of constant uncertainty.
 
32andBelow
Posts: 6165
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 2:54 am

Re: FAA to prohibit many flight operations due to risk of ‘5G’ wireless interference

Tue Jan 18, 2022 4:52 am

SEAorPWM wrote:
32andBelow wrote:
SEAorPWM wrote:
https://www.reuters.com/technology/exclusive-major-us-airline-ceos-urge-action-avoid-catastrophic-5g-flight-2022-01-17/

Despite the clickbaity headlines, it looks like the industry is still in panic mode for Wednesday. If operations are affected even further, I hope the carriers have a case against these tech giants. This is not what the industry needs after the meltdowns over the last four weeks.

I have not heard any mention of the popular RJ types you see everywhere in the US also.

Against the tech giants? Didn’t the government auction the spectrum to them?

Also how was this never brought up on the years since the auction?


I've heard rumblings on this for about a year IIRC; it's now only going through the media cycle as we're at the deadline.

Like others have said, as an end user, I don't see the benefit. I surmise the real benefactors are data harvesting/advertising operations as a result of this rollout (hence term-dropping "big tech"), and it stings for me even more as I am part of the aviation industry and am fed up after 2 years of constant uncertainty.

airlines love knowing about problems and not fixing them and then just trying to get whatever agency to fix it for them.

Isn’t the problem that The airplanes haven’t been checked for interference? What have the airlines and manufacturers been doing? The last 2 years would have been perfect to test stuff like this as pilots and planes sat.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos