Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

GPS Jamming West Coast USA

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

GPS Jamming West Coast USA

Old 7th Jun 2016, 21:28
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Hawarden (near EGNR)
Age: 74
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
GPS Jamming West Coast USA

FAA Warns of GPS Outages This Month During Mysterious Tests on the West Coast
Whilst during my sea going career I received Nav Warnings re GPS jamming by the UK military some years back, what concerns me with this test is the issue with Embraer Phenom 300 "aircraft flight stability controls".
GPS Interference Notam For Southwest - AVweb flash Article That seems to suggest something other than simple jamming transmissions on 1575.42 MHz or 1227.60 MHz.


Cheers!

Last edited by Ancient-Mariner; 7th Jun 2016 at 21:29. Reason: typo
Ancient-Mariner is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2016, 13:38
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fairly close to the colonial capitol
Age: 55
Posts: 1,693
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Embraer's "aircraft flight stability control" computer system must in some way rely primarily on GPS. Odd, one would think the primary reference for any stability augmentation system would be IRU data with GPS and/or NAV inputs for position information only.
vapilot2004 is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2016, 13:52
  #3 (permalink)  
Pegase Driver
 
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 74
Posts: 3,698
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
A bit of overreaction if you ask me . Such military exercises with tempo GPS outages are also occurring in my country and are frequently NOTAM'ed.
Not really a problem. My not-so-expensive GPS in my single engine aircraft receives and process GLONASS signals to compensate for that anyway.
I have difficulty to believe the Embraer story.
ATC Watcher is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2016, 16:19
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: New York
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
@ATC Watcher. Believe it Brother.. http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/m...11_EMB-300.pdf
neilki is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2016, 17:35
  #5 (permalink)  
Pegase Driver
 
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 74
Posts: 3,698
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
Thanks neilki, so it is true ! but who in his right mind designed such a system ?
Surely Embraer knows that GPS is owned by the US military and that in case of crisis/war they have the key to degrade it or even switch it off. So there must be a back up no ?
ATC Watcher is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2016, 21:45
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Confusio Helvetica
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
That's pretty crazy. Even if the FAA says it, I still refuse to believe it. I mean, this ain't an airliner, but you're telling me that you get all that from jamming GPS? I mean, one or two problems, okay, but this is like giving every idiot with a couple hundred bucks the ability to build a "land immediately" box they can carry on board. Gives a whole new sense to the notion of a business meeting that "headed south".
DingerX is offline  
Old 8th Jun 2016, 21:51
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: uk
Posts: 579
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Equally, who in their right mind certificated such a system? How widely is this business known, or is this a first heads-up?
Wageslave is offline  
Old 9th Jun 2016, 00:39
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: PA
Age: 59
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
widespread or anything other than very, very local jamming would take an incredible amount of power. Even if one could jam the GPS, the IRU would cover nav for quite some time. (I guess unless you are in an Embraer, which appears to just fall out of the sky)
underfire is offline  
Old 9th Jun 2016, 05:04
  #9 (permalink)  
Hippopotomonstrosesquipidelian title
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: is everything
Posts: 1,826
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
End-of life spec is -160 dbW at the surface, so the signals are reasonably easily interfered with. Or one could simply use the WAAS network to transmit bogus correction data, perhaps.

Last edited by Bushfiva; 9th Jun 2016 at 06:24. Reason: spelling
Bushfiva is offline  
Old 9th Jun 2016, 05:41
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Malvern, UK
Posts: 425
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
The FAA text is annoyingly ambiguous. It refers to warning messages but without any indication of whether the crew experienced any actual control issues. One has to assume without an explicit statement that they did not, but it is remiss of them to issue a statement that "begs the question" in this way.

It is perfectly plausible that, with the loss of a suitable, synchronising time reference, the warning system became unable to function correctly and began to issue frequent and spurious warning messages.

Not a happy situation, but one that is more credible than inertially referenced control systems that not only need a GPS signal, but also malfunction without it.
Dont Hang Up is offline  
Old 10th Jun 2016, 21:17
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Colorado
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by underfire
widespread or anything other than very, very local jamming would take an incredible amount of power.
Why do you believe that? Such a jamming signal would be competing with a power-budget constrained transmitter on satellites orbiting at approximately 20200 km altitude. I see commercial "GPS Jammer" pocket-sized handheld devices that apparently function effectively with 300mW output power on omni antennas. It would be a trivial RF engineering exercise to put out something quite a bit more, you could paint such a beam on any number of targets with a directional antenna.

The L1 carrier wave is at 1575.42 MHz. (wikipedia) In the frequency allocation filing the L1 C/A power is listed as 25.6 Watts. The Antenna gain is listed at 13 dBi. Thus, based on the frequency allocation filing, the power would be about 500 Watts (27 dBW). Now, the free space path loss from 21000 km is about 182 dB. Take the 500 Watts (27 dBW) and subtract the free space path loss (27 - 182) and you get -155 dBW. The end of life spec is -160 dBW, which leaves a 5 dB margin. (GPS Satellite Power Output)

The low power level of GPS was discussed previously here, at: http://www.pprune.org/tech-log/48302...hosen-gps.html

Last edited by chromakey; 10th Jun 2016 at 21:28.
chromakey is offline  
Old 11th Jun 2016, 00:21
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Arizona
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The U.S. Navy has cancelled the planned GPS outage in Southern California. The FAA and many aviation organizations put pressure on the Navy to reduce or eliminate the tests and the impact to aviation, naval, and land users of GPS.

Here is a link to the FAA notice about the EMB-300 yaw damper problem. Requires the crew to decrease speed below 240 KTS and descend.
http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/m...11_EMB-300.pdf
Three Lima Charlie is offline  
Old 12th Jun 2016, 01:23
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: PA
Age: 59
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Such a jamming signal would be competing with a power-budget constrained transmitter on satellites orbiting at approximately 20200 km altitude.
You have a moving target with multiple signals coming from multiple directions. In addition, the IRU would cover the temporary outage.
Tracking and jamming one aircraft may be possible with low power, if you could track it, but to jam an area would take a wide beam, and that takes power for that altitude.
underfire is offline  
Old 12th Jun 2016, 01:50
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: 43N
Posts: 183
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Our crews were getting GPS jamming a few months ago into RKSI.
It was North Korea, reportedly they get into this every few years when they are jacked up over something.
Koan is offline  
Old 12th Jun 2016, 12:16
  #15 (permalink)  
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Three Lima Charlie:

Here is a link to the FAA notice about the EMB-300 yaw damper problem. Requires the crew to decrease speed below 240 KTS and descend.
http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/m...11_EMB-300.pdf
I know of the individual who issued that document. I am sure it wasn't issued casually. Sure doesn't say much for the certification of that type aircraft.
aterpster is offline  
Old 12th Jun 2016, 14:40
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Moses Lake, WA
Age: 63
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Which agency approved the AHRS that apparently requires GPS to function correctly?
khorton is offline  
Old 12th Jun 2016, 16:39
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Denver
Posts: 1,229
Received 15 Likes on 9 Posts
Per Embraer's site: 300 Certified by

ANAC (Brazil) and FAA (US) 12/2009
EASA (EU) 5/2010

I guess we've moved on from automation-dependent pilots to automation-dependent aircraft....
pattern_is_full is offline  
Old 12th Jun 2016, 19:22
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Moses Lake, WA
Age: 63
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The root of the problem seems to be in the AHRS, which is I believe is a Rockwell-Collins product, TSO'd by the FAA.
khorton is offline  
Old 13th Jun 2016, 03:49
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: PA
Age: 59
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It was North Korea, reportedly they get into this every few years when they are jacked up over something.
Yes, that Korean corridor is a bit dicey...I suppose that the power would be an issue for NKOR!

I know of the individual who issued that document. I am sure it wasn't issued casually. Sure doesn't say much for the certification of that type aircraft.
Exactly, look at who certified the 787 firebird!
underfire is offline  
Old 13th Jun 2016, 08:11
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 1A
Posts: 8,574
Received 77 Likes on 45 Posts
Originally Posted by Pattern is full
I guess we've moved on from automation-dependent pilots to automation-dependent aircraft....
Like Like Like!
Capn Bloggs is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.