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

FAA ADs re 5G interference

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

FAA ADs re 5G interference

Old 10th Jan 2022, 08:15
  #81 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
real world 5G testing

hi,
I just realized that the FAA list of 50 airports that have some reduced-power 5G operations ((my wording)) is not complete.
For whatever reasons, airports like Atlanta and Denver aren´t in.
I think the networks will install normal, high-power 5G stations near those places- lots of people, lot´s of purchasing power...
AND: lots of airplanes will fly there. With normal radio-altimeters. Got to remember that they are on, non-switcheable, from the moment
aircraft power-up at the gate to parking and shutdown.
Consequently, high power 5G and altimters will operate close to each other at Atlanta and Denver.

It will be interesting to watch.

K
Originally Posted by Sallyann1234
I can't disagree with Klauss.

Allowing C Band cellular except near airports is fine for normal airline operations, but what happens when an airplane has a distress condition and is off course? It may be flying close to cell sites, perhaps on a hilltop where they are often sited, and be deprived of height information at the very time when it is most vital.

And how does this help with low level operations over urban areas with a high density of cellular activity?

This really does seem another case of "We'll try it and see if it works". And we all know where that has led to recently.
Klauss is offline  
Old 10th Jan 2022, 11:32
  #82 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The sunny side
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Klauss
hi,
I just realized that the FAA list of 50 airports that have some reduced-power 5G operations ((my wording)) is not complete.
For whatever reasons, airports like Atlanta and Denver aren´t in.
I think the networks will install normal, high-power 5G stations near those places- lots of people, lot´s of purchasing power...
AND: lots of airplanes will fly there. With normal radio-altimeters. Got to remember that they are on, non-switcheable, from the moment
aircraft power-up at the gate to parking and shutdown.
Consequently, high power 5G and altimters will operate close to each other at Atlanta and Denver.

It will be interesting to watch.

K
Airports with 5G Buffers | Federal Aviation Administration (faa.gov)
The 50 Airports with 5G Buffer zones are considered safe, and so any airport not on the list is not considered safe?!? I wonder therefore the NOTAMs restricting operations will be limited to the non-listed airports...
FiveGirlKit is offline  
Old 10th Jan 2022, 15:57
  #83 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Within AM radio broadcast range of downtown Chicago
Age: 71
Posts: 678
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As of Monday 10 Jan (around noon EST)

Website of ALPA-International is running an information-intensive page on the 5G deployment situation:

5G C-Band, NOT Cleared for Takeoff - ALPA

Also, from Politico's Transportation newsletter, the following (quoted verbatim) about the posture of the major airports organization w.r.t. the situation:

AIRPORTS AREN’T HAPPY: The Airports Council International – North America on Friday called the FAA's analysis "irrelevant,” arguing that the ripple effects of the deployment will hit the entire national airspace hard, including flight cancellations and delays. Last week’s deal pushed the 5G expansion date to Jan. 19, and AT&T and Verizon agreed to employ additional protections at certain airport zones until July.

“Despite eleventh-hour efforts to resolve obvious concerns that could have been addressed months ago, this attempt at a short-term fix does not address a number of critical uncertainties about the potentially adverse impact of 5G on certain low visibility approaches,” ACI-NA President and CEO Kevin Burke said in a statement.” This so-called fix will create winners and losers within the airport community, and the entire aviation system will suffer under the terms of this deal.”
WillowRun 6-3 is offline  
Old 10th Jan 2022, 17:59
  #84 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: England
Posts: 474
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
What kind of crazy excuse for a plan is this? It satisfies no-one.

The cellular side are concerned because they can't use C band at many airfields.
The aviation side are concerned because they don't have protection near many other airfields.

Are the unprotected airfields being used as an unwilling test case, with future regulations depending on whether there are many incidents at them over a period of time?

There are just too many variables of equipment, operation and terrain for such a plan to be adequate. A merely representative test based on a subset of conditions answers nothing. As observed above, aviation has never worked this way.

An issue on this scale, involving potential risks to life as well as billions of dollars, requires a properly organised test regime based on equipment specifications and actual worst-case physical operation.
Sallyann1234 is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2022, 03:57
  #85 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Hi,
found a bit of a test description from here in Europe. 1 test in Norway and France.
https://cept.org/Documents/ecc-pt1/6...-compatibility
unzipp, look at the larger document.

The tests don´t look like the more comprehensive version Sallyann1234 prefers.....but they are for the lower power, more freq. separation conditions here in Europe. So, maybe they are ok as a first try....
Looking forward to seeing the US version of real-world tests.
K

Originally Posted by Sallyann1234
What kind of crazy excuse for a plan is this? It satisfies no-one.

The cellular side are concerned because they can't use C band at many airfields.
The aviation side are concerned because they don't have protection near many other airfields.

Are the unprotected airfields being used as an unwilling test case, with future regulations depending on whether there are many incidents at them over a period of time?

There are just too many variables of equipment, operation and terrain for such a plan to be adequate. A merely representative test based on a subset of conditions answers nothing. As observed above, aviation has never worked this way.

An issue on this scale, involving potential risks to life as well as billions of dollars, requires a properly organised test regime based on equipment specifications and actual worst-case physical operation.
Klauss is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2022, 11:46
  #86 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The sunny side
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
NOTAMs have been issued, effective on 19 January (when 5G is turned on). Example:

!FDC 2/3714 SFO IAP SAN FRANCISCO INTL, SAN FRANCISCO, CA. ILS RWY 28R (SA CAT I), AMDT 15A ... ILS RWY 28R (CAT II - III), AMDT 15A ... ILS RWY 28L (SA CAT II), AMDT 27B ... PROCEDURE NA EXC FOR ACFT USING APPROVED ALTERNATIVE METHODS OF COMPLIANCE DUE TO 5G C-BAND INTERFERENCE PLUS SEE AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 2021-23-12, 2021-23-13 2201190500-2401190501EST

Now the fun starts....
FiveGirlKit is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2022, 18:04
  #87 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yes.... 1400 Notam....approximately.

Originally Posted by FiveGirlKit
NOTAMs have been issued, effective on 19 January (when 5G is turned on). Example:

!FDC 2/3714 SFO IAP SAN FRANCISCO INTL, SAN FRANCISCO, CA. ILS RWY 28R (SA CAT I), AMDT 15A ... ILS RWY 28R (CAT II - III), AMDT 15A ... ILS RWY 28L (SA CAT II), AMDT 27B ... PROCEDURE NA EXC FOR ACFT USING APPROVED ALTERNATIVE METHODS OF COMPLIANCE DUE TO 5G C-BAND INTERFERENCE PLUS SEE AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 2021-23-12, 2021-23-13 2201190500-2401190501EST

Now the fun starts....
Klauss is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2022, 22:42
  #88 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Within AM radio broadcast range of downtown Chicago
Age: 71
Posts: 678
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
IFALPA 13 Jan 2022

"Maintaining Safe Operations with Radar Altimeter Interference from 5G" issued by IFALPA (based on ALPA-International).
Indexed as 22SAB01 superseding and updating prior bulletin on same topic (21SAB16)
Link (from IFALPA website):

22sab01-maintaining-safe-operations-with-radar-altimeter-interference-from-5g.pdf (ifalpa.org)
WillowRun 6-3 is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2022, 08:40
  #89 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: England
Posts: 474
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
So now we know how tests are to be done. Every flight is to be a test, and every radar altimeter is to be considered unreliable near airports.
How does the pilot, perhaps under pressure from other adverse factors, decide whether the radalt reading and the systems connected to it are right or wrong?
Sallyann1234 is offline  
Old 15th Jan 2022, 00:39
  #90 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Texas
Posts: 135
Received 6 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Sallyann1234
So now we know how tests are to be done. Every flight is to be a test, and every radar altimeter is to be considered unreliable near airports.
How does the pilot, perhaps under pressure from other adverse factors, decide whether the radalt reading and the systems connected to it are right or wrong?
And all the pax in the back will be unwitting participants in the test...

Tango and Cash is offline  
Old 15th Jan 2022, 06:58
  #91 (permalink)  

ex-Tanker
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Luton Beds UK
Posts: 907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Only the fixed Antennae?

How much of a problem is the signal from a mobile phone (or many mobile phones)? Is this a signal strength issue?

You can control where the fixed antennae are but not where mobiles are used. And they are certainly not angled downward.

Doesn’t a mobile send out a “squitter” from time to time to test network availability? On all possible bands?

And are there other items on these bands - stage wireless or sports equipment?
Few Cloudy is offline  
Old 15th Jan 2022, 09:00
  #92 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: England
Posts: 474
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It's extremely unlikely that handsets could cause a problem. They operate at much lower power than the base stations, and they respond at lower frequencies in the bottom part of the C band. ​​​​​​​
______

​​​​​​​Let's be clear about what is happening here. There is a potential issue of interference to radar altimeters from C band cellular, which calculations suggest might happen. For technical reasons, the risk is likely to be greatest in the USA.

At the moment, both sides are walking around the issue by restricting operations and/or reducing reliance on equipment. For obvious reasons, these have to be temporary measures. ​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

​​​​​​​What seems to be missing at the moment is any move to test whether the interference would actually exist under normal operations, and to what extent.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​
Sallyann1234 is offline  
Old 16th Jan 2022, 17:28
  #93 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 4,711
Received 20 Likes on 11 Posts
There is now reporting that G5 interference is particularly problematic for the B787. Apparently it uses RA data for air ground logic switching and interference may effect spoiler and reverser operation
Big Pistons Forever is offline  
Old 16th Jan 2022, 23:00
  #94 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Within AM radio broadcast range of downtown Chicago
Age: 71
Posts: 678
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
FAA "Continued Airworthiness Notification"

U.S. FAA has issed CAN-2022-01-2, "Continued Airworthiness Notification to the International Community" dated Jan. 14, 2022.
Subject is 5G interference as it affects certain functions or operations of 787 aircraft, worldwide.

(Apologies, not accessing FAA link to post here - but it's quite e-z to locate)

Also, Satcom_guru has technical information in posts on the Tw soc media platform (which is how this SLF/atty learned about the referenced FAA CAN).
WillowRun 6-3 is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2022, 00:35
  #95 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 4,711
Received 20 Likes on 11 Posts
Sigh, another own goal for Boeing engineering…..
Big Pistons Forever is offline  
Old 17th Jan 2022, 16:29
  #96 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: At home
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Progress:

Collaborative Work Underway to Reduce Delay, Cancellation Risk
Approved radio altimeters will allow commercial aircraft to continue low-visibility landings in the 5G C-Band deployment areas.

The agency has made progress during the last two weeks to safely reduce the risk of delays and cancellations as altimeter manufacturers evaluate data from the wireless companies to determine how robust each model is. This work has shown some altimeters are reliable and accurate in the 5G areas; others must be retrofitted or replaced.
Today, the FAA cleared an estimated 45 percent of the U.S. commercial fleet to perform low-visibility landings at many of the airports where 5G C-band will be deployed on Jan. 19.
The agency approved two radio altimeter models that are installed in a wide variety of Boeing and Airbus planes. This combination of aircraft and altimeter approval opens up runways at as many as 48 of the 88 airports most directly affected by 5G C-band interference.
The airplane models approved include some Boeing 737, 747, 757, 767, MD-10/-11 and Airbus A310, A319, A320, A321, A330 and A350 models. FAA expects to issue more approvals in the coming days.
See updates on https://www.faa.gov/5g

snowfalcon2 is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2022, 08:19
  #97 (permalink)  
Paxing All Over The World
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hertfordshire, UK.
Age: 66
Posts: 9,883
Received 14 Likes on 10 Posts
Perhaps a dumb question: The folks that allocate bandwidth for use - would they not have known all the devices likely to operate in a given band? Or, should they have known?
PAXboy is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2022, 10:42
  #98 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Spain and Gibraltar
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
An update on the BBC web-site https://www.bbc.com/news/business-60036831
Nil by mouth is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2022, 11:03
  #99 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
2 weeks

...were enogh to find out some hard info on 5G and radioaltimeter compatibility.
Amazing.
So, how much do we know in 2 months ?
and....what about the year that went by.. ?

Shrug. As bystander, I can only wonder at what happens.
Klauss is offline  
Old 18th Jan 2022, 12:33
  #100 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Tring, UK
Posts: 1,748
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Sallyann1234
It's extremely unlikely that handsets could cause a problem. They operate at much lower power than the base stations, and they respond at lower frequencies in the bottom part of the C band.
______

Let's be clear about what is happening here. There is a potential issue of interference to radar altimeters from C band cellular, which calculations suggest might happen. For technical reasons, the risk is likely to be greatest in the USA.

At the moment, both sides are walking around the issue by restricting operations and/or reducing reliance on equipment. For obvious reasons, these have to be temporary measures. ​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

​​​​​​​What seems to be missing at the moment is any move to test whether the interference would actually exist under normal operations, and to what extent.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​
I think that’s a reasonable summary. The other thing to add is that that FAA appear to be in full-defence bureaucrat mode having been caught with their pants down over the 737 Max, and there also seems to be a political infight between them and the FCC; toys are exiting prams all over the place and air transport is collateral right now...
​​​​​​​
FullWings is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.