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 24th Jan 2022, 13:46
  #141 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: England
Posts: 470
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by The Nr Fairy View Post
Yes. Japan and Europe have both studied the issue and found resolutions.

While FAA and FCC seem to have conducted a two-year face-off, neither doing anything to check whether the potential problem is an actual one.
Sallyann1234 is online now  
Old 24th Jan 2022, 15:31
  #142 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Within AM radio broadcast range of downtown Chicago
Age: 70
Posts: 640
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Not to be morbid . . .

Too early to engage the question, 'how is it that the massive bureaucracies in the U.S., at the federal level, could have fumbled this situation so badly?' While enough facts for a more complete post-mortem probably aren't yet known, this SLF/att'y wants to take a swing at it.

Perhaps "two-year face-off" is very descriptive, if your context is hockey. That is, bureaucracies of this size move in slow motion.....very slow motion.

Especially where complicated technologies (and engineering too, I think) are at the center of the question or questions. Consider a comparable situation--not aviation, but really all about complicated technologies and "Engin."

The U.S. National Orbital Debris R&D Plan was made final (in form) and published in the waning days of the prior presidential administration. It was done by - get this - four (4) levels of formal bureaucracy, plus a superior bureaucratic layer. A Working Group, of a Subcommittee, of a Committee, of the National Science and Technology Council, layered over by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. The Council, ostensibly anyway, coordinates in and among the Executive Branch, while OSTP, again ostensibly, advises the president. How this all works really, given that the president is the head of Executive Branch..... not for today.

So, if you've indulged this comparison of bureaucratic inertia so far, do you wonder how the R&D Plan is progressing? Public comments on the plan were solicited through the Federal Register, and three-minute timeslots were available for two "listening sessions." Despite some professional and academic interest I declined to participate at all - trying to say much of anything about a complicated (to say the least) technology-focused problem set in 3 minutes, that would insult any professional audience's intelligence. (The cognitive, not artificial....)

Yet, your bureaucracy at work. So, some Slayer of Bureaus is needed, I would suppose.
WillowRun 6-3 is offline  
Old 25th Jan 2022, 08:47
  #143 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 765
Received 25 Likes on 15 Posts
I hope the 5G guys are made to pay for this not the aviation industry. The 5G guys want to use bands that had been allocated to somebody else before.
Less Hair is offline  
Old 25th Jan 2022, 11:54
  #144 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Less Hair View Post
I hope the 5G guys are made to pay for this not the aviation industry. The 5G guys want to use bands that had been allocated to somebody else before.
I think that´s going in the right direction. There is the ITU, International Telecomunications Union, that coordinates frequency use worldwide. One of their principles is, that newcomers may not disturb established services (-slightly reworded, from memory) . So , this makes it clear that the 5G people have to design and operate their systems so as not to bug the radioaltimeters. Of course, it´s only an international, global agency - thus, their § may not apply in the US
Klauss is offline  
Old 25th Jan 2022, 14:25
  #145 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Yakima
Posts: 331
Received 13 Likes on 7 Posts
From the Seattle Times today:
As fog shrouded Paine Field in Everett Monday, Alaska Air regional carrier Horizon Air was forced to cancel all commercial flights in and out of the airfield because of limitations on low visibility flying imposed to avoid 5G interference.

Horizon is currently the sole airline operating commercial flights out of Paine Field and all those are flown on the Embraer E175, a 76-seat regional jet.

The limitations imposed by the Federal Aviation Administration to prevent interference with cockpit instruments have created a problem specific to that aircraft and certain airports, including Paine Field and Portland International Airport.
And further
Whether the FAA granted clearance depended on what model of altimeter was installed on each aircraft and also how close the cell towers at each airport were to the runways.

The altimeters on Horizon’s Q400 turboprop planes — supplied by Collins — allowed those aircraft to be cleared everywhere. But Sprague said that the specific Honeywell altimeter on the E175 jet required airport-specific limitations.

“The configuration of the Honeywell radio altimeter in the E175, and how it integrates with the other aircraft systems on the E175, are such that the the likelihood of interference from the 5G signal is greater,” said Sprague.

The FAA therefore cleared the E175 to use only runways further away from the cell towers.
Winemaker is offline  
Old 25th Jan 2022, 19:04
  #146 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Florida
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
E170/175s are really taking the brunt of this. As I have posted, it isn't always weather related either! Apparently so many EICAS warnings and system alarms have the RA wired into the logic tree of the E170/175 that at Key West with its short 5,000 foot runway, the type is significantly weight restricted on takeoff causing medium distance flights to have to fly over to southern FL airports like RSW, MIA, FLL and PBI to take on full fuel to reach their destination. It has to do with the possibility of a RTO and not be able to completely trust brakes/spoilers due to the RA being in the logic tree. I cannot give you the tech details accurately, so I will leave it at that.
Lake1952 is offline  
Old 26th Jan 2022, 09:18
  #147 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: England
Posts: 470
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
And still the issue is dealt with in the US on the basis of 'potential' and 'possibility' and 'likelihood' of interference to altimeters, which therefore requires extensive precautions and operational restrictions. ​​​​​​​

Has anyone yet demonstrated or reported actual interference to altimeters, of an extent to require these restrictions?
​Are these restrictions to be maintained indefinitely, in the absence of proper tests?​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

Meanwhile the rest of the world has made its assessments, and got on with life as normal.​​​​​​​

Last edited by Sallyann1234; 26th Jan 2022 at 09:46.
Sallyann1234 is online now  
Old 26th Jan 2022, 12:57
  #148 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Sallyann1234 View Post
And still the issue is dealt with in the US on the basis of 'potential' and 'possibility' and 'likelihood' of interference to altimeters, which therefore requires extensive precautions and operational restrictions.

Has anyone yet demonstrated or reported actual interference to altimeters, of an extent to require these restrictions?
​Are these restrictions to be maintained indefinitely, in the absence of proper tests?​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

Meanwhile the rest of the world has made its assessments, and got on with life as normal.​​​​​​​
-.-.
Hi, well, actually, there is a report for a 3G / 4G installation. Quite severe interference.
https://www.icao.int/safety/FSMP/Mee...terference.pdf
Thus, I think that a thorough investigation of the 5G issues is warranted.
Klauss is offline  
Old 26th Jan 2022, 13:15
  #149 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Within AM radio broadcast range of downtown Chicago
Age: 70
Posts: 640
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Objection

Not to revisit ... let alone in any detail or depth ... the significant body of evidence presented to FCC in the May 2020 motion for reconsideration, or in the Emergency Petition filed late last year, on behalf of principal aviation interests and interested parties.

But, I will say it is simply incorrect, invalid and wrong to assert that the safe, efficient, and resilient U.S. aviation sector, or the National Airspace System, can be put into experimental mode, on the basis that commercial entities and interests have invested capital. Or that other countries have taken their own decisions.
WillowRun 6-3 is offline  
Old 26th Jan 2022, 16:03
  #150 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: England
Posts: 470
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I don't see anyone suggesting that airlines should be experimenting. In the absence of properly constructed tests to establish acceptable parameters, the present wide operational restrictions seem to be the only safe option.
There was a two year window in which those tests should have been done, by the relevant authorities and not by the airlines. Someone now has to decide how to proceed, or the restrictions will remain.​​​​​​​

​​​​​​​I find myself to be repeating the same message - time to leave the thread.​​​​​​​
Sallyann1234 is online now  
Old 26th Jan 2022, 16:07
  #151 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 67
Posts: 3,872
Received 28 Likes on 14 Posts
Originally Posted by Sallyann1234 View Post
Has anyone yet demonstrated or reported actual interference to altimeters, of an extent to require these restrictions?
​Are these restrictions to be maintained indefinitely, in the absence of proper tests?​​​​​​​
​​​​​​​
Electro-Magnetic Interference can be very difficult to measure and evaluate. Even documented cases of EMI often can't be duplicated in the lab.
I recall one case many years ago - a flight crew on a Boeing aircraft started observing some very unusual avionics behavior. The cabin crew observed a passenger playing a gameboy type device - when they had the passenger turn it off the problem immediately went away. The airline actually purchased the computer game from the individual and gave it to Boeing to investigate - and Boeing could find nothing unusual about the device or duplicate any sort of unusual behavior
That being said, the FAA and FCC have done a horrible job of handling this issue...
tdracer is offline  
Old 27th Jan 2022, 21:10
  #152 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Florida
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well, the Key West departures that pulled up short to refuel in South Florida have now been flying to their intended destinations nonstop. So either the 5G adjacent to KEYW has been shut down or whatever had to be done to verify the RA integrity of the E170/175 has been done.
Lake1952 is offline  
Old 27th Jan 2022, 21:37
  #153 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Ohio
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
AT&T and Verizon paid close to $70 billion dollars for the spectrum they are using. The bureaucrats should figure out how they can safely use it.
Oldshredder is offline  
Old 27th Jan 2022, 22:19
  #154 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Oldshredder View Post
AT&T and Verizon paid close to $70 billion dollars for the spectrum they are using. The bureaucrats should figure out how they can safely use it.
Well, there is always the possility to negotiate, like about a refund, or acceptance of restrictions for a few $ ....
and there is the possibility of a serious mishap, with som people not around afterwards to pay taxes.

Choices.
Klauss is offline  
Old 28th Jan 2022, 01:41
  #155 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Washington.
Age: 72
Posts: 873
Received 9 Likes on 6 Posts
Originally Posted by Sallyann1234 View Post
And still the issue is dealt with in the US on the basis of 'potential' and 'possibility' and 'likelihood' of interference to altimeters, which therefore requires extensive precautions and operational restrictions.

Has anyone yet demonstrated or reported actual interference to altimeters, of an extent to require these restrictions?
​Are these restrictions to be maintained indefinitely, in the absence of proper tests?​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

Meanwhile the rest of the world has made its assessments, and got on with life as normal.​​​​​​​
It’s not quite that simple. When systems are certified, they must be demonstrated to comply with the standards of performance in conditions that represent those expected to be found in service. Any certification applicant could justifiably object if performance tests were required in more challenging, nonrepresentative conditions. Radio altimeters and the flight control systems they interface with have been certified to meet known requirements in the appropriate conditions.

Now the the conditions are changing. Radio altimeters had been certified to sufficiently reject interfering signals and continue to meet required performance standards when 5G transmission in nearby wavelengths were not present. There was nothing wrong with these approvals. But not all currently approved radio altimeters type designs would be able to perform with the necessary accuracy and assurance in these new conditions.

One may point fingers only at the FCC and FAA, but remember they operate in the midst of powerful and disparate political influence by corporate interests and powerful politicians they support and rely on.
GlobalNav is offline  
Old 28th Jan 2022, 11:54
  #156 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Ankh Morpork, DW
Posts: 637
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
AMOC Contents

For those in FAA land, have any of you seen your 5G AMOC if you have one? If so, could you publish it here?
ImbracableCrunk is offline  
Old 28th Jan 2022, 17:47
  #157 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Within AM radio broadcast range of downtown Chicago
Age: 70
Posts: 640
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
What GlobalNav said (155, above).

Also, I had not meant to be understood as saying that anyone had advocated actually experimenting.

Time perhaps will tell whether a difference that appears to exist between the FCC and the FAA is a real difference. FAA obviously is situated within and as part of the Department of Transportation, headed by a Cabinet Secretary. The head of FCC might have "Cabinet rank" (I don't know) but it appears there's a difference in operating as a component (in so many words) of the president's Cabinet, and being instead one among many federal agencies which, collectively, sometimes are referred to as "the inter-agency." In this matter, it sometimes seems like the prior administration strongly favored commercial interests in telecommunications, and applied pressure on and through FCC. Then the new administrstion took over, FAA regained its role as the heavier of the heavyweights, and because Cabinet agencies can apply more authority more quickly, FAA was effective in changing the game up.

Tom Wheeler, formerly head of FCC, published a piece a few days ago in which he asked if FAA was like the kid who "cried wolf" once too often. Perhaps surprisingly, his writing appeared to give good amount of credence to FAA and the aviation community's concerns. But overall, this tangle-up doesn't bode well for future, anticipated clashes of rival technological interests.
WillowRun 6-3 is offline  
Old 29th Jan 2022, 03:53
  #158 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Age: 55
Posts: 827
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ImbracableCrunk View Post
For those in FAA land, have any of you seen your 5G AMOC if you have one? If so, could you publish it here?
Not really comfortable publishing company manuals here. We do have it, it covers most, but not all of our airports.
hans brinker is offline  
Old 29th Jan 2022, 14:49
  #159 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Ankh Morpork, DW
Posts: 637
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Can you summarize?
ImbracableCrunk is offline  
Old 29th Jan 2022, 16:44
  #160 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Age: 55
Posts: 827
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ImbracableCrunk View Post
Can you summarize?
Of all our regular allowed airports, destination, alternate, diversion, it is about 50% that don't have AMOC, for our regular scheduled most do, quick look is only 5 that don't, and at least 1 of those doesn't have CAT II/III. It just says: AMOC provides relief from AD2021-23-12, without any explanation of the how/what was done.
hans brinker 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.