Russians playing games with their jammers (believed)

[Right20deg]

Originally Posted by ATC Watcher

It is played by both sides, as the main use is against drones , the US and Israel and playing with it as much as Russia. We civilians are just collateral damage.. The price to pay to fly near conflict zones.

You make a very good point. So we are stuck with this .

[oceancrosser]

Bring back NDBs! But in reality, all those Aviation Authorities that have been throwing out the ground based NAVAIDS need to have a rethink.

[CargoOne]

It is not an attack, just a collateral damage. Russia is jamming their borders to protect against the drones. Good thing is that TAY airport still has a functioning ILS (ok may be calibration is out of date) and the tower is still there, you just need to send dispatchers to switch the lights on and provide vectoring. So it can be solved quickly if politicians will decide so, just a matter of money. Finnish eastern airports are in worse position as ILS were either removed or not existed from day one.

[LapSap]

Originally Posted by oceancrosser

Bring back NDBs! But in reality, all those Aviation Authorities that have been throwing out the ground based NAVAIDS need to have a rethink.

Well i have thought for some time now that the "all-the-eggs-in-one-basket" obsession with doing away with all ground-based aids in favour of "free" GPS/GNSS was going to come back to bite us.

With so many areas of conflict en-route now, a large number of our flights are turning up in the Far East with no ADS-B, unable to accept certain runways with RNP Missed Approach procedures and having to be separated more due lack of other surveillance.

My understanding is once Airbus fleet detect out of tolerance position information, ADS-B is automatically decoupled (or de-latched is a term I've heard used) and cannot be recoupled in flight. Whereas with Boeing types, the system can be manually recoupled once in a stable GNSS reception area.
Can any body comment on the accuracy of that info?

[ATC Watcher]

Originally Posted by LapSap

My understanding is once Airbus fleet detect out of tolerance position information, ADS-B is automatically decoupled (or de-latched is a term I've heard used) and cannot be recoupled in flight. Whereas with Boeing types, the system can be manually recoupled once in a stable GNSS reception area.
Can any body comment on the accuracy of that info?

interesting question , I did not hear that one before , I will add another if I may : on the Boeing 787 avionics are synchronized by the GPS clock signal , and once /jammed/spoofed you cannot reset the clock in flight and you lose many functions including CPDLC for the rest of the flight . Is it the same on the Airbus fleet ?

[601]

Back to the good old days, VAR, VOR, DME, LLZ, ILS and ADF.
Maybe if GPS was designed from the beginning as a navigation system, we would not be having this discussion about jamming.
Same with the WWW.
Using both for things that were never envisaged.

[Jwscud]

LapSap speak to your technical department. There is a lot of work going on behind the scenes at Airbus on this issue with possible resets for certain types, but one can’t just invent a reset procedure without properly testing it so patience is needed.

[Sailvi767]

Originally Posted by LapSap

Well i have thought for some time now that the "all-the-eggs-in-one-basket" obsession with doing away with all ground-based aids in favour of "free" GPS/GNSS was going to come back to bite us.

With so many areas of conflict en-route now, a large number of our flights are turning up in the Far East with no ADS-B, unable to accept certain runways with RNP Missed Approach procedures and having to be separated more due lack of other surveillance.

My understanding is once Airbus fleet detect out of tolerance position information, ADS-B is automatically decoupled (or de-latched is a term I've heard used) and cannot be recoupled in flight. Whereas with Boeing types, the system can be manually recoupled once in a stable GNSS reception area.
Can any body comment on the accuracy of that info?

What you posted matches my experience on the A330.

[Sailvi767]

Originally Posted by 601

Back to the good old days, VAR, VOR, DME, LLZ, ILS and ADF.
Maybe if GPS was designed from the beginning as a navigation system, we would not be having this discussion about jamming.
Same with the WWW.
Using both for things that were never envisaged.

GPS will always be highly susceptible to jamming. It’s a very low power system by design. To come up with a more jam resistant system would require far more power out which is simply not possibly with current of envisaged future technology in satellites on the scale needed to provide worldwide coverage.