I remember back in the day where one couldn’t even use a cellphone in or around an aircraft due to interference. One would think that before implementing a new service or system, it would be throughly tested beforehand to insure that it would work without any issues. Now it’s up to the operator of a prior system to make sure that his equipment can still function? How about the other way around?
1 reply
Here is the problem Karrpilot and Jon Mc… The system is not in or around the plane, it’s at least for the moment, not even at the airport. A handheld unit puts out much lower power and I won’t bore everyone with what all that means from a math/physics point of view, but suffice it to say it’s very different. From an engineering point of view the fault is with the radar/radio altimeter not the cell phone system. There is plenty of guard band if the RA’s were designed properly to begin with. As an electrical engineer I have been in the communications sector for over 3 decades. If I did such a bad job of designing the front end for our devices it would’ve been caught by others and I’d have been likely fired. As I understand the history here, the RA’s were designed to meet the government’s requirements and there in lies the problem.
As to who should pay, that’s certainly a debatable point. As I understand the history, the government created the specs, but if they pay it’s we the tax payers who pay. The RA makers did a horrible job but and while they could’ve done better than the requirements I suspect, there may have been good reasons to not rock the boat. I worked in defense for a while and there was usually incentive to just meet the requirements and not exceed them. The aircraft makers and airlines that installed them I suppose could’ve insisted on better but again, there may have been reasons to not risk attention from the regulators. Either way, the makers of the cell phone gear from the spectrum plots I’ve seen have done a good job of keeping their emissions where they need to and should be which is no where near the band used by the RA’s. It is the RA’s that didn’t filter properly. This is why as Russ’ article points out, an additional filter is an option in a lot of cases (can’t say for sure but likely all). That filter isn’t to prevent the cell phone emissions from getting in because they are not supposed to be there but is to keep the emissions that are where they should be from getting into the circuits well outside of the spectrum they should be looking at anyway.
I don’t know what the answer is in terms of who should pay, but I do know from everything I’ve seen the cell phone companies are not to blame.
3 replies
it was tested, very thoroughly. I was part of many of those tests. the problem is, and now thankfully the FAA has finally stepped up, decertifying or updating the much much older band pass filters that older RA’s use that allow interference.
because the FAA has literally over the last decade declined to do anything but blame others.
this is something they have dropped the ball on for the longest. allowing much older RF Receivers like RALT’s to stay certified even though their tolerance is much lower than after the FCC shifted a few band allocations around.
Steve S. makes this very apparent, and as a fellow IT/RF Engineer myself who has been part of this process. FAA has FINALLY stepped up to do their part to work with the FCC on getting this fixed.
^ ^ ^ THIS the older RA’s need to be updated/replaced/modified to tighten up their filters, this is all the FCC and the Telecom industry was asking for. there are thousands of older RA’s still in use that simply allow the interference to go uninhibited and causes this problem. updating those filters = problem mitigated.
FCC and Telecom has been dumping out serious funding to fix this, but it is not the sole source of the problem, the FAA is also part of the problem and up until now, has literally denied and refused to do anything to help.
i know for a fact, KATL Has 5G UWB and low and midband Carriers right on the airport, and UWB uses ultra short ranges. that alone tells me that small cell sites are right on the property. I was just at KATL few weeks ago and my Note 20 was showing a MAXIMUM reception airport wide from the moment I walked in the doors at Terminal South to the time I stepped on the aircraft and sat down till doors closed which after I entered the aircraft, I did lose a single bar. the 5GUWB was faster than the WiFi coverage!
Now, lowband and midband, these populate your traditional tower and segmented emitters with midband evolving into the small cell site cans.
The government auctioned off this spectrum with full knowledge the problem existed. Each branch of the government stayed inside its own funnel beyond pointing fingers, or the optimal solution of including the cost of updating aircraft would have been rolled into the requirements for winning the spectrum.
Regardless, I truly LOL at the other engineers here that would like to convince anyone that it should be straightforward and reasonable to make updates to ancient certified hardware just because it is ancient and non-efficient. I am sure it plays better on non-aviation websites though.
Can you give an example of a filter that is available?
I am remembering that there is one major telecom in the US that either is not putting 5G near airports at this time or did it properly.
Well of course, that is where many users are.
But the question in this thread is frequency, power level, and aim of antenna.
Look at the antennas you see - are they tilted down a bit? I think most are. And the coverage is split into quadrants with an antenna for each, some carriers use three some four.
Keep in mind the tough demands on avionics for size, various performance characteristics, …
Rather different than on a boat.
Advancing technology may make RAs better, certainly some manufacturers claim that they have.
On a go-forward basis, airlines could confront staffing issues by curtailing their future schedules. In extremis, make all tickets available on a same-day basis only.
Of course, that won’t work for the mlions of already-booked reservations that, in many cases, were purchased six months ago. Those simply will have to work their way out of the system…
Is there a lesson here? “Be careful what you ask for” comes to mind.
What the administration doesn’t seem to realize is that the dynamic in the reservation system is the ticket price. It only seems logical that constraining seat capacity by only scheduling flights that can actually be staffed gives the airlines the opportunity to raise prices even higher. I’m sure the current passengers who must remain future passengers will appreciate that result and the other consumers left behind will happily adapt. (I’m also sure that unicorn farts will solve the carbon emission problems.)
The DOT regulates airline safety vis-a-vis crew duty times, aircraft maintenance, etc. Then they turn around and slam the same airlines for doing exactly what they mandate them to do.
Airline passenger traffic is up 128% from last year as near as I can tell. This growth would be difficult for any business to keep up with.
The government can’t manage anything properly, yet they are good at telling everyone else how to do it. BTW, airline delays are also caused by airports and ATC both operated by government. Free enterprise will work if given the chance. Note to Buttigieg….Get your damn feet off my rudder pedals….
God bless.
1 reply
On the ATC side there are many delays. I was recently delayed by ATC leaving LGA for “weather” when the skies were clear. This 1:45 delay resulted in the next 3 flight on the same aircraft being delayed since there aren’t spare aircraft at every out station. We closed up and pushed 5 minutes early and sat so long on the ramp we almost had to taxi back in due to the DOT3 rules (company policy is to go back in at 2 hours). So 3 delayed flights all directly related to ATC, what’s the plan for fixing your own issues there Pete???
They need to be competent prior to getting their jobs.
I have given up on commercial flights. Either I grab the 182 or my car keys. It takes me 1.5 - 2 hours to get to either of Chicago’s airports. Only to wait 1/2 the day to get airborne? Sorry. Not happening anymore.
Let’s be clear, there is no such thing as a free market out there today. if there was it would be chaos or a monopoly. Time and time again it has been shown that unregulated markets evolve into monopolies, those monopolies are then less interested in the consumer and use an abuse phase of maximize profit to happily destroy the environment.
At the moment there are four major airlines, United, American, Delta, and South West and these four control much of the major airports, staking claims in home ports like Atlanta, Chicago, Charlotte, and Houston. In what way can there be any real competition so of course American can screw customers and not really take a hit since they are almost guaranteed customers due to demand.
I get a kick at those who love to insult Sec of transportation, but don’t seem to have any viable solution as to how to fix the problems. I actually think it is smart to go after airlines, but reminding passengers they have rights and protections, because that does hurt the bottom line.
I am beginning to suspect “Bob’s” comments for it was a remarkably similar post to an FAA article last week. Bob loves to say ATC delayed him on a sunny day at the departure airport, but I would have also said why ATC delayed. Have pilots stopped being curious and just don’t ask any more? Nope, it would seem they are content sitting a long time on a ramp then complaining. Was it routing? Weather in route? Weather at arrival predicted?
The S0T is right about one thing, these cancellations and delays impacts real lives. People have/had come to depend on the reliability of airlines and that trust is fading so at least he is trying to do something.
3 replies
Not sure why my comment about the sad state about the airlines and the equally low standards of attire of the traveling public was removed. Suffice it to say that US air travel is now akin to a minimum security holding pen followed by bus trip.
Bob’s comment on ATC delays is spot on. I have had to contend with ATC “weather” and traffic volume delays many times as well. How about the efficiencies ADS-B was supposed to provide? The airlines overselling doesn’t help either. What happened to the billions of dollars given to the airlines to help coping with Covid restrictions? There is plenty of blame to go around on this issue.
Here’s a review of the existing passenger rules:
https://www.transportation.gov/airconsumer
Air Carriers most have their schedule approved by the U.S. Department of Transportation (D.O.T.) each year and can have the schedule adjusted but it can take 6 months. If the D.O.T. does not approve the schedule change the Air Carrier must continue until the next approved schedule.
There’s a lot of rules being cherry-picked by the many levels of government that are enforced or NOT enforced that are creating these delays. The Air Carriers are at the mercy of the rules and can be fined or suspended if fail to follow the ones that they are told to follow. ‘Regulation Du Jour’.
Learn More Here:
https://www.transportation.gov/policy/aviation-policy
Justin, you are right that there is no free market but you are wrong about why. There is no free market because of government intrusion by definition and without government intrusion there would NOT be chaos or monopolies. Monopolies, again by definition, only exist through government intervention. Where free markets do and have existed, the performance was substantially better for their customers and in may cases ruined by subsequent involvement by governments. Of course I support your ability to have an opinion about the correct course of action, but please do a bit more research on the fundamentals of economics before making such broad and incorrect statements to support your opinion.
Once upon a time if an airline flight did not go for any number of reasons, the airline would book the passenger on another airline to solve the problem. Getting back to this simple rule would go a long way in resolving the airline problem.
That is a rule that essentially everyone but the airlines would agree with. There ought to be a law…
Or those sturdy stage coaches. No need for expensive fuel, either.
How about forbidding the airlines to overbook? Some are doing overbooking up to 20%. Also how about first come first served? Meaning those who book and pay for their flight in advance have priority over those who book later. Those who book in advance may get a cheaper price which allows the airlines to float that $$$ for the duration and then later bookings paying a higher price ticket seem to get a seat and boot out the early birds.
Well said, Justin.
They seem to forget who will pay for this. The passengers. Give more things, pay higher prices.
Remember what happened after Congress got involved with compensation for long delays on board. Airlines just canceled the flight. And if for weather, the passengers get nothing.
Too many unintended consequences when things like this get mandated.