I get AOPA's point about the latest way enterprising folks are cashing in on the vast taxpayer funded data stream that is ADS-B but the umbrage and high dudgeon being expressed is a layer too thick.
Giving EVERYONE on the planet access to real time tracking of air traffic was always a mistake. When you think of how many nefarious uses there are for that, âfeesâ are way down the list of concerns.
Once an airport management decides to take on fees related to safety then they are responsible for an extra level of safety. When they fail to deliver, they will be sued and the insurance companies will step in.
Unfortunately, we have to have an âADS-b feeâ accident before this money grab ends. For example, what if a pilot has not paid his extortion and the airport refuses permission to land? What FAR is the airport management going to use for landing denial justification?
To me, ADS-B reminds me of EZ-Pass. Both were government programs that sold themselves as a convenience to the public.
In the case of ADS-B âOutâ, the government got better air traffic control abilities, and the âInâ gave the public weather and traffic visibility.
EZ-Pass, for those who donât know, is a transponder that is carried in a car that is used to automatically pay tolls. The government gets better/easier toll collection, and the travelling public gets the convenience of not being stuck in toll-booth traffic.
But, just like with ADS-B, the EZ-Pass transponder is a defacto tracking device. And it would be extremely easy for the government to see if someone was speeding by simply checking the travel time between two toll boths. The government realized that if they did this, NO ONE would sign up for EZ-Pass. So, as far as I know, itâs forbidden to use EZ-Pass data to issue speeding tickets.
It seems to me the same restriction should be applied to ADS-B. The only allowable use should be for its primary purpose of safety, such as air-traffic control and collision avoidance. Any use for enforcement or revenue should be disallowed.
Suppose a pilot turns off ADS-B to avoid fees- and is then involved in a mid-air collision?
On Labor Day, I gave a young man his first GA airplane ride as a Young Eagle. I get back and describe where we went and did when the Father says, "We were watching your ADS-B AND listening to you on LiveATC. Itâs a brave new world out there âŚ
If this poopus maximus keeps up ⌠people will start removing the ADS-B units IF their situation permits. Those of us that were leery of it are now justified in our concerns, sadly.
I remember when toll roads appeared in the 50âs. They said âas soon as the road is paid for, the tolls will go away.â Howâd that work out for everyone? Imagine paying ADS-B prices for the toll transponder only to learn âtheyâreâ using it to spy on you! This is but another nail in the coffin that will bury GA ultimately. The shortage of A&Pâs / IAâs servicing GA is another.
I have no idea where you get your facts when reporting a story, but UPS didnât âinventâ ADS-B. Period. I was there flying the mentioned 757 and 767 aircraft.
Long before ADS-B came into being, UPS purchased the company that developed the well-known Apollo LORAN and the subsequent GPS receivers and associated avionics. They actually bought the company to develop the DIAD handheld computer used by their drivers.
That company developed avionics to utilize ADS-B technology. They had some very bright people, but in no way did they invent ADS-B. The company and UPS were heavily involved in tests of ADS-B technology in Alaska and other places.
UPS intended to use ADS-B to develop a merging and spacing protocol to reduce the vectoring required during inbound pushes to their hubs at night. That is where the savings in fuel was to come. They developed and installed, at great expense, a dedicated Electronic Flight Bag (EFB) for the 757 and 767 aircraft. The EFB wasnât anything like the iPads used today. It was a huge box permanently installed to the left and right side of the captain and first officerâs seats respectively.
That piece of avionics along with associated equipment installed on the glareshield was used to facilitate the merging and spacing scheme. Unfortunately, it was a colossal failure due to the ATC requirement to integrate non-participating aircraft flying into the hub and other technical issues.
After it became clear that merging and spacing wasnât going to happen, the EFBs were removed. Not long after, UPS sold their UPSAT subsidiary to Garmin.
I agree with you Arthur. There are several intentionally deviant goals that a person or entity could achieve by using publicly available ADS-B data. Scenarios that make airport fee collection relatively innocent. In a number of ways, ADS-B tracking availability creates vulnerabilities in safety and security. Much like the liberal application of small UAS into the NAS creates the same concerns.
Iâm someone here on the front lines in Florida, fighting this usage of ADS-B. Our airport manager floated a proposal to implement these fees here in Fernandina Beach (KFHB) by Vector. The airport pays for Virtower to collect operations data that is useful to help in planning, getting grants, etc. So this proposal by their offshoot company Vector seemed like a good idea to him, a way to collect more money for all the growth he wanted to implement at the airport. His presentation to the City Council was met with a lukewarm response. Then he presented it to our local pilot group and was TROUNCED by the idea. The arguments are all the same as above, and since Iâm the AOPA volunteer representative I approached our regional manager. At first she said AOPA wouldnât weigh in on the matter too heavily, so I was happy to see they changed their minds. We pay taxes on every gallon of AvGas we buy, no matter where, so that the system can stay solvent and infrastructure improved. Adding fees on top of that, especially using a system that we had to invest heavily in for our aircraft, is just egregious. The good news for us is that this manager has moved on to a different airport in Colorado (no bad feelings for him, this was just a better fit for what he wants to do) so it seems like this idea is dead for now. But we remain ready to fight against it should the time come.
I readily agree that money is the root of all evil - and good. Letâs be honest, without financial incentives very little is done. But that does not justify opportunistic leaches usurping the system.
The flying public needed to be convinced that they should buy into ADS-B with expensive equipment. We could just as easily have decided to avoid class Charlie and Bravo airspace and kept several thousand dollars in our wallets, but without participation, the system loses value. We were sold a system that would cost the FAA money to build and cost the participants money to equip for, but it would provide efficiencies to the FAA ($ savings over time) and increased safety for the aviators. Win-win. It also required trust that it would not be abused.
If I had been told that I should spend several thousand dollars so that anyone tracking government data could decide at their discretion that I should be billed any amount they choose, or scrutinized for possible violations and sued or fined, I would have immediately said âNo thank youâ.
As an example, I enjoy using Google Maps, it is a fantastic service. I know Google collects my data and sells it. They can provide the mapping service to me because they make money from the meta data the users generate. But if Google started selling my location to local municipalities in order that they charge me a virtual âtollâ because I happened to drive through their town, or issuing citations because I didnât appear to make a full and complete stop at an intersection, I would immediately delete every Google app off my phone, use paper maps and leave my phone at home. I suppose they would all say they were within their rights to do it, and maybe they want to discourage traffic from out-of-towners, but for my part, I would immediately stop participating in the service that facilitated it.
The airports that are opting in to this service readily admit that they are participating in the program in order to discourage students from utilizing their field. I donât necessarily enjoy a pattern full of students, but if they are permitted to use ADS-B to push out specifically targeted unwanted traffic, it wonât be long before ADS-B data is used to support a litany of restrictive and punitive measures that will twist and contort the flying public according to the whim of any political activist on every municipal and town board across the country.
Allowing unrestricted use of ADS-B data by third parties for purposes other than aviation safety and efficiency is a mistake and will drive participants out of the system.
If thatâs their stated reasoning, I believe that would put them in violation of FAA rules that require public airports to provide equal access to all potential users. I certainly hope AOPA or others would pick up on that and sue those airports and the city councils that approved such measures.
âkerfuffleâ is likely the word you were looking forâŚ
Perhaps the FAA needs to block ownership information from the FAA aircraft registry database. Iâve never understood why it is public. I canât look up a license plate and find a car ownerâs name and address. And for many good reasons. Thereâs crazy people out there. You cut someone off on the highway and now you get a rock through your living room window.
Russ, I want to help you with your âorigins of ADS-Bâ portion of your article. Briefly, the UAT was invented by The MITRE Corporation in the mid-1990s as a full-featured low-cost ADS-B/FIS-B/TIS-B solution for GA that would not further congest the 1090 band. In the late 90âs, the Tomorrow (sp?) Corporation in Salem developed the first commercial prototypes with MITRE for use by the FAAâs Capstone program in Alaska and SafeFlight21 program in the lower 48. UPS, as a forwarding thinking organization purchased Tomorrow and renamed the company as UPS Aviation Technologies (UPS-AT). UPS was very active testing ADS-B with the SafeFlight 21 program. UPS-AT was later purchased by Garmin and was named Garmin-AT. MITRE continued to support the Capstone and Safeflight 21 programs until 2007, when the FAA created a national ADS-B program. 1090 ADS-B had a very different development and implementation history.
I discussed the use of ADSB for FAR violations with a DAR said it that ADSB alone canât be used solely as a means for issuing a violation. Then I asked about Martha and the bridge and he said the Ohio DOT had a crew on the bridge at the time that saw her fly under the bridge. Also the sky beacon isnt very reliable below 1000-1500â AGL since it requires the appropriate towers to trigger their response. Unlike my more expensive Garmin gear that tracks me down to short final. In fact after studying the skybeacone I donât think it would be approved today.
Good point. Block our names and addresses from open databases OR owners need to spend $5 to re-register our planes under our own made up âLLCââ names.
If the FAA would prohibit airports that receive Federal funding from charging aircraft owners for self fueling, you would see Fuel Clubs, much like Flying Clubs to share the upkeep of fuel farms either for MOGAS, 100UL or plain old 100LL and the revenues that support the airport would dry up. Local taxes would rise to pay for an airport and soon the airport would ditch the ADS-B data grab.
Also since anyone is permitted free access to my identified data, why canât the FAA or EPA etc, put a âcookieâ on it and record the amount flown and send a tax bill annually?
Money hungry states have taken notice. ADS-B also is apparently being used by states for collecting sales tax because an aircraft is on record as originating and terminating flights at an airport within the state, so the owner must live there and it must be based there, and there is no previous record of sales tax collected by that state.
âTaylor Swift might be happy but some lesser lights actually ensure their movements are well known and then thereâs that pesky First Amendment.â Thereâs nothing âFirst Amendmentâ guaranteeing government data is available to citizens for unrestricted use. Think tax returns, Social Security medical records and claims, and classified data.
The real problem here is that it isnât âgovernmentâ data, but data that anyone with a free FlightAware-provided radio can access themselves.