Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

Register Log in

Are we nearing a point where common technologies are starting to interfere with each other... 5

Status
Not open for further replies.
JohnRBaker

JohnRBaker

Mechanical
Jun 1, 2006
35,343
2
38
US
If you're not sure what I mean by this question, let me give you and example:

I'm hoping that there might be some pilots and other people who know the airline industry, as well as some people from the world of wireless communications, who could comment about this issue in particular since it seems like something which could have a big impact on two major sectors of our lives, communications and air travel:

Airplane Landings at Risk of Delays on FAA Move to Ease 5G Risk


John R. Baker, P.E. (ret)
EX-'Product Evangelist'
Irvine, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:

The secret of life is not finding someone to live with
It's finding someone you can't live without
 
Replies continue below

Recommended for you

Sort by date Sort by votes
Not so much direct interference, but a high vulnurability must exist between various low orbit technologies, GPS, Earth imaging, remote monitoring, space comms applications, space tourism and other developing low orbit technologies. The space junk from all of them is getting dangerous. It's only a matter of time before junk from one impacts another.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
It seems to follow my perception of the history and I really can't see them doing anything about changing the Rad Alts medium term ie next 10 years never mind by the time 5G goes live.

That IACO band has been defined and protected since I was in nappies.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Well it appears that the FAA is going to ban all ILS approaches and RNP approaches at 46 city's next week.

Which will mean basically anything less than 400ft cloud base and nothing is going to land. Most of the VOR were taken out of action years ago along with NDB's

And ambulance flight as well are going to be grounded.

faa said:
Example IAP NOTAM against impacted approaches (SA CAT I / II, CAT II, III, or RNP AR):BDL IAP BRADLEY INTL, WINDSOR LOCKS, CT. ILS RWY 06 (SA CAT I AND SA CAT II), AMDT 13A… ILS RWY 06 (CAT II AND CAT III), AMDT 38A… RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 06, AMDT 1… RNAV (RNP) Z RWY 24, AMDT 1… PROCEDURE NOT AUTHORIZED EXC FOR ACFT USING APPROVED ALTERNATIVE METHODS OF COMPLIANCE DUE TO 5G C- BAND INTERFERENCE PLUS SEE AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVE 2021-23-12
Click to expand...



METAR KIAD 310852Z 00000KT 7SM OVC007 11/10 A2992 RMK AO2 SLP133 T01060100 50000

Here is a site which will decode the above. And you can have a look at your local airport. Purple seems to mean under the ban aircraft couldn't land.


If you click on the notams tab it will tell you the current "rules" at the airport and if the FAA bans the approaches.

if your interested here is Dulles approach plates. Have a look at the cat C minimas

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Just had a bit of a google and it appears that they are going to turn off the glide slopes and SBAS. So they can't just ignore it. The airports will be turning the hardware off.

Which means they should be able to get down to 300 ft on a LOC approach and 250 off a LNAV/VNAV.

Were as before they were 50ft for a CAT 3A and 0 for a CAT3B.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
From the white paper, 5G user equipment on the ground not a problem, 5g user equipment onboard cat 2 and cat 3 aircraft pose a significant risk of harmful interference to the radar altimeters used on these aircraft, 5G base stations present a risk of harmful interference to radar altimeters across all aircraft types, with far-reaching consequences and impacts to aviation operations.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Seems the FAA has asked for a 2 week extension and is trying to sort out a compromise for 27 airports.

The telecoms providers are saying its not our problem you allow aircraft to fly with old antiquated hardware we shouldn't have to change things for that.

FCC is just saying we can't see a problem and we want the cash for the blocks.

There is also miss direction with "47 countries are using it no problems already" but they are all 3.4 to 3.8 block. Round me its being run at 3.5 and we had zero issues last night with doing CAT II and autoland approaches.

BBC said:
The letter cited research by trade group Airlines for America which found that if the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) 5G rules had been in effect in 2019, about 345,000 passenger flights and 5,400 cargo flights would have faced delays, diversions or cancellations
Click to expand...

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Wonder what the French restrictions are.


It only seems that USA and Japan have this issue. Everyone else has stuck with the ICAO protected zone even Russia.

It will cost more than they got for the 5G licenses to upgrade the USA aircraft domestic fleet of commercial carriers never mind the rest.

The restrictions on the medical and police heli ops will create a storm to boot.

And then there will be national security issues around military airfields not being able to operate. I am pretty sure the military gear will have the same Rad alts although they won't be linked into the other systems in the same way.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Found some details and response to the FAA and DOT


They have is way wrong about helicopters though, they definitely do need an approach and departure sector just a different shape to aircraft.


Although there doesn't seem to be anything over 3.8 to date or even about to be turned on. And as they say the rest of us are operating fine with a 400 block split.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I haven't seen anything with onboard 5G handsets or anything else.

And there must be a load traveling around Europe switched on. And a fair few of them controlled by crew.

I am 99% sure that the 4G LTE network in most of Europe has 3.8 Ghz as its top limit currently, and has done since it came out. Not a clue what the difference in risk is between 4G and 5G.

We used to have issues years ago when they used radio isotopes in the hold fire and smoke detectors with GSM phones. If they were left on in baggage they sometimes used to trigger them. But I haven't flown anything in decades which had one of them fitted.

Could it be a cat fight between two federal agency's for supremacy over that 3.8 to 4.8 range?






 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I was looking more for instances of interference with the radar altimeters. My recollection is that the 1980s' timeframe altimeters were a bit dodgy w.r.t. penetration of moderate foliage, because NASA once funded us to provide a laser altimeter to supplement their radar altimeter

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I think that's when they went away from pulse .
They have pretty strict approach zones out to 6 miles I think. Which are surveyed to death and also controlled what goes in them. There are quite a few airports that only one end of a runway is able to take a low minima approach because of tertian issues.

They tend not to have crops in them just grass cut to special length to discourage birds.

There are plenty of accidents of radar alts failure which has resulted in fatal crashes.

The Turkish in Amsterdam had the active one started reading minus numbers at 1000ft and the plane went into retard mode and took the power back to idle. Pilots didn't spot it and a heap of alarms were in landing mode so they stalled and crashed.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

Here is the accident report on it.

I am posting from my phone but seem to remember the Dutch were quite though with it and there is quite a bit of back ground on how the rad alt links in with the 737-800 Ng systems.

Which I suspect is one of the reasons why the FAA are so twitchy about this. They have over 10 000 737's operating domestically in the USA and know full well what happens when the systems get false triggers.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I know Allister has posted the letter from Verizon, but here's the news item that reports on their and AT&T's responses:

AT&T, Verizon reject U.S. request to delay 5G wireless plans

Verizon and AT&T have rejected a request by the U.S. government to delay the rollout of next-generation wireless technology


John R. Baker, P.E. (ret)
Irvine, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:

The secret of life is not finding someone to live with
It's finding someone you can't live without
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

JohnRBaker
  • Locked
  • News
Are we about to get a repeat of the 2021 power crisis in Texas... 1
2 3
Replies
53
Views
56
1503-44
1503-44
tommj
  • Locked
  • Question
2 Are Killed at Delta Maintenance Facility Near Atlanta Airport
Replies
7
Views
8
TugboatEng
TugboatEng
JohnRBaker
  • Locked
  • News
We're about to be hit with a solar storm... 4
2 3
Replies
57
Views
58
Alistair_Heaton
Alistair_Heaton
IRstuff
  • Locked
  • Question
Self-Driving Cars and Taxis Are Here! 5
2
Replies
31
Views
32
Luceid
Luceid
IRstuff
  • Locked
  • Question
Tesla's are apparently pretty tough
Replies
4
Views
5
TugboatEng
TugboatEng
Back
Top