AT&T and Verizon plan to deploy their new 5G technology in many markets across the United States as of Wednesday, January 5, 2022, and this will potentially have some implications for aviation. There’s now a bit of a cat fight between the FAA, FCC, and wireless communication companies.
Continue reading: What’s With All The Airline 5G Drama?
Share your questions, experiences, and thoughts below.
From Reuters re. the frequencies used in France are different from the US:
"FAA officials said France uses spectrum for 5G that sits further away from spectrum used for radio altimeters and uses lower power levels for 5G than those authorized in the United States."
One would have hoped this potential problem would have been fully studied and resolved before billions in cheap hardware was installed but Verizon and ATT. But then the FCC regulation has been largely captured by the Telcom industry.
Are we talking about the same FCC allowing T-Mobile to acquire Sprint to eliminate competition?
Good for AT&T and Verizon (never imagined I’d write that sentence).
They already delayed for a month at the FAA’s request and nothing was accomplished. If the risk is so great, go to court to prevent it and make your case.
Carr is a blowhard, but he's right here (by accident, I assume...). The FAA simply doesn't have anything remotely approaching the depth of technical expertise that the FCC does on spectrum matters, and it's ridiculous to suggest otherwise. Enough with the petty inter-agency turf wars; they've caused enough public health damage between FDA/CDC without now setting our telecom tech back as well.
Were they ever able to establish the link between COVID and 5G? Asking for a friend...
They just did, but in reverse.
5G disrupts Air Travel.
Air travel spreads Covid.
Hence 5G prevents Covid.
FAA is just afraid that robo calls will penetrate the cockpit.
Delta 123 your insurance has expired. Squawk 7600 to be connected to an agent for assistance.
This is JetBlue 321, our radio altimeter shows back taxes of $15000 and climbing. Requesting frequency for IRS.
This is Brandon from Alpha Foxtrot One, I wanted to get this important call to you because next Tuesday is election day, and somebody needs to be asleep in the Capitol. Can I count on you?
Might be worth noting that Brendan Carr is a career telecoms lawyer and right wing culture warrior, appointed by trump. Not exactly a detached regulator.
Might be worth noting that Pete Buttigieg was most recently the mayor of South Bend, IN.
A "cat fight"? Really?
I don't understand. The 5G network was not installed last month. Its development and deployment has occured over the past several years. It is likely not a surprise to the FAA, but maybe monitoring the deployment was just not a priority until recently?
It is not 5G, it is 5G-C. This will be turned on for the first time this week and the frequency spectrum is close to aircraft radar altimeter spectrum.
RF Tech snob here. The risk is low if everything operates as designed. If one of the transmitters/repeaters has an issue, (Noise spurious signals etc.) it can interfere with the higher frequencies. More power = more potential interference and more chances to screw things up. Not a problem so much on takeoff but potential issues during landings. One would hope that pilots would notice something off with altimeter readings and ask ATC for an altitude reading. Then again, we are all human and we do make mistakes. I side with telecom they knew about this for how long and now it's an issue. Easy enough to study get some transmitters and have a field day around airports for a few days during normal operations and see if there are any issues.
By the way, so if 5G is really interfering with flying and FAA is making a big deal about it now.
What about all the way back during 2G age. Is all these years in airplane mode just a big hoax? Wasn't it the FCC that banned cellphones on the plane and now they say 5G is safe? But 2G 3G 4G affects avionics?
The technology definitely poses risks and the band range is uncomfortably close to that used in avionics. The problem is that the emission may be across a larger band range than the used band range, especially if malfunctioning. Problems arise only during malfunctions. This of course means one of two things - either limit installation around airports and civil aviation zones or invest into materials with adequate EMI shielding for these bandwidths (the latter solution I prefer since my company provides customized RF/EMI shielding polymers) 🙂
Off topic but probably in your area of RF, any good recommendations for speed trap detectors?
The one I'm using is producing too many false positives.
Couple of points: (1) The FAA may not have the spectrum experts the FCC has (been in aviation for 35 years and I could easily argue that point), but unlike the FCC, they do have avionics experts who are trained to overcompensate and question everything (Just like Boeing, Airbus and all aircraft manufacturers). That is how you get the safety record that aviation has. (2) No country has allowed any cell phone company to just transmit these frequencies around airports at the power and equipment angle they choose. They either limit both (Canada) or the power output (France...). (3) Carr just does what all politicians do, politicize everything. As soon as any politician starts discussing technical information, I quit listening. They are just regurgitating what those who are lobbying them have said. (4) The FAA is not without fault here and should have had temporary cell towers (like they use at NASCAR races and other large events) at an unused air strip, transmitting these frequencies at different power levels while aircraft, with the equipment that is believed to be at risk, fly simulated approaches 2000 feet above the ground. You capture if and at what levels, interference occurs. Everyone is safe (and legal, paraphrasing US Code, you can't fly air carrier aircraft with paying passengers while the aircraft is experimental or testing.) and rigorous testing actually happens (picture parades and confetti flying through the air). I have been part of similar testing before (strangely enough, with the FAA) and it produces verifiable data that can be used to determine answers to very specific questions. (5) This type of testing should have been done prior to the FCC making the frequencies available for purchase. It wasn't because that isn't their world. So there is just as much fault with them as with the FAA. (6) I would say Government Agencies should learn to talk to one another, but fantasy worlds belong in movies and video games.
On a web site competing with OMAAT, it was posted yesterday that "Airlines get a break: Wireless companies agree to two-week 5G delay." The article contains quotes from (among others) from AT&T and Sara Nelson (AFA/CWA) attesting to the delay.
So, this article should be targeted for an update.
I’m an EMC expert at the international level. True EMC issues are thorny to devolve, typically because insufficient immunity testing has been done. So when an issue develops, tempers flare. Bottom line, the airline argument regarding France and the laws of physics is ridiculous on its face. The French have taken real measures the US has not to reduce potential issues near airports. These two cell companies simply did not want to spend more money to take the same measures. I can ensure you that there are competent engineers in these cell companies this very moment disgusted with their senior management. When these frequencies were sold, the buyers knew the risks. They had plenty of time to resolve issues around airports. It’s a limited part of their market. Do the right thing and completely emulate the French technical measures. Then they may actually be following the physics. Europe uses lower power and more towers. The US manufactures, predictably, want to take the less expensive approach. Sad.
The FCC has excellent technical staff. The problem is with the politically appointed Commission. They historically have no clue regarding the technology of what they administrate.