ADSB-Getting ready to bite someone in the butt

If "somebody" has a concern, then "somebody", perhaps somebody with some powers, might start asking difficult questions. Civil disobedience has its place, if one is ready willing and able to accept the possible consequences of the fight.

..........and don't forget ASRS reports

cubdrvr said:

..........and don't forget ASRS reports

Click to expand...

Sorry, Dave, ASRS only gets you off the hook if the violation is “inadvertent”.

So stop asking questions on a public forum.

MTV

The first time is always "inadvertent":-?
........and it's always the first time since NASA can't give these reports to the FAA.

180_jeff said:

Back to my theoretical question - how does some 'do-gooder' on the ground know if you are equipped with ads tracking h/w? My understanding is even the class d towers do not have that information on their screens. And, if you operating from non-towered fields (but within the 30 nm arc) how is anyone going to know who you are?

Click to expand...

There are app's that track aircraft in real time via ADS-B.
Flight Radar 24 is one of them, I'm sure there are others.
FR24 only tracks 1090, not 978, but I'm sure there are others that track both.
That's where the "anonymous" feature of a 978 unit comes in handy.

Anonymous isn't anonymous anymore. Read post #15.

Write your representatives. The requirement to display your identity and location to the world needs to be revised.

stewartb said:

Anonymous isn't anonymous anymore. Read post #15.

Write your representatives. The requirement to display your identity and location to the world needs to be revised.

Click to expand...

What SB sez: There are a bunch of us on this site .......like a whole bunch......that routinely fly outside any rule airspace. If I counted right there are only 15 airports........10 class C and 5 class B ( not including CA) that are west of Texas. Our representatives will listen to us more so than any organization. Call or write 'em. Explain how ADS_B works and that the government does not need to know ownership for any FAA purpose even in rule airspace. Have them challenge the FAA on why this was done. Can you imagine the push-back if that were on boats or autos?
One of our current Senators was former Gov of SD and used to fly our state King Air on a regular basis. Surely, there are other pilot representatives out there.
I can flat guarantee that knowing the identity of every aircraft in the country will not solve any safety issues or prevent any accidents. It will however, lead to automated enforcement and user fees. Where was AOPA and EAA?

cubdrvr said:

What SB sez: There are a bunch of us on this site .......like a whole bunch......that routinely fly outside any rule airspace. If I counted right there are only 15 airports........10 class C and 5 class B ( not including CA) that are west of Texas. Our representatives will listen to us more so than any organization. Call or write 'em. Explain how ADS_B works and that the government does not need to know ownership for any FAA purpose even in rule airspace. Have them challenge the FAA on why this was done. Can you imagine the push-back if that were on boats or autos?
One of our current Senators was former Gov of SD and used to fly our state King Air on a regular basis. Surely, there are other pilot representatives out there.
I can flat guarantee that knowing the identity of every aircraft in the country will not solve any safety issues or prevent any accidents. It will however, lead to automated enforcement and user fees. Where was AOPA and EAA?

Click to expand...

Well said. Writing Congressfolks is not hard. You'll likely get a phone call from a field rep. Be pleasant and persistent. Sometimes things happen....

I agree with the privacy approach, comparing to cars or boats. It is legitimate. It's not just governmental entities that are following us around.

180_jeff said:

Back to my theoretical question - how does some 'do-gooder' on the ground know if you are equipped with ads tracking h/w? My understanding is even the class d towers do not have that information on their screens. And, if you operating from non-towered fields (but within the 30 nm arc) how is anyone going to know who you are?

Click to expand...

If you launched from inside the mode c ring with transponder and adsb turned off, you could be tracked to destination with local law enforcement there to greet (its been done). If the FAA takes serious issue with the infraction, you can be tracked to ground irregardless of local radar coverage

If you take off and land with your adsb switched off outside of rule airspace ‘probably’ no one would know.


Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org mobile app

cubdrvr said:

What SB sez: There are a bunch of us on this site .......like a whole bunch......that routinely fly outside any rule airspace. If I counted right there are only 15 airports........10 class C and 5 class B ( not including CA) that are west of Texas. Our representatives will listen to us more so than any organization. Call or write 'em. Explain how ADS_B works and that the government does not need to know ownership for any FAA purpose even in rule airspace. Have them challenge the FAA on why this was done. Can you imagine the push-back if that were on boats or autos?
One of our current Senators was former Gov of SD and used to fly our state King Air on a regular basis. Surely, there are other pilot representatives out there.
I can flat guarantee that knowing the identity of every aircraft in the country will not solve any safety issues or prevent any accidents. It will however, lead to automated enforcement and user fees. Where was AOPA and EAA?

Click to expand...

Dave,

ADS-B was initially thought of as providing "Radar-like" coverage in areas with no FAA radar. In fact, it's being used like that right now in Southwest Alaska, where the original ADS-B program, called "Capstone" was introduced as a test project. Radar is VERY expensive to install and maintain, so the initial thought was that this ADS-B thingy could be a lot cheaper. Of course, they didn't count the cost of building and maintaining the Ground Based Transmitters (GBT).....

So, now they're shutting down VORs and NDBs because they're too expensive to maintain, after having built a country-wide system of GBTs......duh. I can hardly wait till someone decides to block GPS in a big way.

And, of course, the FAA has now initiated a program to consider making ADS-B satellite based, at least in Alaska. Which, of course they should have done from the git go.

In other words, this program is a mess. The bad news: It's an FAA mess, and they'll never admit that it's a mess, because it was invented by them. And, the FAA detests Congressional "interference".

So, you may make some headway writing your representatives in Congress, but unless it gets shoved down the FAA's throat, it'll never go anywhere. Witness Basic Med and ELTs.

MTV

If you aren't part of the solution, you're part of the problem.

Write your representatives. Google up their contact info and send them a message. It'll take about a minute each. Be part of the solution.

Not sure why some are saying you can’t be anonymous. I saw two GA aircraft last week with “blocked” showing up on the info box of flightradar24. One was a customers bonanza. So I believe it’s an option by request.


Transmitted from my FlightPhone on fingers...

Farmboy said:

Not sure why some are saying you can’t be anonymous. I saw two GA aircraft last week with “blocked” showing up on the info box of flightradar24. One was a customers bonanza. So I believe it’s an option by request.


Transmitted from my FlightPhone on fingers...

Click to expand...

Even AOPA came out and admitted anonymous is not anonymous. The gummit's original intent was for it to be anonymous to the third parties. I was on a Bendix-King/Social Flight webinar last week (the feds participated) and they explained how the gummit knows who you are and how the third parties have figured it out, too.

The whole purpose of the ads tracking h/w is for the gummit to shift the cost of the atc system from them to the users and put the means in place to levy user fees and mete out violations. To get you members of the hive to get all enthusiastic, they gave you a few bread crumbs in the form of ads "in"

There are criminal sanctions for certain violations of FAR--ie false statements on a medical. Air controllers have received federal time for false statements. Repeated operations of an aircraft after revocation is another.

My GTX335 slides out of the tray quite easily. Sounds like I may do that until the dust clears.

Eddie Foy said:

My GTX335 slides out of the tray quite easily. Sounds like I may do that until the dust clears.

Click to expand...

You might as well just switch it off. If anyone has a reason to look inside the cockpit, the tray will prove that the system has been installed. Pulling the unit out of the tray will not help.

Web

Where does it say that you can't uninstall any of the avionics if they are not required on a Cessna 180? I need to see some FAA reg that says that once you install ADS-b out that it must remain forever.

wireweinie said:

You might as well just switch it off. If anyone has a reason to look inside the cockpit, the tray will prove that the system has been installed. Pulling the unit out of the tray will not help.

Web

Click to expand...

Same reg that says if installed it must be operational. Pull the tray out and you might get away with it. This is different than pulling a uAvionics unit off a wing/tail. In that case the entire system is removed.

Your wallet. Just don't get caught and it's a moot point. If you pull the unit, might at least cover the tray with a kydex strip.

Web

ADSB is a small data payload and a CRC check on the end. That's it. (https://mode-s.org/decode/adsb/introduction.html)

There is no signature that can be verified (I can say I am anyone in the sky and you can't tell if I am telling you the truth)

There is no point to point encryption (I can listen to anyone's traffic and interject as I see fit with the obvious problems that would cause)

ADSB at its very core is an extremely insecure protocol essentially depending on your (the pilots) participation simply because you are told to do so.

Every single transponder with ADSB out capability has the ability to change its own configuration. You (the pilot) could illegally change the type designation and Mode S output, the proceed to bust any airspace you like all the while (mostly) showing up as someone else's aircraft. This is very illegal. But, it sure does limit the suggestion that ADSB is somehow beneficial for security.

Better yet, GPS positional data is and open format (with a variety of formats supported by most). It is quite simple to feed bogus GPS data to a transponder. Ground stations would be able to determine this anomaly, but air-to-air would not. A spoofed target could report at any altitude and as any type of aircraft and from the air, you would not be able to tell what is real and what is not. This exact thing has been demonstrated with consumer drones fitted with cheap ADSB-out chipsets.

https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-...ads-b-insecure-and-easily-spoofed-say-hackers

All of this said, I do not dislike ADSB. I think the implementation is garbage (but fixable), the privacy implications horrible (yet fixable), however find it most concerning there is the notion we should take it on the chin and just be happy they still let us fly...

The reasons there are such severe consequences for turning off your ADSB output is because that is the only control they have left over you. The tech itself is easily defeated.

If you pull the unit out of the tray, the unit has to be “disabled” and a logbook entry made to reflect that.

Which brings up about a dozen interpretations as to what “disabled” means, and who is authorized to make and sign that logbook entry. Some say just collaring the circuit breaker with a tie wrap is “disabling”. Others argue even that’s not good enough. Some say a pilot can log a disabled unit, others say nope....gotta be an A&P. And I’ve heard both sides of both arguments from FAA Inspectors.

But, you cannot legally just remove a piece of installed equipment from an airplane, and go fly....

MTV

MTV

wireweinie said:

Same reg that says if installed it must be operational. Pull the tray out and you might get away with it. This is different than pulling a uAvionics unit off a wing/tail. In that case the entire system is removed.

Your wallet. Just don't get caught and it's a moot point. If you pull the unit, might at least cover the tray with a kydex strip.

Web

Click to expand...

You might be ok with removal and placard per 91.213(d)(3).


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Just a little off the topic, I just received a Email from UAvionix about their new products. They have a tail mounted unit that transmit on 1090 and services as a transponder. This makes it compliant to ICAO standards. To use it as a transponder you will need a comparable head or buy one of their two units that will do the job . One is a MFD W/ several functions including a attitude ind. the other is smaller and has several function. The new ADS-B is 2495, the other units are roughly $1595 and $995. Just a little food for though.
Ps. This unit is experimental at this time and expected to be approved in the near future. Install expected to be 12 hours also.

I would be more than willing to send an agreed upon organizational message (if it helps) to representatives, etc. We could do a survey and collect some counts of those interested. As much as I like to see other traffic with ADS-B I have never liked the privacy ramifications - although, if you are carrying around a cellphone, the powers that be could track your whereabouts - even with location services off to some extent. In fact, you can buy the private market data to tell how many "phones" (thus people" are in any given place (like a store or an event) - said a friend in the cell phone industry - although I don't think they advertise the service.

sj

My view is that the biggest problem with the ADS-B regs is the requirement that it be operational even in airspace where the regs do not require it. I just don't see how that is legally defensible. As posted above, if it were changed to require all units to be operating when in the designated airspace, most of the complaints will go away.

What are the other opinions on needed changes?

Web

SJ said:

although, if you are carrying around a cellphone, the powers that be could track your whereabouts - even with location services off to some extent.

Click to expand...

This is absolute truth, however I could use one of these:

https://www.amazon.com/Mission-Darkness-Non-Window-Faraday-Phones/dp/B01A7MACL2

...and not lose my ticket over it.

My messages are already sent. I'll follow up on those every few days.

Alaska is exempt from ADS-B except in class C. It's crazy that most owners will not use this tech because of the public tracking. Only the government could eff something up so badly.

motosix said:

This is absolute truth, however I could use one of these:

https://www.amazon.com/Mission-Darkness-Non-Window-Faraday-Phones/dp/B01A7MACL2

...and not lose my ticket over it.

Click to expand...

Interesting thought, have the system on a working, but throw a faraday bag over it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

dgapilot said:

Interesting thought, have the system on a working, but throw a faraday bag over it.

Click to expand...

That is not how I intended it, but I like the creativity...

It is way easier just to have a loose connection from the GPS source to the transponder...No GPS, no ADSB. Transponder is still fully functional and no removal of parts required.

mvivion said:

But, you cannot legally just remove a piece of installed equipment from an airplane, and go fly....

MTV

MTV

Click to expand...

My understanding is that if an aircraft is "equipped" it must be "transmitting". Grace period to get to your destination or a place for repairs if unit is TU in flight.
So, if you are on the ground and KNOW that your unit is broken(self inflicted or not)....NO MATTER WHERE THE HELL YOU ARE IN THE COUNTRY......you cannot fly. But.......if you do fly and avoid rule airspace
nobody will know......but you are illegal. As bone headed as the FAA is I cannot image this was their intent.
To bypass this, in my opinion, is to"unequip the equipment" somehow. TXP is part of the equipment so you can't disable it. That leaves only removal. Per UavioniX I was told you can uninstall
and install at your discretion ( from STC to no STC and back). What about paperwork? Is this different than going from wheels to skis and back? Can an owner do it once installed? Can an owner
remove a com radio, send in for repair, and rerack?
My take is that if you have UavioniX the owner can remove a couple screws, pull 2 more bullet connectors and he is unequipped until he wants to be equipped again.

Maybe time to get my unmost favorite organization involved........ACLU

wireweinie said:

My view is that the biggest problem with the ADS-B regs is the requirement that it be operational even in airspace where the regs do not require it. I just don't see how that is legally defensible. As posted above, if it were changed to require all units to be operating when in the designated airspace, most of the complaints will go away.

What are the other opinions on needed changes?

Web

Click to expand...

I fail to see the need for ADSB in rule airspace. ATC already knows your tailnumber, altitude and intentions in Charlie and Bravo. They have a transponder pressure altitude above 10,000' and inside the mode C ring
Outside the rule airspace seems to be where it would be most advantageous...but it's not required there....??? (that's fine with me, it should be personal preference) I was pulled over this summer and asked by a trooper why I wasn't wearing my seatbelt. I replied "same reason I not wearing a helmet, personal preference" ....got a ticket.

I don't care to be tracked and also suspect this probably has some relationship to future user fees. I like the safety factor possible with ADSB in uncontrolled airspace but believe it should be my choice whether I turn it on or off.