FAA sets 2024 deadline for preventing 5G crash landings
(2023/01/10)
- Reference: 1673376313
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2023/01/10/faa_2024_altimeter_deadline/
- Source link:
America's Federal Aviation Administration is directing all aircraft to get new altimeters, or install filters on existing ones, by February 1, 2024, to eliminate risks posed by C-band 5G networks.
Under the new rule, passenger and cargo aircraft will not only be required to address altimeter concerns by the year after next, but airlines will also have to update flight manuals to prohibit low-visibility landings (which radio altimeters are used extensively in) after June 30, 2023, unless they have been retrofitted.
The [1]order [PDF] could bring an end to years of back-and-forth discussions between the FAA and telecommunications operators, which have tried to address the issue since the FAA warned in late 2021 of service delays and interruptions if C-band networks were [2]switched on in January 2022, as was initially planned.
[3]
The C-band, which occupies frequencies between 3.7-3.98GHz, is near to the 4.2-4.4GHz spread used by radio altimeters, posing a potential problem if cell signals manage to bleed over into aircraft bands.
[4]
[5]
By January of last year the FAA said it had cleared [6]90 percent of the commercial aircraft flown in the US to land at airports with nearby C-band towers, but Boeing 747-8, 747-8F and 777 aircraft were excluded, and the [7]737 was later [8]added to the list as well.
Fast forward to May, the FAA had decreed that airline operators would be forced to replace vulnerable altimeters or install filters, a decision that it carried over to the newly proposed rule.
[9]
Months later in June, Verizon and AT&T agreed to [10]slow C-band rollouts near airports, an agreement that will end in July of this year and clear the way for more C-band deployments.
Shut up and install the filters
The FAA's laborious discussion and investigation into the realities of the risk posed by C-band 5G signals has been called excessive by some given the extent of the fix in other nations.
Japanese scientists who studied the issue, for example, [11]said the issue could be resolved by not deploying high-power 5G masts within 200 meters of aircraft approach routes. The FAA, however, takes its job very seriously.
"We rely on data to mitigate risk, and never assume that a piece of equipment or a given flight scenario is safe until this can be demonstrated. If there's the possibility of a risk to the flying public, we are obligated to restrict the relevant flight activity until we can prove it is safe," the FAA [12]said .
[13]Southwest Airlines blames IT breakdown for stranding holiday travelers
[14]Musk bans private-plane-tracking @Elonjet on Twitter, threatens legal action
[15]FAA wants pilots to be less dependent on computer autopilots
[16]CT scanning tech could put an end to 100ml liquid limit on flights by 2024
[17]Research casts doubt on energy efficiency of 5G
During the couple of years that the C-band issue has been on the FAA's radar, the agency said it had received over 420 reports of radio altimeter anomalies occurring within known C-band deployment zones.
While most of the reports were attributable to other causes, the FAA said in around 100 of the incidents it "could not rule out 5G C-Band interference as the potential source of the radio altimeter anomalies." The FAA said the incidents all involved flight deck effects, like false terrain awareness traffic collision warnings, incorrect radio altimeter data and more.
The FAA admits those issues may seem "minor in isolation," but that they have serious implications over time, especially as C-band deployments near airports begin in earnest in the second half of 2023.
[18]
The agency is concerned that repeated false warnings, which it believes "will occur more frequently as telecommunication companies continue to deploy 5G C-Band services," will desensitize flight crew to actual emergencies.
In other words, better safe than sorry, so pipe down and install those new altimeters.
The FAA estimates 7,993 aircraft will need to have flight manual revisions made, while 180 aircraft will require a total altimeter replacement. An additional 820 aircraft will need a C-band filter added.
Airlines for America, a trade group that represents several US air carriers, [19]said of the proposal that "carriers are working diligently to ensure fleets are equipped with compliant radio altimeters, but global supply chains continue to lag behind current demand."
While it didn't express frustration with the FAA's 2024 deadline, Airlines for America did appear to at least consider it a bit tight given supply chain concerns. "Any government deadline must consider this reality," the trade group added. ®
Get our [20]Tech Resources
[1] https://public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2023-00420.pdf
[2] https://www.theregister.com/2021/12/08/aircraft_5g_interference/
[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/networks&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2Y73uEOZp0DIfHGWv69Ax7QAAAAs&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/networks&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44Y73uEOZp0DIfHGWv69Ax7QAAAAs&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/networks&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33Y73uEOZp0DIfHGWv69Ax7QAAAAs&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[6] https://www.theregister.com/2022/01/26/faa_5g_boeing/
[7] https://www.theregister.com/2021/12/15/boeing_737_max_senate_report/
[8] https://www.theregister.com/2022/02/24/faa_5g_737/
[9] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/networks&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44Y73uEOZp0DIfHGWv69Ax7QAAAAs&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[10] https://www.theregister.com/2022/06/27/aviation_5g_cband_risks/
[11] https://www.theregister.com/2022/01/19/5g_airliners_solved_by_japan/
[12] https://www.faa.gov/5g
[13] https://www.theregister.com/2022/12/28/southwest_outdated_it/
[14] https://www.theregister.com/2022/12/15/musk_bans_elonjet_flight_tracker/
[15] https://www.theregister.com/2022/11/23/faa_pilot_computer/
[16] https://www.theregister.com/2022/11/24/airport_scanning_liquid_limit/
[17] https://www.theregister.com/2022/03/03/report_casts_doubt_on_5g/
[18] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/networks&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33Y73uEOZp0DIfHGWv69Ax7QAAAAs&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[19] https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/us-faa-proposes-requiring-airplanes-have-5g-safeguards-by-early-2024-2023-01-09/
[20] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Under the new rule, passenger and cargo aircraft will not only be required to address altimeter concerns by the year after next, but airlines will also have to update flight manuals to prohibit low-visibility landings (which radio altimeters are used extensively in) after June 30, 2023, unless they have been retrofitted.
The [1]order [PDF] could bring an end to years of back-and-forth discussions between the FAA and telecommunications operators, which have tried to address the issue since the FAA warned in late 2021 of service delays and interruptions if C-band networks were [2]switched on in January 2022, as was initially planned.
[3]
The C-band, which occupies frequencies between 3.7-3.98GHz, is near to the 4.2-4.4GHz spread used by radio altimeters, posing a potential problem if cell signals manage to bleed over into aircraft bands.
[4]
[5]
By January of last year the FAA said it had cleared [6]90 percent of the commercial aircraft flown in the US to land at airports with nearby C-band towers, but Boeing 747-8, 747-8F and 777 aircraft were excluded, and the [7]737 was later [8]added to the list as well.
Fast forward to May, the FAA had decreed that airline operators would be forced to replace vulnerable altimeters or install filters, a decision that it carried over to the newly proposed rule.
[9]
Months later in June, Verizon and AT&T agreed to [10]slow C-band rollouts near airports, an agreement that will end in July of this year and clear the way for more C-band deployments.
Shut up and install the filters
The FAA's laborious discussion and investigation into the realities of the risk posed by C-band 5G signals has been called excessive by some given the extent of the fix in other nations.
Japanese scientists who studied the issue, for example, [11]said the issue could be resolved by not deploying high-power 5G masts within 200 meters of aircraft approach routes. The FAA, however, takes its job very seriously.
"We rely on data to mitigate risk, and never assume that a piece of equipment or a given flight scenario is safe until this can be demonstrated. If there's the possibility of a risk to the flying public, we are obligated to restrict the relevant flight activity until we can prove it is safe," the FAA [12]said .
[13]Southwest Airlines blames IT breakdown for stranding holiday travelers
[14]Musk bans private-plane-tracking @Elonjet on Twitter, threatens legal action
[15]FAA wants pilots to be less dependent on computer autopilots
[16]CT scanning tech could put an end to 100ml liquid limit on flights by 2024
[17]Research casts doubt on energy efficiency of 5G
During the couple of years that the C-band issue has been on the FAA's radar, the agency said it had received over 420 reports of radio altimeter anomalies occurring within known C-band deployment zones.
While most of the reports were attributable to other causes, the FAA said in around 100 of the incidents it "could not rule out 5G C-Band interference as the potential source of the radio altimeter anomalies." The FAA said the incidents all involved flight deck effects, like false terrain awareness traffic collision warnings, incorrect radio altimeter data and more.
The FAA admits those issues may seem "minor in isolation," but that they have serious implications over time, especially as C-band deployments near airports begin in earnest in the second half of 2023.
[18]
The agency is concerned that repeated false warnings, which it believes "will occur more frequently as telecommunication companies continue to deploy 5G C-Band services," will desensitize flight crew to actual emergencies.
In other words, better safe than sorry, so pipe down and install those new altimeters.
The FAA estimates 7,993 aircraft will need to have flight manual revisions made, while 180 aircraft will require a total altimeter replacement. An additional 820 aircraft will need a C-band filter added.
Airlines for America, a trade group that represents several US air carriers, [19]said of the proposal that "carriers are working diligently to ensure fleets are equipped with compliant radio altimeters, but global supply chains continue to lag behind current demand."
While it didn't express frustration with the FAA's 2024 deadline, Airlines for America did appear to at least consider it a bit tight given supply chain concerns. "Any government deadline must consider this reality," the trade group added. ®
Get our [20]Tech Resources
[1] https://public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2023-00420.pdf
[2] https://www.theregister.com/2021/12/08/aircraft_5g_interference/
[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/networks&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2Y73uEOZp0DIfHGWv69Ax7QAAAAs&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/networks&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44Y73uEOZp0DIfHGWv69Ax7QAAAAs&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/networks&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33Y73uEOZp0DIfHGWv69Ax7QAAAAs&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[6] https://www.theregister.com/2022/01/26/faa_5g_boeing/
[7] https://www.theregister.com/2021/12/15/boeing_737_max_senate_report/
[8] https://www.theregister.com/2022/02/24/faa_5g_737/
[9] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/networks&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44Y73uEOZp0DIfHGWv69Ax7QAAAAs&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[10] https://www.theregister.com/2022/06/27/aviation_5g_cband_risks/
[11] https://www.theregister.com/2022/01/19/5g_airliners_solved_by_japan/
[12] https://www.faa.gov/5g
[13] https://www.theregister.com/2022/12/28/southwest_outdated_it/
[14] https://www.theregister.com/2022/12/15/musk_bans_elonjet_flight_tracker/
[15] https://www.theregister.com/2022/11/23/faa_pilot_computer/
[16] https://www.theregister.com/2022/11/24/airport_scanning_liquid_limit/
[17] https://www.theregister.com/2022/03/03/report_casts_doubt_on_5g/
[18] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/networks&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33Y73uEOZp0DIfHGWv69Ax7QAAAAs&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[19] https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/us-faa-proposes-requiring-airplanes-have-5g-safeguards-by-early-2024-2023-01-09/
[20] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Lars
A few words about the reason the problem is not quite the same in Europe would have been proper.
Yet Another Anonymous coward
They use meters which are much more robust than feet.
Anonymous Coward
Europe uses 3.6GHz for 5g, so it's not an issue.
"Reality"
Eclectic Man
"Any government deadline must consider this reality,"
Whilst I appreciate the sentiment, a lot of government deadlines are for public consumption rather than 'reality' (at least that is often how it seems in the UK). This is a safety risk and really should have been considered when 5G was being designed and equipment prototypes built and tested. Cross band 'leaking' of radio signals has been know about for a long time, so why it seems to have come as a surprise is a bit worrying.
Opposing Forces
Anonymous Coward
On one side, you have the FCC, which auctioned off the C-band spectrum to the network operators for hefty fees and possible bribes (it's not as if the FCC doesn't understand radio frequency interference). On the other side, you have the aircraft owners whose "old" stuff (radar altimeters) which previously worked just fine. The FCC, the FAA, and various lobbying groups wrestled, to see who was going to pay, with the end result being the aircraft owners have to buy new stuff.
Ideally, aircraft passenger safety would have been the foremost issue ...
Re: Opposing Forces
Yet Another Anonymous coward
FCC vs FAA
One can 9/11 you with airliners, the other can ban porn, neither admit to having nukes
What about the other 320?
So 420 reported altimeter anomalies, and of those, 100 *might* be related to 5G. What caused the other 320 anomalies?