Except that the FAA isn't claiming interference in their LICENSED band, they are claiming interference OUTSIDE their licensed band. You can't squat on a frequency and then expect the licensed users to accommodate you.
Shane On Tue, Jan 18, 2022 at 5:06 PM Mel Beckman <m...@beckman.org> wrote: > Shane, > > Incorrect. Owning spectrum also includes the right to interference-free > operation. And you imply that the FAA and airline industry has done > nothing, when in reality it’s the FCC who has done nothing. the FAA > sponsored extensive engineering tests that demonstrate the interference is > a concern, and they notified all the parties well in advance. The fCC et al > chose to do no research of their own, and are basing all their assumptions > on operation in other countries, which even you must admit can’t really be > congruent with the US. > > -mel via cell > > On Jan 18, 2022, at 2:01 PM, sro...@ronan-online.com wrote: > > The thing is aviation DOESN’T own this spectrum, they just assumed it > would always be unused. And they failed to mention it would be a problem > during the last 5 years of discussion regarding the use of this spectrum. > > Shane > > On Jan 18, 2022, at 4:25 PM, Mel Beckman <m...@beckman.org> wrote: > > > > Michael, > > > Here’s a recent PCmag editorial on the subject, and it seems like many > people want to put Internet speed above airline safety: > > > https://www.pcmag.com/news/faa-goes-in-hard-to-kill-mid-band-5g > <https://www.pcmag.com/news/faa-goes-in-hard-to-kill-mid-band-5g?utm_source=spotim&utm_medium=E-mail&utm_content=replied-your-message&spot_im_redirect_source=email&spot_im_highlight_immediate=true&spot_im_reply_id=sp_K16VHJZS_072HRXmNRXaBpGnEYhzHF9p_c_226CAR9Wh7cKB5nT7ZEk9jsnt4P_r_23YHCX47igC6D698mkyoaTHv1ke&spot_im_content_id=sp_K16VHJZS_072HRXmNRXaBpGnEYhzHF9p&spot_im_content_type=conversation&utm_spot=sp_K16VHJZS> > > > This issue definitely impacts network operations for 5G providers, so > makes sense to discuss here. > > > Here’s a comment from a friend of mine who has been both a network > engineer and a pilot for United Airlines, posted on the article linked > above: > > > *“As a pilot, I can tell you that landing in instrument conditions is by > far the most critical flight regime possible, during which the radar > altimeter reports are a matter of life and death. There is no alternative > technology, such as GPS, with the required accuracy and reliability, to > provide approach guidance down to the runway in zero-zero weather, which is > what the radar altimeter does. * > > > *The collective tech industry needs to admit that it made a huge blunder > when it urged the FCC’s clueless Ajit Pai to “blow off” the clearly > demonstrated FAA spectrum conflict. Sorry, passengers, but if you look out > your window, you’ll see that aviation owns this spectrum and is entitled to > interference-free operation. Replacing all radar altimeters isn’t going to > happen in time for 5G anyway — it took more than ten years just to deploy > anti-collision technology. So do what you should have done from the > beginning: follow the FCC rules of non-interference to existing users, who > have clear priority in this case.”* > > > I tend to agree with him, and it looks like the 5G providers and FAA > agreed last week to put some buffer safety zones around runway approaches > at 50 major airports: > > > > https://www.cnet.com/news/faa-lists-50-airports-getting-temporary-buffer-zones-blocking-new-5g-signals/ > <https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnet.com/google-amp/news/faa-lists-50-airports-getting-temporary-buffer-zones-blocking-new-5g-signals/> > > > > -mel > > On Jan 18, 2022, at 12:33 PM, Michael Thomas <m...@mtcc.com> wrote: > > > I really don't know anything about it. It seems really late to be having > this fight now, right? > > Mike > >
