Yeah - I'm sure they do and that is my point. The heads of Verizon and
ATT are not flying commercial. Their planes are not commercial airlines
with hundreds of passengers == so they can much more easily just divert...
Geoff
On 1/19/22 15:12, sro...@ronan-online.com wrote:
Considering Verizon has a very sizable fleet of private aircraft, I am
fairly certain this will happen often.
Shane
On Jan 19, 2022, at 4:59 PM, nano...@mulligan.org wrote:
Scott - a side note to clarify things...
The 737 Max8 problem was NOT due to lack of testing or
non-incremental changes. The system was well tested and put through
it's paces. It was a lack of proper pilot training in the aircraft
and its systems and some carriers choosing to NOT purchase specific
flight control options.
Full disclosure - my classmate was the Chief Test Pilot for the MAX8
and another classmate is the current FAA Administrator.
But I digress - sorry...
If you look at 5G deployments around Japan and Europe, generally they
are NOT right up next to major airports.
I would like to ask ATT and Verizon senior leadership to put their
loved ones onto a commercial aircraft that is flying into ORD during
a blizzard on a Zero-Zero landing (the pilots relying on radio
altimeters) and the 5G network up and running and then ask how
confident they are that NOTHING will interfere and 5G is perfectly safe.
Geoff
On 1/19/22 14:37, Scott McGrath wrote:
I’m guessing you are not a pilot, one reason aviation is resistant
to change is its history is written in blood, Unlike tech
aviation is incremental change and painstaking testing and
documentation of that testing.
When that does not happen we get stuff like the 737 Max debacle
Aviation is the antithesis of ‘Move fast and break things mentality’
for a very good reason safety.
On my flying club’s plane every replacement part comes with a
pedigree which is added to the plane’s maintenance log upon
installation and the reason for removing the old one recorded
Imagine how much easier our networks would be to maintain if we had
records down to the last cable tie in the data center. If there
was a bug in a SFP+ for instance all of them, when they were
installed and by who and what supplier they came from was readily
available sure would make my life easier.
The reasoning behind that massive pile of documents (pilot joke ‘a
plane is not ready to fly until the weight of the paperwork equals
the weight of the airplane’) is that if a failure is traced to a
component all of them can be traced and removed from service.
On a Airbus for instance all the takeoff and landing safety systems
are tied to the RadAlt. The EU has strict rules about where the
c-band can be used as does Japan both use the 120 second rule c-band
devices not allowed in areas where the the aircraft is in its
beginning/ending 2 minutes of flight.
So the REST of the world got c-band right the US not so much
On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 10:59 AM Dennis Glatting <d...@pki2.com> wrote:
On Tue, 2022-01-18 at 12:29 -0800, Michael Thomas wrote:
>
> I really don't know anything about it. It seems really late to be
> having
> this fight now, right?
>
I worked in aviation as a technologist. Aviation is resistant to
change.
Any change. When you fly older aircraft, be aware that the
software is
old. Very old. As in some of the vendors long ago stopped
supporting the
software kind of old, assuming the vendors still exist.
Aviation didn't wake up one day with the sudden appearance of
5G. They
knew it was comming. They, aviation themselves, are heavily
involved in
standards. Aviation had plenty of time to test, correct, and
protest.
What aviation now wants is a 5G exclusion zone around airports,
or what
I sarcastically call "a technology exclusion zone," which tends
to be
businesses and homes. What is aviation going to do when 6G comes
along?
A new WiFi standard is implemented? Any other unforeseen future
wired/wireless technologies? Or perhaps cell phones should go
back to
Morse Code for aviation's sake?
🤷♂️️
--
Dennis Glatting
Numbers Skeptic
