Slashdot Mirror


Senate Votes To Replace Aviation Radar With GPS

plover writes "The US Senate on Monday passed by a 93-0 margin a bill that would implement the FAA's NextGen plan to replace aviation radar with GPS units. It will help pay for the upgrade by increasing aviation fuel taxes on private aircraft. It will require two inspections per year on foreign repair stations that work on US planes. And it will ban pilots from using personal electronics in the cockpit. This just needs to be reconciled with the House version and is expected to become law soon. This was discussed on Slashdot a few years ago."

5 of 457 comments (clear)

  1. What about UFO's by rossdee · · Score: 4, Interesting

    In the literal sense, light aircraft not equiped with GPS, (Drug or people smugglers), and of course aircraft that have been hijacked and their transponders disabled.

    Or some kid in a baloon (hoax or not, its probably not going to do an engine any good if it sucks it in...

    And if the pilots are too busy playing with their laptops to even look out of the window...

    It doesnt sound safe to me, especially in a post 911 world.

  2. Re:Finally Congress gets down to business by smpoole7 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Or, as Robert Heinlein once put it: once the Plebes discover that they can vote themselves bread and circuses, it's all over.

    --
    Cogito, igitur comedam pizza.
  3. Re:Security by shrtcircuit · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Planes already send their location back to ATC using query/response from the ground radar in an easily breached system. We haven't seen the big scary terrorists making fake planes appear on screens yet. In fact the current system is significantly more vulnerable, as it can only handle so many planes in its "view" at a time. Try to imagine loading that up with a few hundred fake transponders that block out real aircraft from showing up - essentially an ATC DoS attack. NextGen would, I hope, be considerably harder to attack in that method. With the current method it isn't unheard of for busy areas to DoS themselves from overload so it's already a weak model.

    Also while I don't think GPS is or could ever be 100% reliable, we pilots do have something called pilotage, paper charts, and good old fashioned flying that we can use to get where we're going. It isn't as cool or convenient as a big moving map on your panel, but is a tried and true way to safely navigate that folks have been using since Jeppesen invented aeronautical charting. Even if some freak solar storm blew out all of the GPS satellites, pilots aren't going to suddenly find themselves completely lost, and planes aren't going just drop out of the sky. GPS receivers and transponders fail in planes from time to time, and we have backup plans to account for that and continue on. It's really not the end of the world. In effect an aircraft could suffer entire avionics failure and still make it down just fine.

    NextGen is not the end of the world, it's a much needed upgrade to a vastly outdated system. It's better than what we have now, and if it breaks there won't be airliners crashing right and left. It's OK.

    My personal beef with it is the "personal electronics" thing. I use my phone to access aviation information (weather, databases, etc) and fail to see why I should stop just because a couple wankers couldn't stop playing Doom in the cockpit or whatever they were doing. Federal Aviation Regs *already* have clauses to deal with pilot stupidity, this is just extra bullshit with literally zero benefit.

  4. Re:Great... by AlecC · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is as much about increasing airway capacity as increasing safety, over ocean there is no radar coverage so that aircraft have to be kept very well spaced, which is becoming a bottleneck on busy routes e.g. US North East to Northern Europe. With GPS you can increase density without decreasing safety. And it will probably save money in the long term - the GPS based systems are inherently cheaper, but you have to put up money in front to run both systems in parallel, and you don't get the payback until you can begin switching off radars. So it needs short term funding to cover the spending hump.

    Basically, this is an unsurprising bit of good housekeeping - as shown by the vote. It was a change that would have to be made sometime, and the only real question was exactly when: costs will almost certainly fall if you delay, but that puts off the arrival of benefits as well.

    --
    Consciousness is an illusion caused by an excess of self consciousness.
  5. Re:Security issue... by vlm · · Score: 4, Interesting

    GPS, since the plane's antenna is semi-omnidirectional, is easily jammed.

    The problem is, the semi-direction, as you call it, is pointed up. Most GPS satellites are up there rather than down here. And most/all jammers will be down here, where it isn't pointing. You're going to need about 20 dB more power just for that alone.

    A weak signal can't interfere far away. So, just fly on for a mile, and its all good again.

    A strong signal can be easily detected/pinpointed/eliminated by military ECM/ECCM aircraft.

    Its unlikely a ground based jammer could be effective for more than a couple hours.

    --
    "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger