FAA Fumbled Its Response to a Surge in GPS Jamming • Hacker News Board

Re: FAA Fumbled Its Response to a Surge in GPS Jamming

#131

Post by rnjesus » Tue, Oct 12, 2021, 6:49 PM UTC

ryandrake wrote: post #36

> "Aircraft are greatly affected by the GPS jamming and it's not taken seriously by management," reads one report. "We've been told we can't ask to stop jamming, and to just put everyone on headings." This is the military practicing, but I would hope that civilian airline transport operations are also robust to GNSS unavailability or denial. Even private pilots in little Cessnas are taught to navigate using radio-nav…

curious question: can navigational computers (on planes, though maybe this can be asked about other systems as well) not take an initial position-reading from gps or radio and then compute their location then-on based on internal gyros, compasses, accelerometers, etc.? if outside navigation aids fail, are these systems not capable of internally simulating and determining their own position, or am i underestimating how much compute power this would take?

Re: FAA Fumbled Its Response to a Surge in GPS Jamming

#132

Post by wolrah » Tue, Oct 12, 2021, 7:34 PM UTC

light_hue_1 wrote: post #113

KennyBlanken wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The FAA is a giant lumbering dinosaur that has done as little as humanly possible to avoid any sort of modernization while drowning General Aviation in paperwork and regulations to protect a buggy-whip avionics and engine manufacturing/maintenance/repair industry, while for decades has failed to effectively address the primary safety issues in GA. Namely controlled flight into terrain and running out of fuel. Let me…

This is a case where a little knowledge makes everything look like a conspiracy. Sadly none of what you wrote is even remotely true. Glass cockpit upgrades are very popular. For example, an Evolution E5 is $5k to $10k depending on the model. You can remove your vacuum system at that point. There's nothing stopping anyone from upgrading, aside from the cost. There's no conspiracy here, no evil FAA paperwork or regulat…

> Glass cockpit upgrades are very popular. For example, an Evolution E5 is $5k to $10k depending on the model. You can remove your vacuum system at that point. There's nothing stopping anyone from upgrading, aside from the cost.

To me the cost is the obvious point of complaint.

Now I'm not an aircraft tech, but I'm looking through the manual for the E5 and as far as I can tell the $5000 base configuration gets you the main unit itself as well as an exterior sensor module. The main module of course houses the display, CPU, and battery as well as the IMU and pneumatic sensors for pitot/static and some serial ports for connection to other electronics. The remote module houses a non-certified GPS (connection to an IFR-certified navigation system is required for installation in IFR-capable aircraft), a compass, and a temperature sensor.

None of that is high-tech equipment, nor is the software required to turn those sensor inputs in to useful displays particularly complicated. I don't see any obvious reason a group of motivated electronics hobbyists couldn't build a proof-of-concept that performs all the same core functions over a long weekend with a few hundred bucks worth of off the shelf parts and access to the relevant details of the ARINC 429 standard.

Obviously there are reliability and redundancy aspects to consider, but even the E5 is only officially allowed to replace one of two instruments and everything else must remain in its original position. Reliable IMUs and redundant microcontrollers aren't the cheapest things out there but they don't make up an order of magnitude price difference either.

The regulations are there for a reason at their core, but there has to be some kind of balance where we don't have extra zeroes appearing in price tags just because something goes on a plane.

Re: FAA Fumbled Its Response to a Surge in GPS Jamming

#133

Post by light_hue_1 » Tue, Oct 12, 2021, 8:26 PM UTC

wolrah wrote: post #132

light_hue_1 wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a case where a little knowledge makes everything look like a conspiracy. Sadly none of what you wrote is even remotely true. Glass cockpit upgrades are very popular. For example, an Evolution E5 is $5k to $10k depending on the model. You can remove your vacuum system at that point. There's nothing stopping anyone from upgrading, aside from the cost. There's no conspiracy here, no evil FAA paperwork or regulat…

> Glass cockpit upgrades are very popular. For example, an Evolution E5 is $5k to $10k depending on the model. You can remove your vacuum system at that point. There's nothing stopping anyone from upgrading, aside from the cost. To me the cost is the obvious point of complaint. Now I'm not an aircraft tech, but I'm looking through the manual for the E5 and as far as I can tell the $5000 base configuration gets you th…

> None of that is high-tech equipment

Of course! No one wants high-tech equipment in aviation.

> the software required to turn those sensor inputs in to useful displays particularly complicated

Relative to what though? This software has to always work. 100% of the time. If it ever goes wrong you might die. Software developers who are used to shipping normal code aren't used to the testing and rigor required in the aircraft industry.

> I don't see any obvious reason a group of motivated electronics hobbyists couldn't build a proof-of-concept that performs all the same core functions over a long weekend with a few hundred bucks worth of off the shelf parts and access to the relevant details of the ARINC 429 standard.

For sure. And hobbyists can also make experimental engines and aircraft. There's a whole category for those. But most people would not trust their lives to them. I wouldn't. There are too many edge cases, too many one out of a billion coincidences that will kill you in aviation.

Also, remember that they're not going to sell a lot of these E5s. These aren't phones. The entire GA fleet in the US is 200k aircraft. So they're going sell what, 20k of these over a decade worldwide? The low volume and the fact that you need to recoup your costs in a year or two at most, means that prices need to be very high.

Re: FAA Fumbled Its Response to a Surge in GPS Jamming

#134

Post by RNCTX » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 8:53 AM UTC

unionemployee wrote: post #128

RNCTX wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not so much that you can't fly from VOR to VOR, everyone knows how to do so. It's more that it's a horrible waste of time and fuel. If you have GPS, you will get cleared direct after getting out of congested areas, usually (presuming you are capable of clearing all of the terrain between point A and point B). If you're having to fly from VOR to VOR you will fly a much more indirect route and spend a lot more tim…

There's an incredible amount of inefficiency in the airspace system that causes massive fuel and time waste, but flying VOR to VOR in cruise doesn't seem like one of them. Airline routes are still frequently planned along airways with lots of VOR to VOR along the way. Yes, you get directs, but these only save a minute or two. If you're in a Gulfstream flying above everyone else, sure, it's "direct Van Nuys" from over…

Didn't say they did. Yes, airlines are run assembly-line style.

The linked article mentioned a private jet straying into a restricted area, I was referencing that incident in particular.