Live data from Hacker News

Civilian plane crash in New Mexico tied to military GPS blocking

wired.com

171–180 of 295 posts

Re: Civilian plane crash in New Mexico tied to military GPS blocking

#171

Missing from the article is that, once the pilots reported to ATC that GPS was inoperable, ATC was going to have them circle to the right and guide them along the ILS approach, which would've avoided the worst of the mountains. ATC also asked the military to stop GPS jamming, which they did for a brief while... and the pilots probably noticed GPS start working again... except... Instead, the pilots saw the airport vi…

> The alternative, visual approach in mountainous terrain on a moonless night, is clearly unwise for inexperienced pilots.

There is not only one alternative.

When presented with two impossible (per your telling) options for landing, you choose option C: don't.

Re: Civilian plane crash in New Mexico tied to military GPS blocking

#172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mechanical failure and engine outs will always rely on muscle memory and training imho, but I strongly presume everything else is going to be "Push red button to survive, switching to autonomy." Garmin Is Automating In-Flight Emergencies (Autoland, Smart Glide, ESP) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48996106 - July 2026 (0 comments) The accountability problem exposed by the first Garmin Autoland deployment - htt…

The problem is things like regulation and litigation have pushed the price of those modern technologies up outside the reach of everyone who isn't filthy rich, meaning the average GA pilot is tooling around in a clapped-out rental C172 from the 80s.

There's nothing inherently unsafe or unreliable about old airplanes. Aircraft maintenance and inspections are very rigorous and evidence based as compared with almost any other mechanical systems you might interact with. I flew a 1949 Piper PA-16 Clipper with a fairly anemic 108hp Lycoming O-235 with auto gas STC. I'd say it was every bit as safe as any other light single engine airplane, so long as you pay close attention when the wheels are touching ground and mind your density altitude.

In some sense it felt safer than the 172 because I could fly a higher, tighter pattern. It was easier to lose a bunch of altitude on final by putting it sideways in an aggressive slip. The 172's small rudder didn't let it get as sideways, so it was a little more constrained. The 172 did have functioning instruments and dual radios, not just a handheld. It also had flaps. I think it was probably 10-15yr newer? Still a relatively "old" airframe. I probably had 5x or more as many hours in the Clipper so all that could just be biased towards familiarity.

Point being, old plane does not mean unsafe plane. It's not like you're riding around in some rusted out hooptie in the sky. There are rigorous mandatory inspections and maintenance schedules for every single component, which results in mechanical failures being really rare even in aircraft that are nearly 100 years old.

None of that obviates the need to know what you're doing, of course. The pilot in command needs to have control of the plane. I'm pretty skeptical of systems that kind of try to smooth over that sharp edge, I can understand the altruistic motivation behind it, but there's likely a side effect of reducing the perceived risk. That's a problem, because it makes people complacent. So in terms of overall safety, it might not be a win? You're trading on average higher complacency and lower situational awareness for maybe some better outcomes in rare situations? Probably not the best trade.

Re: Civilian plane crash in New Mexico tied to military GPS blocking

#173
post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, pilots should ensure they're current at navigating without GPS because it can fail, just like pilots practice engine failure procedures and every other emergency / non-normal procedure. That doesn't mean it should be "randomly disabled" for the same reason that you don't test software in production or randomly turn off the engine of the plane. Obviously.

We don't know how it failed. Maybe it displayed their lat/long perfectly but at the wrong altitude. We think of failure as obvious, but it is often nearly impossible to tell unless you are looking for it.

Altitude is the least accurate dimension for GPS, and it's also the one dimension that's provided with great accuracy by a really simple mechanical gauge present in every aircraft. There should never be a situation where an incorrect altitude figure from GPS causes a problem.

Re: Civilian plane crash in New Mexico tied to military GPS blocking

#174
post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is that they don’t cause hurricanes, despite the fact that some hurricanes might not have happened if not for the flapping. I can point to at least one fatal crash that wouldn’t have happened if GPS was unavailable. Would it be reasonable to say that crash was caused by a lack of GPS jamming?

If I know stopping a particular butterfly from flapping its wings prevents thousands of people from dying and devastating effects on infrastructure (the typical result of a hurricane) I don't particularly care if they "cause" hurricanes I'm still stopping it. Philosophers can debate the meaning of the word "cause" all they want but it really isn't relevant.

That "if" is the critical thing. There's no way to know that in advance, not even probabilistically. If you try to stop prevent deaths in this way, you'll just waste your time, and you might even produce more deaths rather than fewer.

Something like GPS jamming isn't quite so bad. It's intuitively reasonable that reducing or degrading the information available to pilots will make things worse, and avoiding that is likely to improve safety. But it requires proper analysis to figure out the best thing to do, not a simplistic "this specific event wouldn't have happened if this specific fact had been different." That's what "cause" is about in a practical sense: not "what changes would have avoided this past event?" but "what changes improve our odds in the future?" And the first question isn't nearly enough to answer the second.

Re: Civilian plane crash in New Mexico tied to military GPS blocking

#175

The loss is tragic but I’m sorry GPS jamming was not a factor here. There was a NOTAM indicating it’s going on, the pilots should have been aware and it appears when they reached out with a request the jamming was stopped. It was a visual approach at a moonless night at an airport in high terrain, this was pilot error unfortunately.

Luckily, aviation investigations haven't concluded with "pilot error" for over half a century, or else there would be a lot more accidents as we never fixed any of the actual causes and just blamed the dead pilots.

Re: Civilian plane crash in New Mexico tied to military GPS blocking

#177
post #54
post #17

GPS is not essential to air navigation. It’s nice to have, and there are some approaches that legally require it to be operational in order to fly them (IFR procedures) but aviation has other systems in place to guide aircraft under conditions where visual flight navigation is impossible. In this case, IMHO, the pilots had become complacent and lax in their navigational rigor because of the fact that GPS makes a lot…

Don't worry, our government is doing their level best to make GPS the only option for air navigation. After all, we all know that technology NEVER fails, and the sooner we can turn off all those big bad old ground radars and navigation aids, the sooner we can sell all that real estate and use the money for things that the American public desperately needs, like more corporate bailouts and bathroom security cameras.

Everyone knows what the police need to catch more criminals is a comprehensive network of underseat security cameras. I’m sure they would never misuse that kind of access.

Re: Civilian plane crash in New Mexico tied to military GPS blocking

#178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GPS is not, and never will be, reliable enough for IFR on its own. Relying on a tower in instrument conditions because GPS failed is unacceptable, because every other GPS user is in the same boat. If you’re flying IFR, you should have a working set of instruments and be using them. Why didn’t these pilots have their VORs tuned in for positioning?

> GPS is not, and never will be, reliable enough for IFR on its own. WAAS GPS (~7.6M accuracy) is reliable enough for IFR on its own that many approaches have removed legacy RF ILS equipment for instrument approaches (RNAV LPV with synthetic glidescope from GNSS). I would agree this does not apply to the vast majority of general aviation (although certified receivers supporting this are well within the reach of GA at…

It's demonstrated fact that GPS is not 100% reliable, which would be required to meet the "on its own" requirement. See the article you're commenting under, and documentation about it from the FAA [1].

[1] https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/av...

Re: Civilian plane crash in New Mexico tied to military GPS blocking

#179
I run GPSJAM.org, have been studying and tracking the effects of GPS interference on aviation for the past 5 years, and I was a source for this article. I'm not a pilot and I don't work for any aviation agency.

I'm very curious to see what the final NTSB report says, but their preliminary report along with commentary from other analysts seems to show that this was a crew that made bad choices and died because of it. It also seems to show that GPS interference was a contributing factor to the accident, and that they'd likely be alive if the U.S. military hadn't been jamming GPS.

I think pilots need to be prepared to fly without GNSS, and also it might be a bad idea for the military to regularly deny GPS to thousands of civilian aircraft with tens or hundreds of thousands of passengers.

Lack of GPS isn't a critical safety issue, but it is a safety issue. GPS interference removes options, hurts situational awareness, disables or degrades other safety equipment (like TAWS, the Terrain Awareness and Warning System that is specifically designed to warn pilots that they're about to hit a mountain), and adds to crew and ATC workload and distraction.

Saying that this situation is what pilots train for and they should have just used VORs and ILS reveals an overly macho, unsophisticated understanding of aviation safety. We've added GPS, ADS-B, TCAS, GPWS, TAWS, etc. because they make flight safer. The airline industry and governments are concerned about GPS interference because of the aviation safety issues--if you're not concerned, you're thinking about the problem in a very narrow way ("I would never have trouble if my GPS died.").

In fact they think it's an urgent problem.

2024: "Aviation sector seeks urgent solutions for GPS interference" https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/aviation-...

From a 2023 presentation by Eurocontrol at the UN International Committee on GNSS/Interference Detection and Mitigation https://rntfnd.org/wp-content/uploads/Aviation-GNSS-interfer...:

  • GPS Problem reports dominate over all other type of safety reports
  • Redundant systems are the only reason why aviation has been able to
    maintain normal operations despite GNSS RFI!
  • GNSS integrated into many systems; exact RFI impact difficult to
    predict, manufacturers had to issue aircraft specific
    guidance → Complexity and workload increase

  Aviation Safety Impact
  • Aviation Safety is built on two main principles:
  • Trust your instruments
  • Follow standard operating procedure
  • GNSS RFI causes pilots to have to question both principles!
  • Chief Operations Officer of one major airline:
    Navigation is not my problem. My problem is “normalization of
    deviance”!
  • Incidents have occurred simply due to pilot distraction because of
    having to deal with too many system alerts
The U.S. military jamming GPS of civilian aircraft is a situation where there have been several close calls before this incident and experts have been saying for years that if the military keeps doing this, even with NOTAMs, people will get hurt and then that prediction tragically came true.

From 2021, "FAA Files Reveal a Surprising Threat to Airline Safety: The U.S. Military GPS Tests" https://spectrum.ieee.org/faa-files-reveal-a-surprising-thre...:

  Early one morning last May, a commercial airliner was approaching El
  Paso International Airport, in West Texas, when a warning popped up in
  the cockpit: “GPS Position Lost.” The pilot contacted the airline’s
  operations center and received a report that the U.S. Army’s White
  Sands Missile Range, in South Central New Mexico, was disrupting the
  GPS signal. “We knew then that it was not an aircraft GPS fault,” the
  pilot wrote later.

  The pilot missed an approach on one runway due to high winds, then
  came around to try again. “We were forced to Runway 04 with a predawn
  landing with no access to [an instrument landing] with vertical
  guidance,” the pilot wrote. “Runway 04…has a high CFIT threat due to
  the climbing terrain in the local area.”
Also

  This is far from the most worrying ASRS report involving GPS jamming.
  In August 2018, a passenger aircraft in Idaho, flying in smoky
  conditions, reportedly suffered GPS interference from military tests
  and was saved from crashing into a mountain only by the last-minute
  intervention of an air traffic controller. “Loss of life can happen
  because air traffic control and a flight crew believe their equipment
  are working as intended, but are in fact leading them into the side of
  the mountain,” wrote the controller. “Had [we] not noticed, that
 flight crew and the passengers would be dead. I have no doubt.”
Here's what an air traffic controller with 18 years of experience wrote about WSMR GPS interference in 2024: "Someone will get hurt ignoring the pilot reports or deciding for pilots how much equipment can fail or be unreliable before they 'agree' or decide to stop GPS jamming." https://asrs.arc.nasa.gov/docs/rpsts/ctlr.pdf

Re: Civilian plane crash in New Mexico tied to military GPS blocking

#180
post #17

GPS is not essential to air navigation. It’s nice to have, and there are some approaches that legally require it to be operational in order to fly them (IFR procedures) but aviation has other systems in place to guide aircraft under conditions where visual flight navigation is impossible. In this case, IMHO, the pilots had become complacent and lax in their navigational rigor because of the fact that GPS makes a lot…

> GPS is not essential to air navigation. It’s nice to have, and there are some approaches that legally require it to be operational in order to fly them (IFR procedures) but aviation has other systems in place to guide aircraft under conditions where visual flight navigation is impossible. This has not been the practical reality for many years for IFR flights (arguably not for VFR flight either but some of the good…

Does Europe not have VORs?
Post reply on HN