It's all good until you can't turn it off.  

 

https://theaviationist.com/2014/08/13/bacn-supports-air-strike-afghanistan/#disqus_thread

It's all good until you can't turn it off.

https://theaviationist.com/2014/08/13/bacn-supports-air-strike-afghanistan/#disqus_thread

Somebody brought up a similar point at meeting on ADS-B integration with the Army.

Basically his point was even stateside this could be a vulnerability. Basically this shows your hand. Like if say something like Panama was happening in the age of instant internet access and a potential country to be invaded could just watch air traffic way back in our national airspace system and suddenly see a whole metric butt load of C5s landing at Polk to pick up the guys due to jump into your country.

Now instead of airborne shock and awe you're jumping into a defended and prepared site that expected you for the party.

Lawman, that's a great point that I haven't heard brought up before.  Someone else alluded it to it earlier but that spells it out pretty clearly. 

Anyone know if they solved the spoofing issues?  Bandwidth Issues?  I did a "research paper" on ADS-B back in '11 for a Riddle class.  

An aviation enthusiast in mid 2000's found that they could spoof as many "returns" as he wanted with a laptop and some ADS-B equipment.  If I remember right, he actually did it and caused some commotion with the controllers.  Not knowing whether a blip on a screen is real or fake is a pretty big deal. 

As for bandwidth, the FAA did some test cases before making ADS-B required/operational in Utah and Alaska.  Both reports mention saturation points where information was lost on both ends of the transmission.  I also remember Australia coming to the same conclusions and electing to opt out of ADS-B full integration.  I know the ADS-B signal shares some frequency space with other commercial frequencies.  One of them was an old cell phone frequency band, which might be even less used now, and the other was portable phones.  In all the "research" I did, I found it very hard to find anything from the FAA addressing how much traffic a system can handle.  It may be a non-issue but if the test cases got overloaded I don't know how the service will handle the entire NAS.  

I may be way off/old news now, anyone heard talk along these lines?

 

Somebody brought up a similar point at meeting on ADS-B integration with the Army.

 

Basically his point was even stateside this could be a vulnerability. Basically this shows your hand. Like if say something like Panama was happening in the age of instant internet access and a potential country to be invaded could just watch air traffic way back in our national airspace system and suddenly see a whole metric butt load of C5s landing at Polk to pick up the guys due to jump into your country.

 

Now instead of airborne shock and awe you're jumping into a defended and prepared site that expected you for the party.

Probably a dumb question, but is it integrated somehow that you couldn't just pull the breaker?

not without disabling power to your entire transponder (Mode 1, 2, 3, 4, etc), assuming it's integrated that way (like ours is going to be).

Simple solution: install one ADS-B Out capable transponder and one without. Use each as needed.

don't have enough real estate for that.  Plus I'm sure having two transponders would prevent the PJs from being able to carry 3 grenade launchers.

Probably a dumb question, but is it integrated somehow that you couldn't just pull the breaker?

I'm sure we can get that developed... After we integrate it.

We gotta install it first and pay for it to find out how it works you know.

Simple solution: install one ADS-B Out capable transponder and one without. Use each as needed.

Or just have a switch for ADS-B Out just like you do for Modes 1-4. FENCEing in, ADS-B Out - Off.

Or just have a switch for ADS-B Out just like you do for Modes 1-4. FENCEing in, ADS-B Out - Off.

The problem is for longer range platforms.  A FENCE check won't be effective in they pick up your jet from 500 NM away.  The ADS-B discussion is going to get complicated the closer we get to execution/integration with other airspace systems.

I sure would love to have the Chinese watch how I work my 4-ship A/A tactics and SERE gameplan over the civilian feed in a MOA, too.

I sure would love to have the Chinese watch how I work my 4-ship A/A tactics and SERE gameplan over the civilian feed in a MOA, too.

If they're not on the ground watching it already...

I thought that all mil aircraft were mandated by Congress to have TCAS after the 141 mid air.

Not all, clearly.  The B-1 doesn't have it.

I sure would love to have the Chinese watch how I work my 4-ship A/A tactics and SERE gameplan over the civilian feed in a MOA, too.

they've already downloaded the 3-1 anyway...

 

Maybe we should go back to the days where every flight lead briefed their own customized a2a game plan :)

they've already downloaded the 3-1 anyway...

 

Maybe we should go back to the days where every flight lead briefed their own customized a2a game plan :)

Reminds me of this supposed quote from a WWII German Officer:

"A serious problem in planning against American doctrine is that the Americans do not read their manuals, nor do they feel any obligation to follow their doctrine."

https://theaviationist.com/2014/08/13/bacn-supports-air-strike-afghanistan/#disqus_thread

Not to discount the fact that it could cause issues in another circumstance, but I'd put an extraordinarily high probability on the fact that the airstrike mentioned had precisely fuck-all to do with the presence of BACN in the area.

Not to discount the fact that it could cause issues in another circumstance, but I'd put an extraordinarily high probability on the fact that the airstrike mentioned had precisely -all to do with the presence of BACN in the area.

If you've flown the BACN and know their way of scheduling, I'm sure you could answer that question pretty easily.