What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

FAA Acts To Preserve ADS-B Data Privacy (1090 ES)

I thought it through before I posted. :)

Moderator hat pulled on; Let's not get too political, VAF rules will become a factor.

Fair enough. Some people didn't want to leave England, either, and from their viewpoint those who wanted independence were radicals - thus it ever was! There is room in our society for honest disagreement. :D
 
Good grief.....I express an interest in watching aircraft and get branded as "borderline criminal" and "creepy".....and now its implied I'm a Tory....... :(

Tough crowd.....
 
Last edited:
Good grief.....I express an interest in watching aircraft and get branded as "borderline criminal" and "creepy".....and now its implied I'm a Tory....... :(

Tough crowd.....

Some people value their privacy more than you do Sam. And there is a near certainty that some of your airpark neighbors that you track for your own entertainment feel just as strongly about it as we do.

Just think about that next time you apply your own version of reasonableness to other people.

This thread may seem tough, but it's better than a punch in the nose at your next airport meeting.
 
Last edited:
Data is Power

If the FAA can provide the raw data (number of flights, to and from, times, type of aircraft, etc.) with or without the N-numbers, then those who don't like aircraft for any reason (noise, pollution, whatever) will have the ammunition to force us out of the sky.

Sometimes I wish AOPA and the EAA would be a bit more militant, similar to the NRA in that no compromise is acceptable.
 
Some people value their privacy more than you do Sam. And there is a near certainty that some of your airpark neighbors that you track for your own entertainment feel just as strongly about it as we do.

Just think about that next time you apply your own version of reasonableness to other people.

This thread may seem tough, but it's better than a punch in the nose at your next airport meeting.

Way over the top, Michael. You don't know anything about my airport neighbors and are making totally invalid assumptions.

The RVers I hang with are early adopters of APRS technology over ten years ago (here is the VAF APRS sub-forum). We've been tracking each other's aircraft ever since.....with no bloody noses and never a tense moment or cross word.

Maybe we are just a bit more laid back than the aviation community you are accustomed with. You are militant about privacy, but aviation enthusiasts who are tapping into data that is legal and provided by the FAA and other providers are not villains or doing anything criminal.

That's the way it is......deal with it.

In case you wish to join the tracking community, here are details on how to build or buy a receiver and join the piAware system:

https://flightaware.com/adsb/piaware/build

There are nearly 25,000 tracking sites worldwide. :)

Here is the coverage map as of a few minutes ago:

pi-aware-coverage.jpg
 
Last edited:
Sam, you can feign insult, but by your own admission you're the guy who tracks the comings and goings of your neighbors for your own entertainment. And since this is an ADSB centric thread, that means it's outside the APRS network and you are doing it (to some) without their permission. Sorry, but that's "creepy" defined.

Your group of tracker buddies might have colored your worldview, but I'm informing you that some people do not appreciate being tracked. Judging by the response these threads generate, there's plenty of us who feel this way. This is your wake up call. You have the option of respecting this viewpoint of your peers, friends and neighbors and perhaps use this information as "social epiphany", or you can continue to go on the offensive and diminish those views because they conflict with your own.

It's your choice to give up your privacy, but does that override the rights/opinion of those who cherish it?
 
Last edited:
So, if enough peeping toms unite with enough exhibitionists...

We just see a new normal? Ewwww.
 
Last edited:
I'm wondering if Vans' new kit shouldn't have been a wall sign, but an aluminum hat. More durable than tinfoil...
 
Has anyone successfully used this new process on a piston plane? Seems you need a third party number and they are only available from fltplan for turbine aircraft. Not sure about foreflight.
 
The reality (alternately, MY reality) is that I value privacy and see no need for the 7 (?) billion people on earth to know where my airplane is at any given time. Certainly, ATC has a need to know, but beyond that, I only see downsides to that information being public. I can come up with dozens of scenarios (and I guarantee some will come to fruition) where the information can and will be used for less than beneficial purposes.

This gets back to my original question: what scenarios is everyone concerned about (the tracking of a daughter is a complete non-starter for me; that's tinfoil hat stuff, imho)?

There are possibilities and there are probabilities and the assessment of risk requires us to know the difference and the dimension.

The information has been around for years. If someone can provide specific examples of how it has been used against GA owners, including the total number of such instances, it might be easier to determine whether it's worth bothering to worry about .

Murder?

That's an "alrighty then" Homer Simpson, back into the cornfield slowly thread ender.
 
Last edited:
The information has been around for years. If someone can provide specific examples of how it has been used against GA owners, including the total number of such instances, it might be easier to determine whether it's worth bothering to worry about .

I know of no way to count the instances. But a high profile example of what can happen was the incident a few years ago where Auburn was courting a football coach from another school, and flightaware data (IIRC) was used to embarrass everyone involved.

There are also examples where people have been tracked to locations they didn't want disclosed, either for personal or business reasons. I promise you, Warren Buffet does not want you to know where he is on a given day, nor (sometimes) does AOPA management, for instance. Same with Air Force One. Why? Security. Business insight. Privacy.
 
Bob, not sure if you have ever been in the military, but those of us that have understand the concept of OPSEC. And some of us are required to be aware of and adhere to some significant security processes due to our employment choices since our military service. I have a pretty extensive document I have to fill out before I go on personal vacation and again when I return documenting to my employer and customers that nothing "unusual" happened. This has been my reality for 30 years and I'm far from alone in this requirement among those on this forum. Bottom line: knowing where your adversary is now and where they will be in the future is a VERY powerful piece of information. Just ask Admiral Yamamoto or Osama bin Laden (sorry, can't because they're DEAD).

The fact that you (or others) can't conceive of a malicious use of the information ADSB presents is likely a testament to your gentle nature. That's a complement. But the reality is that it's also demonstrably naive. Laws have been passed which block car registrations from the public BECAUSE BAD PEOEPLE DO BAD THINGS WITH THAT INFORMATION. This isn't tin foil hat paranoia, it's reality. I work in an industry that exploits this information and I see first hand just how easy it is to use.

You may think that everyone on this forum has your best interest in heart. You may think that people who use aviation tracking data are good people. You might not believe people get killed for less information.

You would be wrong on all counts.
 
Last edited:
Bob, not sure if you have ever been in the military, but those of us that have understand the concept of OPSEC. And some of us are required to be aware of and adhere to some significant security processes due to our employment choices since our military service. I have a pretty extensive document I have to fill out before I go on personal vacation and again when I return documenting to my employer and customers that nothing "unusual" happened. This has been my reality for 30 years and I'm far from alone in this requirement among those on this forum. Bottom line: knowing where your adversary is now and where they will be in the future is a VERY powerful piece of information. Just ask Admiral Yamamoto or Osama bin Laden (sorry, can't because they're DEAD).

The fact that you (or others) can't conceive of a malicious use of the information ADSB presents is likely a testament to your gentle nature. That's a complement. But the reality is that it's also demonstrably naive. Laws have been passed which block car registrations from the public BECAUSE BAD PEOEPLE DO BAD THINGS WITH THAT INFORMATION. This isn't tin foil hat paranoia, it's reality. I work in an industry that exploits this information and I see first hand just how easy it is to use.

You may think that everyone on this forum has your best interest in heart. You may think that people who use aviation tracking data are good people. You might not believe people get killed for less information.

You would be wrong on all counts.

Spot on!!!
 
Amen brother.

).

The fact that you (or others) can't conceive of a malicious use of the information ADSB presents is likely a testament to your gentle nature. That's a complement. But the reality is that it's also demonstrably naive. Laws have been passed which block car registrations from the public BECAUSE BAD PEOEPLE DO BAD THINGS WITH THAT INFORMATION. This isn't tin foil hat paranoia, it's reality. I work in an industry that exploits this information and I see first hand just how easy it is to use.

You may think that everyone on this forum has your best interest in heart. You may think that people who use aviation tracking data are good people. You might not believe people get killed for less information.

You would be wrong on all counts.

Michael,
As a former terrorist hunter/killer I appreciate your service and candor, couldn’t agree more.
Privacy is still an inalienable right guaranteed in the Constitution. My ADSB solution? Its simple, avoidance.
I will simply comply by treating affected ADSB airspace like a SAM ring, stiff arm, for now. ATC still has the option to allow passage, my guess is they will, at first.

Thank God there’s still enough unaffected airspace left (protected by and preserved by brave patriots) here in TX and elsewhere that I can still operate VFR without a flight plan, transponder, ADSB or speak to anyone while piloting an airplane I built myself.

V/R
Smokey

I spent a large portion of my aviation career pursuing some very evil men in a lawless land where malicious intent is personified.This task performed under the mission description “search and destroy,” flying in airspace where you’re not welcome and the natives shoot back and play for keeps. Needless to say, trust is a word I don’t take lightly.
 
Last edited:
Being closer to a large city, the hangar I bought lies just under the 30 mile ring, and that's half an hour away from home. I have no choice - ADS-B is required for my planes. Now if they didn't have an electrical system.... but they do.

Dave
 
Spot on!!!

Agreed.

I would be somewhat less bothered by the public's ability to easily track N numbers if our registration information weren't public information. Why is it that aircraft owners and operators are afforded less privacy rights than automobile owners? To me, this is the heart of the problem for those aircraft owners that want to protect their privacy.

Skylor
 
The fact that you (or others) can't conceive of a malicious use of the information ADSB presents is likely a testament to your gentle nature.

I never said any such thing. I can conceive of all sorts of scenarios, but that's not the question I asked.

I asked what of those scenarios are or have been experienced in the GA world which -- if answered could at least give us a better idea of risk assessment. That fact that someone COULD do something of some sort does not provide anything of value other than a theory.

That's not good enough and the reason I know that's not good enough is the "it could happen" assertion is the same one that's used by lots of people to try to keep us and our planes out of the air.

You COULD use that plane for terrorist purposes. You COULD drive your plane into your ex-wife's house (by the way, I dare say THAT actually happens much more frequently than people being murdered or a daughter abducted because FlightAware showed you going off for a $100 hamburger).

How do we as pilots react to those assertions?

We respond in a logical and informed way. We assess that liklihood and-- usually -- dismiss it, or at least try to educate the people on the ground as to why the assertion is out of proportion to a proper risk assessment. I put those assertions in the same category as "someone could murder your daughter" because of ADS-B information.

That we do this logical and informed assessment of risk as pilots is not a testament to our gentle nature or our unwillingness to conceive of a possibility. It's that we recognize that it is impossible to live life in a risk-free world and we evaluate those risks factually and logically in order to determine what we will assume and those that we are not willing to assume.
 
Last edited:
I
Michael,

Privacy is still an inalienable right guaranteed in the Constitution. [/I]

Privacy isn't mentioned in the Constitution.

It is considered by the Supreme Court to be in the Fourth Amendment:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause,

But that runs afoul of a lot of strict constructionists and, of course, the extent what is covered by the Fourth is very much a matter of debate that is not settled by the words of the Fourth Amendment as the debate over government interference of the doctor-patient relationship, mandated breathalyzer tests in implied consent (drunk driving) or DWI blood/urine testing, when can cops enter your property, what can a photographer legally photograph of your home (anything visible from the street), etc., attest.

As with most rights, courts weigh personal rights against societal rights and come down somewhere on that spectrum. That was most evident in two cases before the court a few years ago when the court ruled on two implied consent cases on the same day, striking down a North Dakota law that forced blood tests of suspected drunk drivers, while upholding a similiar Minnesota statute that forced drivers to submit to breathalyzer tests.

Both of thoses cases hinged on the words of the fourth amendent, which mentioned neither blood nor breath, of course.

I could someday see a scenario where we're not allowed to fly over someone's house because of words that actually ARE in the constitution: the right of people to be secure... in their houses. Yikes!

But back to the flight data, I will stipulate, however, to the reality that I've not heard a compelling case for why the public should have access to the data. In that vacuum, I suspect, the over-the-top, unlikely scenarios of why they shouldn't will probably hold sway.

Good chatting with you guys. Thanks for the intellectual stimulation. I'm gonna move along now.

Happy holidays
 
Last edited:
I just tried, but it?s restricted to operators with an approved call sign (like the ?Dot Com? call signs available through FltPlan.com/Garmin).

Doesn?t seem to work for us yet.
 
Are there any new options for anonymity other than the purchased callsign route or standby mode?

FYI: Standby mode is not allowed under the new ADS-B regulations unless you are a wingman in a formation flight where lead is in contact with ATC. You can't even put it in standby mode to taxi to the fuel pump on a private grass strip in the middle of Montana. If you are equipped the equipment must be on and functional any time the aircraft is operated, on the surface or in the air, in all classes of airspace (including the Class G on your private remote strip). Technically that means if a mechanic runs up the engine for an oil change the equipment must be operational and on.
 
FYI: Standby mode is not allowed under the new ADS-B regulations unless you are a wingman in a formation flight where lead is in contact with ATC. You can't even put it in standby mode to taxi to the fuel pump on a private grass strip in the middle of Montana. If you are equipped the equipment must be on and functional any time the aircraft is operated, on the surface or in the air, in all classes of airspace (including the Class G on your private remote strip). Technically that means if a mechanic runs up the engine for an oil change the equipment must be operational and on.

Got it - So does this mean in past 18+ months this thread was started there hasn't been any progress to extend privacy options to small piston A/C to the likes of turbines?
 
Got it - So does this mean in past 18+ months this thread was started there hasn't been any progress to extend privacy options to small piston A/C to the likes of turbines?
Correct. There is no privacy with ADS-B apart from Anonymous mode.
 
Back
Top