New case against flight tracking

And feel free to register your plane to an entity or use a PO Box or both. Boom. Privacy.
An entity might not always help. A quick corporation search at a state’s secretary of state website will likely turn up the name and address of the entity’s owner, unless it’s a Delaware corp. Try it for example with a business like your favorite small local FBO.
 
If tracking somebody's airplane required people to stand by the airport and physically observe the plane's movements
Funny, that is exactly what we would see flying in Europe in the late 1960s and early 70s. People along the fence taking photos and writing down numbers, to track the movement of military aircraft.
 
I think the issue is some of your heads are so big to believe anyone cares who you are and where you live.

I think it is about personal privacy. There is no "need to know" by the public where my airplane is at any given time or who owns the airplane.
 
Funny, that is exactly what we would see flying in Europe in the late 1960s and early 70s. People along the fence taking photos and writing down numbers, to track the movement of military aircraft.
“Spotters” as they are termed still do it in Europe today, and with all kinds of planes. They then publish the photos online. In the US we see little of this because people with enough interest to go to the airport would more likely be flying themselves… except that my plane was photographed by a traveling European spotter in the western US! That’s a little odd, as hobbies go.
 
Last edited:
“Spotters” as they are termed still do it in Europe today, and with all kinds of planes. They then publish the photos online. In the US we see little of this because people with enough interest to go to the airport would more likely be flying themselves… except that my plane was photographed by a traveling European spotter in the western US! That’s a little odd, as hobbies go.
You should see 'em at Oshkosh. They literally walk the lines of aircraft taking pictures and making notes (capturing n numbers) of every aircraft they come across. Good for them. I don't have that much patience.
 
I think it is about personal privacy. There is no "need to know" by the public where my airplane is at any given time or who owns the airplane.
It also helps that almost nobody cares about where your airplane is.

My wife, father-in-law, and occasionally some friends like to know where I am, so I'm fine with my position being broadcast. If others want to follow, drop me a line and let me know when I'm in your area.
 
It also helps that almost nobody cares about where your airplane is.

My wife, father-in-law, and occasionally some friends like to know where I am, so I'm fine with my position being broadcast. If others want to follow, drop me a line and let me know when I'm in your area.
Like you, nobody really cares where I am. But don't you think it should be "opt in" at best? I bet the folks who run Berkshire Hathaway, Bill Gates, and other high profile (potentially vulnerable) people would prefer anonymity, and why shouldn't they have it?
 
Like you, nobody really cares where I am. But don't you think it should be "opt in" at best? I bet the folks who run Berkshire Hathaway, Bill Gates, and other high profile (potentially vulnerable) people would prefer anonymity, and why shouldn't they have it?
No, I think every airplane should be publicly trackable.

The privacy issue comes from knowing who owns an aircraft, not the position of airplanes in the sky.
 
I bet it won't be after somebody actually tries it.
Actually, already being done for years...private companies (Motorola and FlockSafety) do all the plate reader/plate tracking in my home state. Then they sell it to who ever wants it, including both police and/or private entities.

Also in my state, ANYONE can get plate/vehicle/owner info from the state, for $6 per plate. It's public information, you just have to know how to get it.
 
Last edited:
That is only useful to other planes in the area and ATC. Nobody else needs to know this, and the ownership and passenger manifest are irrelevant to the safety function.
And how do you propose limiting reception to other planes in the area?

Ownership is not provided by ADS-B. Those who want it are cross referencing from N Number registration. That is easily prevented by using a corporate entity.

Passenger manifests are not available anywhere.
 
I agree. But there is no need by the general public to be able to trace the ownership of the airplane.
That is a completely different issue that has nothing to do with ADS-B. The N Number registry is public information because that is required by law. Your issue is with Congress, who published the CFR.
 
Why don't we make every car license plate owners info publicly available and trackable as to their every movement by everyone on the internet?

Zero reason ownership and location data of privately owned planes should be publicly available...you could make an argument for the carriers but not privately owned planes IMO.
 
Please explain how you will prevent those planes from sharing this information with the general public without violating the first amendment.
Planes don't even have to share. Anyone in the general public can receive the same signal. The radio waves don't care if you are a plane and can't be made to care. All it takes is a Stratux and an antenna on your roof
 
The corporate entity is where the risk lies. When a publicly traded corp's plan shows up at the airport next to a likely acquisition target or competitor, it has the potential to be insider information that the corp has a legal requirement to hold as confidential.
If you are playing at that level then you have the coin for decent lawyers to structure corporate entities to sever the connection. Easy to do: register the aircraft to a separate entity, then lease it to the parent entity. If a publicly traded corp can't figure that out then they need better lawyers.
 
All this discussion about being able to look up N numbers and find the owners is really irrelevant. I doubt Taylor Swift's airplanes are registered to her personally. But anybody can figure out her N numbers by watching her get on or off a plane, and then track the ADSB. No access to government records required.
 
Do you have an exit from your house through a cave with a hidden exit?

Otherwise it's fairly easy for someone to know when you're not at home (if they really want to know).
Not currently. The next Fancy real estate purchase will have enough acreage for a STOL strip and a secure home site.
 
Read the FAA regs at the link I provided.
I don't need to read the regs again to know that the FAA only regulates a very small percentage of rocketry and still doesn't require clearances. Your claim about drones is also false.
 
I believe you only have to contact the FAA to launch high powered rockets.
 
What's needed to be known is that there is a plane in a particular spot, not whose's plane it is. One has little to do with the other.
 
Anything that's not a wood/paper toy requires clearance.
Incorrect. Your own link shows that. Just because you consider it a toy does not mean it’s not a rocket. Because it is.
 
Fixed.




Here's a portion of the text from the FAA regs:

Part 101 requires all Class 2 and 3 amateur rocket operators to notify the FAA air traffic facility nearest the place of intended operation prior to the launch. Notice of the launch must be provided to Air Traffic no less than 24 hours and no more than 3 days before the launch operation.
[...]
A waiver/authorization is required for amateur rocket operations conducted outside the operating limitations per paragraph 31-2-2. The most common reason for requesting a waiver/authorization is to operate within controlled airspace. An applicant must submit its waiver/authorization request to the service area. If the applicant submits its request directly to AST, AST must direct the applicant to submit its request directly to the service area.

So you agree it's not true that every (or any) model rocket entering controlled airspace will have a clearance.
 
Not ignoring it at all, any more than a comment about drones ignores toy drones.

The point is that anything operating in controlled airspace is subject to FAA regs and authorization - planes, rockets, gliders, etc.
...paper airplanes....

The point is that your statement was incorrect. And irrelevant.
 
No, I do not.

If it is entering controlled airspace it needs to be authorized. Try it and find out for yourself.

What actually prevents the entry into controlled airspace? Is there a force field or something?
 
It's public info she has no leg to stand on IMO.

That said, with these cases popping up more and more and non-celebrities wanting privacy why does ADS-B need a unique identifier beyond an ATC assigned Squawk code? For safety/traffic awareness purposes wouldn't it be enough to only show the aircraft type?
But it should not be public info; I'm not happy that anyone can look up my home value and various other stuff.
 
No, I do not.

If it is entering controlled airspace it needs to be authorized. Try it and find out for yourself.
Still no. I've launched many rockets into controlled airspace without being "authorized." I notice you're no longer claiming I need a clearance. And we still haven't addressed drones.

The reality for most of us is that there's loads of stuff flying around in controlled airspace with no clearance.
 
Back
Top