ADS-B out used by the FAA to watch you?

Scott@KTYR

Pattern Altitude
PoA Supporter
Joined
Oct 12, 2013
Messages
2,103
Display Name

Display name:
Scott@KTYR
Would ADS-B Out ever be used by the FAA to issue you a penalty if you did something stupid and broke a rule while flying your plane? If you are VFR and not talking to anyone and you broke a flight rule, would the ACT see what you did and have your info because of the ADS-B out. For example a plane was on the news a few months ago buzzing a lake very low. If he had ADS-B out, the FAA could look and see who he was and send him a letter.
 
I believe that is true. I heard a long time ago that with ADS-B OUT that the FAA could identify perpetrators of things like runway or airspace incursions.
 
Then again, innocent till proven guilty, how do we know its not an airplane with ads-b equipment programmed with someone else's information? EAB owners are allowed to basically do anything when it comes to installing avionics so they would probably know how to alter these settings.
 
I hate to state the obvious, but isn't that kind of the point of ADS-B?
 
Ever be used? Sure... Why not? It's a tracking system after all, not a safety system. Well, judging by how poorly the safety portion is implemented with the whole hockey puck thing...

Automatic Dependent SURVEILLANCE system...
 
I don't have ADSB-Out, but I just received my 3rd unexpected bill from Canada for my 1 week stay there at two airports. Two bills were landing fees and the last one was a tax for utilizing their ATC facilities. At least that I how it sounded to me.

That's by tail number...it has nothing to do with installed equipment.

Bob Gardner
 
I don't have ADSB-Out, but I just received my 3rd unexpected bill from Canada for my 1 week stay there at two airports. Two bills were landing fees and the last one was a tax for utilizing their ATC facilities. At least that I how it sounded to me.

If you flew there, I'd think they are owed it, que no?
 
Then again, innocent till proven guilty, how do we know its not an airplane with ads-b equipment programmed with someone else's information? EAB owners are allowed to basically do anything when it comes to installing avionics so they would probably know how to alter these settings.

Not with the FAA, you're guilty unless you can prove to them you're innocent.
 
If you flew there, I'd think they are owed it, que no?

Maybe, maybe not. My 182 and I were never in Canada, yet I got a bill anyway for a point to point flight using two of their airports. Called and they said it must have been a clerical error. I got a refund/credit notice. Awhile later, I got a past due notice for the original bill. I called and they said they were having billing issues (I flashed back to Gunny saying "well...no sh--.") and they said they'd take care of it. About a month later I got another past due notice saying they were sending me to collections if it wasn't paid in "x" days (don't recall the number). I called again, finally getting them to fix the issue.

Obviously he flew to Canada so he owes something, but it may not be all they are asking for.
 
I don't have ADSB-Out, but I just received my 3rd unexpected bill from Canada for my 1 week stay there at two airports. Two bills were landing fees and the last one was a tax for utilizing their ATC facilities. At least that I how it sounded to me.

Standard Canadian fees. Landing fees at larger airports, E route flight service etc service based on the calendar quarter. They get the billing data when you talk to NavCanada flight service. I flew from US through the Canada to Alaska and return, did not pay one landing fee. Paid my quarterly service fee after I returned.

Best FSS and flight plan service I'd ever recieved. They were anxious to talk with me each day, after they learned my trip plan, they would ask at the end of the daily brief, and where to tomorrow, and they were ready to brief when I called.
 
I hate to state the obvious, but isn't that kind of the point of ADS-B?

Definitely one of the points.

Then again, innocent till proven guilty, how do we know its not an airplane with ads-b equipment programmed with someone else's information? EAB owners are allowed to basically do anything when it comes to installing avionics so they would probably know how to alter these settings.

It's not that hard to change the broadcast information. All you need is a little know-how on how to set up the parameters, which of course can be changed by any avionics shop. And it's not rocket science to do that, although sometimes a special tool is required.

So yes, that would certainly be one thing one could do to try to not get caught. But really at that point, just pull the breaker and arouse even less suspicion, and be less likely to get picked up on any sort of radar. If you were doing that sort of thing, you'd probably want to be flying in airspace where ADS-B wasn't required anyway since you almost certainly wouldn't want to be talking to people.
 
Then again, innocent till proven guilty, how do we know its not an airplane with ads-b equipment programmed with someone else's information? EAB owners are allowed to basically do anything when it comes to installing avionics so they would probably know how to alter these settings.

For a small fee, cash only, I can do that for you. :cool:

Or you can fly low and slow and turn off the equipment.
 
If a certain person doesn't speak up soon I see 100s of ADSBs broadcast out "N6PC", "N6PC" over the coming months.

On the other hand, that may also result in a Spartacus effect which will give him immunity... mmm...

Are we, in fact, watching the making of the next Barry Seal?
 
That's by tail number...it has nothing to do with installed equipment.

Bob Gardner

If you have a mode S ADS-B solution, every broadcast contains the ICAO 24 bit code that corresponds to your registration number. That means your airplane pumps your registration number out at least 4 times a sec on the mode S squitter broadcast.

That is why I like the UAT 978 Mhz solution. You have the choice to remain anonymous and comply.

A lot of ATC monitoring is done by computer. I operate under a ClassB space. It has all those weird sharp corners (tailored to VOR radials). Squawking 1200 nobody probably notices if you accidentally clip an edge or two, but as computer tracking gets more precise and people get more anal, who knows where it will lead.

If you want to fly around with a big bag of cash anonymously for strictly legal purposes you dont have too many options. TSA will confiscate it. Local police might too of they see it in your car. This isn't that free a country any more. There are other freedoms, besides shooting your mouth off. Try buying sudafed :)




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
If you want to fly around with a big bag of cash anonymously for strictly legal purposes you dont have too many options. TSA will confiscate it. Local police might too of they see it in your car. This isn't that free a country any more. There are other freedoms, besides shooting your mouth off. Try buying sudafed :)

And 100 years ago someone could tail you. There's always been a way to track you, it's just gotten more technologically advanced now.

You really still can go a lot of places anonymously, or at least anonymously enough to go about your business without anyone noticing. This will also be true after you have ADS-B.
 
martha.jpg
 
Actually any mode S transponder sends the 24bit ICAO code. So Mode S + 978 still isn't totally anonymous. Just install a pullable "hold mah beer" breaker for the transponder.
 
I believe the UAT 978 Mhz allows you to be anonymous, it's not the same format as Mode S.

These folks are the only ones to advertise the feature -> https://www.navworx.com/ADS600BDescription.php

Their copy :
AutoStealth(tm) Mode:
The UAT technology is the only ADS-B equipment that will allow for privacy. Normally, ADS-B devices transmit the aircrafts ICAO number, a unique code that is assigned by the FAA to each aircraft. When flying VFR however, there is no need to let the FAA know who you are. The ADS600-EXP randomizes the ICAO whenever the squawk code is set to 1200. In addition, the N-Number of the aircraft configured is changed to "N0", an unassigned N-Number.
 
If I delete my tail number from the Flight ID and change the Flight ID (i can type anything i want into there on the GTN750), would that help keep me more 'anonymous' ?
 
And they will then nail you for lying to a government official.
How about just getting a briefing as required by the regs and not flying into controlled airspace without a clearance?
 
And they will then nail you for lying to a government official.
How about just getting a briefing as required by the regs and not flying into controlled airspace without a clearance?

Lolz

Because if you have nothing to hide you don't need to be worried about poorly educated, highly armed, highly predatory folks who look for trouble until they find it, even when it isn't there, type government officials knowing everything about you right?!

I don't want to lie to anyone, I just don't want to participate in the "conversation" in the first place. It's NO ONES business where I'm going, what I'm doing, or who I am, if I'm not hurting anyone (which I don't) you got no business in my business.
 
I believe the UAT 978 Mhz allows you to be anonymous, it's not the same format as Mode S.

These folks are the only ones to advertise the feature -> https://www.navworx.com/ADS600BDescription.php

Their copy :
AutoStealth(tm) Mode:
The UAT technology is the only ADS-B equipment that will allow for privacy. Normally, ADS-B devices transmit the aircrafts ICAO number, a unique code that is assigned by the FAA to each aircraft. When flying VFR however, there is no need to let the FAA know who you are. The ADS600-EXP randomizes the ICAO whenever the squawk code is set to 1200. In addition, the N-Number of the aircraft configured is changed to "N0", an unassigned N-Number.

That is true only if you are using a Mode C transponder. If you have a "properly configured" non ADS-b Mode S transponder, that transponder already broadcasts your ICAO address as part of the Mode S response. Granted you could screw with that in the Transponder setup, but most of the users probably wouldn't. The ES in the 1090ES is just the additional GPS info etc. Your ID is already in the base mode S reply.
 
I've seen airliners change their flight ID to funny phrases. It shows up on my GTN750 traffic page as well as tracking sites such as flightradar24. So why can't general aviation do it?
 
Damn, there are a lot of tinfoil hats out there.

If the FAA cares to bust you for something, they can do it right now. They have this fancy tool called "radar." It has coverage nearly everywhere. Even if you turn your transponder off. To hide from it, you would have to fly REALLY low, and then they would see you disappear. This would ATTRACT attention because it looks like a crash.

Surveillance is a safety feature. Don't get too stuck on a word. It's also used to monitor ground movement on large airports. Not to bust people for whatever, but to keep them from banging into stuff and anticipate problems like runway incursions or traffic jams, even when the Mark I Eyeballs can't work (poor weather).
 
Damn, there are a lot of tinfoil hats out there.

If the FAA cares to bust you for something, they can do it right now. They have this fancy tool called "radar." It has coverage nearly everywhere. Even if you turn your transponder off. To hide from it, you would have to fly REALLY low, and then they would see you disappear. This would ATTRACT attention because it looks like a crash.

Surveillance is a safety feature. Don't get too stuck on a word. It's also used to monitor ground movement on large airports. Not to bust people for whatever, but to keep them from banging into stuff and anticipate problems like runway incursions or traffic jams, even when the Mark I Eyeballs can't work (poor weather).

There's precisely ZERO chance you're going to convince James that the gubmint isn't comin' to get him. Don't bother.

Those of us that understand that the tools to fang us have existed since forever understand that ADS-B has both positive and negative implications and that it isn't inherently ebil.
 
There's precisely ZERO chance you're going to convince James that the gubmint isn't comin' to get him. Don't bother.

Also, those who derive their liberties from depending on law enforcement to not be able to do their job is dragging us into the mud.

50 years from now (maybe even less) the technology and infrastructure will exist to do cradle to grave tracking for every person in the country. A decade after that and there will not be anything like an unsolved crime. Not even so much as who dropped a gum wrapper on the street.

So I don't want my liberties to come from my ability to avoid tracking. I want it to come from allowing me to live my life in the way I want to live my life, and not give puritans the ability to pass laws that says I can't. Whatever vices I have, if "I'm not hurting anybody" I shouldn't care if the NSA knows whatever I'm doing, as long as they can't act on it.

If we focus instead on trying to avoid enforcement but don't care about what laws are on the book, it will take us a revolution to recover from that.
 
So I don't want my liberties to come from my ability to avoid tracking. I want it to come from allowing me to live my life in the way I want to live my life, and not give puritans the ability to pass laws that says I can't. Whatever vices I have, if "I'm not hurting anybody" I shouldn't care if the NSA knows whatever I'm doing, as long as they can't act on it.

You should care. First, the "I'm not doing anything wrong" defense didn't stop IRS targeting of people operating business names that went against a particular political party, for example.

Blatant abuse of seemingly safe data to collect in a database, overall, but used for an inappropriate purpose. Not a soul went to jail over it, either. We all know this.

And that's the thing with databases. As one of my programming professors said long ago, "Think long and hard about the required longevity of the data your program is using, and whether or not it really needs to be retained in a database. Databases can easily be used for good or evil. Joining databases can reveal things otherwise not intended to be revealed by the two standing alone." She wrote code for DoD for twenty years before getting out and teaching instead.

It's been nearly 20 years since she said that to our class, and "data mining" and "big data" are now all the rage. Marketers and spooks alike, know more about everyone than ever. Whether good or bad, depends upon how the data is used, and we've seen above that political party cultists are more than willing to abuse it. And that abuse may include agencies with the power of already nearly having the power of making their own laws.

As far as NSA goes, you could maybe change that statement to FBI and I'd agree, but NSA supposedly is specifically barred from monitoring and surveillance of Citizens without cause inside the borders. They're in someone else's swim lane, so to speak.

FBI supposedly also needs warrants for certain forms of surveillance, but FISA courts with a different set of rules than our normal courts are here to stay, it looks like, and warrantless wire taps on a mass scale have been uncovered for roughly two decades now. Telecoms specifically requested and were granted immunity once they realized that cat was out of the bag, for example.

Reality is... There's now "joint" database aggregators between agencies after the kerfkuffle that they "didn't properly share information" on things like 9-11. Those are the places the databases get queried together...

(New Mexico and Utah appear to be leading the charge in suckling from that debt-driven teat. But that's a different conversation...)

... and one of those "aggregators" triggered the John and Martha King takedown... Via aviation data mixed with who knows what other data in a poorly designed query in a couple of databases.

I don't know about you, but I've seen what most software coders write for database queries, and I'm not too convinced having that trigger people showing up with guns, is a good idea, overall.

To be less "emotional" about it and more "pragmatic", we need to look hard at the costs of it all versus the gains. And we can't. The bill is a available to the public, but the results are secrets. But we can definitely see its damned expensive. Data centers the size of small cities, even in Utah, aren't cheap.

In summary, I think you should be a bit more concerned, especially about the price tag, but also about possible abuse of any form of collected data.

We've already seen that you don't need to be a criminal at all to be targeted by "low level staffers in Cincinnati". Just disagree with the political party cult currently in power at any given time and you'll "get the message" via a nice "come in for an audit" letter. This isn't tin foil, this is our new reality as of the time we allowed them to get away with it. As if we had a choice.

I paid cash for a pickup truck. I had to fill out a special tracking form to flag myself as a possible criminal when I made the large withdrawal at my bank. The bank had no choice but to comply. Some database somewhere had the Boolean for "large cash withdrawals" turned on in it in my data row that day. Another database has "pilot". Another might have "flies in desert southwest regularly", or that's just a table join away. Etc.

Making data collection easier in the world where the databases are allowed to be combined for purposes other than their original intent, even if we believe the intent is "safety", is problematic. At best.
 
You should care. First, the "I'm not doing anything wrong" defense didn't stop IRS targeting of people operating business names that went against a particular political party, for example.

Blatant abuse of seemingly safe data to collect in a database, overall, but used for an inappropriate purpose. Not a soul went to jail over it, either. We all know this.

But one organization did lose its tax exempt status. A liberal women's organization.

So that dog don't hunt.
 
I recall a story a while back in which the FAA tried to bust someone for violating P-40 but he got the ADS-B track to show that he had not. So I guess it works both ways.
 
You should care. First, the "I'm not doing anything wrong" defense didn't stop IRS targeting of people operating business names that went against a particular political party, for example.

Blatant abuse of seemingly safe data to collect in a database, overall, but used for an inappropriate purpose. Not a soul went to jail over it, either. We all know this.

/snip

So you're right in everything you said. And I do care about all kinds of way that data can be used inappropriately.

But I think where you and I may (or maybe not even) disagree is that whether data collection can be stopped. I don't think that can happen. The floodgates have been opened - it's only going to get worse.

What I rather want is a constitutional-level guarantee that data can't be used against you if you do no wrong. Abuse of data should be a crime (and hey... it would be easy to track).
 
But one organization did lose its tax exempt status. A liberal women's organization.

So that dog don't hunt.

Sure it does. Bullying and hazing by federal agencies sends a message and can be really expensive. Using our legal system as a fiscal weapon is easy.

Doing so from an agency that has immunity from
loser-pays, funded by us all via loans, is even easier.

If you want to pretend that's not the issue and investigation defense is free...

So you're right in everything you said. And I do care about all kinds of way that data can be used inappropriately.

But I think where you and I may (or maybe not even) disagree is that whether data collection can be stopped. I don't think that can happen. The floodgates have been opened - it's only going to get worse.

What I rather want is a constitutional-level guarantee that data can't be used against you if you do no wrong. Abuse of data should be a crime (and hey... it would be easy to track).

There's one handle left to pull and it's the de-funding handle. But expect the two major political cults to try to destroy your life any way they can if you touch "their" money.

We all know the price point to play -- it was leaked by wikileaks. If you pay $1.2M to at least one of the cults, you get to whisper in someone's ear... "Hey, you might want to send some Feds over to investigate so and so..." And you get your own private box to watch the cult leaders from too! That isn't speculating, the price sheet was published.

Once you get to that level of the game, you get use the debt against them.

So... You may be right. Stopping or slowing it may not be realistic unless you're playing at that level.
 
You guys really have no clue, do you? The main purpose of ADS-B is to ensure that the chemtrail dispensing airplanes are flying the correct routes at the proper altitude to maximize coverage.
And, I see now that they are expanding the low level spraying program to fill in the "gaps" using the Zika Virus cover story.
 
Back
Top