The US Federal Communications Commission won an important battle in a fight to free up more unlicensed wireless spectrum for Wi-Fi devices. 

A federal appeals court on Friday sided with the FCC in its decision to reallocate a big chunk of key spectrum for an expansion of unlicensed Wi-Fi use. The spectrum had previously been set aside for auto safety.

The US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia rejected a legal challenge from the Intelligent Transportation Society of America and the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials seeking to reverse the FCC’s 2020 decision to repurpose about 60% of the 5.9GHz band spectrum block for unlicensed indoor use to help improve speeds and reduce congestion on 5GHz Wi-Fi networks. 

In 1999, the agency had set aside the spectrum for automakers to develop technology known as Dedicated Short-Range Communications, or DSRC, to allow vehicle-to-vehicle communication in order to avoid crashes. But for more than two decades, the airwaves have gone largely unused. 

The FCC voted unanimously in 2020 on a bipartisan basis to free up that spectrum, which is adjacent to existing unlicensed spectrum in the 5.8GHz band. Freeing up this neighboring spectrum makes it possible for existing equipment to support gigabit Wi-Fi, experts say. This will greatly improve the performance and capacity of Wi-Fi, enabling new applications, such as telemedicine. 

The FCC’s original decision to reallocate the spectrum was met with controversy from the start. In addition to transportation trade groups, the US Department of Transportation also opposed the reallocation.

When the order was adopted, then-FCC Chairman Ajit Pai repeatedly defended the agency’s action, saying the technology that had been slated to use the spectrum had been slow to evolve and had never been widely deployed. 

To address a need for vehicle-to-vehicle communication, the FCC in its original order carved out a 30MHz sliver of spectrum for a more efficient vehicle communication technology called C-V2X, which is supported by chipmaker Qualcomm and some automobile makers. 

Consumer advocacy group Public Knowledge argued that this 30MHz carve-out of spectrum, which will be retained by the auto industry, “is more than sufficient for collision avoidance and safety purposes,” according to a brief the group submitted to the court in support of the FCC’s decision. 

“The D.C. Circuit’s opinion is a victory for the public interest,” Kathleen Burke, policy counsel at Public Knowledge, said in a statement following the court’s decision. “Not only did the court reaffirm the FCC’s authority as the expert agency over spectrum decisions, but it also upheld the FCC’s correct call to stop bankrolling the auto industry’s speculation on Intelligent Transportation Services that were still in development after more than 20 years.”

Broadband groups, such as NCTA, which represents the nation’s largest cable TV and internet providers, also applauded the court’s decision, calling it “an enormous victory for American consumers.”

“The Commission’s unanimous, bipartisan order modernizes a band that was primarily unused for over 20 years,” the group said in a statement. “And today’s court decision enables that important 5.9GHz spectrum to provide consumers with even more reliable high-speed Wi-Fi and access to next-generation automotive safety applications” 

The post FCC Wins Court Battle to Repurpose Auto Safety Spectrum for Wi first appeared on Joggingvideo.com.

During the pandemic, Liora Bram got even more accustomed to juggling work with family. As life began to open up in the spring, and her children returned to their regular routines of school and sports practices, Bram found herself running her small public relations business from her car as she waited for school pickup or on the sidelines at a baseball game. 

She expected her new iPhone 13 and 5G wireless service from Verizon Wireless to help her take her home office mobile. But that’s not what happened. More often than not, she’s found herself unable to access critical apps like Microsoft Outlook because she can’t get a signal. Now she’s just accepted that in some parts of town she has no access.

Bram said she’s chalked up the poor service quality to the fact that she doesn’t live in an urban center and that the 5G signal just may not be robust enough yet. Her town of North Grafton, Massachusetts, is about 40 miles west of Boston. Her community of roughly 7,800 residents isn’t a dense suburban market, but she noted that it’s not exactly rural either. 

“I just assumed that a 5G device and service would mean everything would be faster,” she said. “My phone is my lifeline for managing my work and my household. I just don’t understand why I can’t replicate the connection and experience I get at home wherever I am. That to me was the promise of 5G, and that’s not what I’m getting right now.”

Kevin King, a director of communications for Verizon, said he isn’t sure why Bram is having issues, since the company’s coverage map shows that its 5G Ultra Wideband service is offered in her town. He also said the company is in the midst of expanding its C-band midband spectrum, which today covers more than 100 million people around the country and is expected to cover at least 175 million by the end of the year.  

Still, Bram isn’t alone in her frustration. While we’re still a long way from seeing any of the much-hyped futuristic applications that 5G was supposed to bring, like autonomous vehicles or augmented reality, even the promised higher download speeds and super responsive networks have been inconsistent or simply unavailable to most people, especially those who live outside big cities or dense suburban communities. 

But there’s a potential answer to her 5G coverage issue: more fiber. 

Fiber-optic lines buried underground or strung on utility poles might seem counterintuitive when all you hear about are ads talking about wireless everything, but an investment in old-fashioned physical infrastructure is critical to ensure those wireless signals can get to more places and people.  That’s because those signals don’t actually travel that far — hopping between your phone and a local cell tower or base station that’s hooked into that physical infrastructure. 

There’s reason to be hopeful on the fiber front. The federal government plans to pour more than $42.5 billion into broadband as part of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act signed into law in 2021. The money, which is being distributed through the US Commerce Department’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration directly to states, is supposed to ensure all Americans have access to affordable, consistent high-speed internet. 

Experts have called it a historic opportunity to finally end the digital divide. While the program appears intent on getting fiber connected directly to people’s homes, wireless experts say it could also provide a much needed boost to core infrastructure that can be tapped for mobile 5G in less densely populated areas and rural regions. 

Getting broadband — both wired and wireless — to more places is critical as the affordable housing crisis pushes more people beyond the suburbs in rural and exurban areas. That includes North Grafton, which is close enough to commute to a big city, but not dense enough to be considered a true suburb. Those regions have traditionally suffered from poor service because carriers worry there are too few customers to justify the investment. 

“It’s a big deal,” said Ben Moncrief, executive vice president of C Spire operations in Alabama. The Mississippi-based regional service provider has been building a fiber network throughout Mississippi and Alabama to support its own regional wireless network and deliver fiber broadband to homes and businesses. “This kind of money, especially in rural areas, could accelerate 5G networks and help lots of small carriers get to places they otherwise weren’t able to get to because the population density is too low.”

But wireless experts concede that access to fiber isn’t the only help needed from the feds to make 5G in rural areas a reality.  Rural and smaller wireless carriers still need federal programs to help fund the deployment of next-generation service in these markets, too. 

“Fiber alone is not going to get us nationwide 5G,” said Tim Donovan, senior vice president of legislative affairs for the Competitive Carrier Association. “It’s an important part, but there’s a lot more to it.” 

5G needs fiber

It doesn’t matter which “G” or generation of wireless technology we’re talking about, all wireless networks need to hand off traffic to high-speed, hardwired infrastructure. 

“The first rule of building a wireless network is to get signals out of the air and into the ground at the first available point,” said Gary Bolton, who heads the Fiber Broadband Association. “It’s like building a house, you need a strong foundation of infrastructure. And fiber is key, because it’s future proof.”

Related Stories

• 5G Is Here, but Where Are the Killer Apps?
• Your Next Phone Really Doesn’t Need 5G… Yet
• Fiber Versus 5G: Why the Wired Connection Still Reigns

It’s this future-proofing that led C Spire to start investing in fiber infrastructure in the early 2000s. More than 20 years later, the regional carrier, which operates throughout Mississippi, the Memphis metropolitan area, the Florida Panhandle and parts of Alabama including Mobile, has several thousand miles of fiber-optic cable it uses for backhaul for its wireless business as well as a fiber-to-the-home broadband service. 

“The company leadership recognized a long time ago that fiber was essential to improving the quality of the customers’ wireless experience,” Moncrief said. “It’s just capable of carrying such huge capacity.”

The investment has allowed the company to keep up with larger national players AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile in offering the latest 5G service. 

There are two big technical reasons why fiber backhaul is critical to 5G. First, because 5G is able to connect more devices and will eventually offer real-time feedback to fuel applications, like self-driving cars and advanced augmented reality experiences, it needs lots of capacity to carry all that data. 

Second, true 5G relies on a mix of so-called midband and millimeter wave spectrum that operate at much higher frequencies than the low-band spectrum used to deploy 4G LTE. Because this spectrum is higher frequency, its transmission range is considerably shorter than low-band frequencies used for 4G. This means 5G networks that use midband frequencies in rural areas will need many more cell towers. And those cell towers will need access to more fiber backhaul.

“The future of 5G networks and really any next-generation network depends upon our ability to densify, enrich and build out as much fiber as quickly as we can,” said Chip Pickering, a former Republican congressman from Mississippi and now CEO of Incompas, a trade association advocating for competition policy across all networks. “Whether it’s 5G, low-orbit satellite, fixed wireless, small cell wireless network; the more fiber we have around the country, the more it enables all the other types of network technologies to be high capacity, highly reliable, and redundant.”

The promise of federal money 

Building wireless and broadband networks in rural America is incredibly expensive, and in some places, it’s nearly impossible due to the terrain. But in most cases, the real barrier is low population density. Broadband and wireless providers simply won’t offer service if they can’t get enough customers to pay for it. 

It’s a problem that policymakers have faced for decades as they try to close the digital divide. Despite billions of dollars being spent by the federal government to subsidize the cost of building infrastructure throughout the country, the lack of connectivity in rural America still persists.

This is where NTIA’s Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment program and other programs funded by the Jobs Act come in. The Jobs Act allocated $42.5 billion to go toward building broadband access in areas of the country where it doesn’t yet exist. NTIA has also established another $1 billion program to provide funding for middle mile projects, which is the part of the internet infrastructure serving regional networks.

As part of its rules, the agency stated it will prioritize projects that will “provision service via end-to-end fiber-optic facilities to each end-user premises.” The main objective by making fiber a priority is to ensure that federal dollars are being spent on infrastructure that can be easily and affordably upgraded in the future. But NTIA also noted the importance of leveraging the fiber for other technology, like next-generation wireless because “new fiber deployments will facilitate the deployment and growth of 5G and other advanced wireless services, which rely extensively on fiber for essential backhaul,” the agency said in its published rules.

Access to fiber could be especially beneficial to smaller rural carriers, most of which can’t afford to build their own fiber backhaul networks.  According to a cost model analysis commissioned by CCA in 2021, the total price tag to offer ubiquitous 5G coverage in unserved rural markets would be about $36 billion. Access to fiber backhaul would put a big dent in that cost. 

“If the fiber is readily available for carriers to access for backhaul, we can take that cost down by $6 billion,” CCA’s Donovan said. “So that’s a significant savings that can help get 5G built everywhere, even in the most rural and remote areas.”

Not as easy as it sounds 

If NTIA is able to fulfill its mission of getting fiber deeper into more communities, it could be a game-changer for 5G in rural markets. And 5G in these markets means that the aspirational applications like autonomous vehicles or round-the-clock mobile medical monitoring can actually become reality, because to truly make these applications useful, a network needs to be ubiquitous even for folks just driving or passing through those regions. 

But Donovan offers one big caveat: Small carriers still need access to this infrastructure, which is easier said than done. He said there are places today in rural areas where fiber already exists, but smaller carriers still can’t get access to it.

“If a fiber provider won’t make it available for a reasonable price, you basically have an interstate highway without an on-ramp,” he said.

Donovan also emphasized that backhaul is only one piece of the puzzle. Smaller rural carriers still need federal funding and support through the Federal Communications Commission’s Universal Service Fund programs to make 5G a reality in rural and less densely populated regions of the country. 

“We’ve been building wireless networks for 40 years now in this country,” he said. “If there’s a place that hasn’t been served yet, there’s probably a reason. Financial support through USF and other federal programs specific to the 5G deployment are still going to be an important part of fixing this issue, along with having access to wireless spectrum.”

For Bram and the hundreds of thousands of others out there waiting for 5G to truly come to their town, the ubiquitous coverage can’t come soon enough. 

“Right now it feels like things were actually better with my old 4G phone and service,” she said. “And that’s really frustrating. All I want is for things to work consistently, so I can stop stressing.”

The post Why Fiber Is the Key to Getting Faster 5G Everywhere first appeared on Joggingvideo.com.

What’s happening

AT&T and Verizon agree to delay the rollout of 5G on C-band spectrum for another year, while the FAA ensures affected aircraft upgrade their altimeters to avoid interference issues.

Why it matters

The FAA says it’s been working closely with wireless carriers and airlines to make sure there are no flight delays and to ensure the widest possible access to 5G service.

The Federal Aviation Administration has struck a deal with AT&T and Verizon to once again delay the rollout of some 5G radios until July 2023 to give airlines more time to retrofit airplane equipment and ensure there won’t be interference issues. 

This latest delay comes after the carriers and the FAA agreed in January to postpone the rollout of 5G near some airport runways through July 5 of this year. The two nationwide carriers began rolling out their upgrade to their 5G networks with so-called C-band spectrum on Jan. 5. 

The radio airwaves, which the carriers spent a combined $70 billion acquiring last year, were poised to provide a big boost to their 5G speed and coverage. 

But the carriers agreed to hold off on deploying the service around certain airports as part of a deal worked out between the FAA and the airlines. The FAA and airlines are concerned that signals from 5G service using the C-band spectrum could interfere with receivers on altimeters that use a nearby spectrum band. Altimeters are instruments used on planes to detect the ground when landing in low visibility conditions. 

Now playing:
Watch this:

Why the FAA is freaking out about 5G

12:25

“We believe we have identified a path that will continue to enable aviation and 5G C-band wireless to safely co-exist,” FAA Acting Administrator Billy Nolen said Friday in a statement. “We appreciate the willingness of Verizon and AT&T to continue this important and productive collaboration with the aviation industry.”

Verizon said Friday in a statement the latest agreement will allow the company to “lift the voluntary limitations on our 5G network deployment around airports in a staged approach over the coming months.”  

AT&T said Friday that through the months of working with the FAA, it had “developed a more tailored approach to controlling signal strength around runways that allows us to activate more towers and increase signal strength.” AT&T said in its statement it had voluntarily “chosen in good faith to implement these more tailored precautionary measures so that airlines have additional time to retrofit equipment.”

Tensions between the wireless carriers and the FAA became public last year before the rollout began for 5G service using C-band spectrum. In November, the FAA began threatening to restrict flights over concerns that the 5G service would cause interference on some altimeters. 

The carriers agreed to delay the rollout of their service, but the issue came to head in January when the carriers began turning on the service and major international airlines, including Emirates, Japan Airlines and ANA, started canceling flights involving Boeing-made planes to several major US airports.  

The airlines resumed flights within days as the FAA began issuing new approvals for aircraft it knew would not be affected by potential interference. 

But the process to ensure the interference issues are mitigated for all aircraft has been a slow one. In April, Department of Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg told US senators that the technological fix to address the FAA’s concerns “won’t be completely resolved by this summer” and that it remained a “top concern.” 

The FAA said Friday that the phased approach requires operators of regional aircraft with radio altimeters most susceptible to interference to retrofit their planes with radio frequency filters by the end of 2022.  The agency also said it’s also been working with wireless carriers to identify airports where they can safely boost the signals of their 5G service without disrupting flight schedules.

The FAA added that airlines and other operators of aircraft using radio altimeters that are affected must install filters as soon as possible. The agency expects the work to retrofit altimeters to be largely completed by July 2023. 

“After that time, the wireless companies expect to operate their networks in urban areas with minimal restrictions,” the FAA said in its statement.

The post AT&T and Verizon Agree to Another 5G Delay Around Airports first appeared on Joggingvideo.com.

Apple’s next big iPhone update, iOS 16, will bring a collection of new features to your iPhone. Previewed at WWDC 2022 last week, its features will include the ability to edit messages you already sent in the Messages app; new tools to personalize your iPhone, like how your lock screen looks; and new automations for sharing pictures in Photo Libraries with friends. 

Now playing:
Watch this:

Watch Everything Announced at Apple’s WWDC 2022 Event

14:37

But all these goodies will only be available to people with the iPhone 8 and later models. This means any phones introduced in 2016 or earlier, including the iPhone 6S, iPhone SE and iPhone 7, won’t be getting Apple software updates anymore. It’s not an unexpected move, given that the company regularly retires software support on older devices. 

To be clear, if you have an older device, it and all your apps should continue to work for now even without the update with all the shiny new features. But since you won’t be getting new iOS updates, that could leave your device vulnerable to hacks and malware because software updates also often include patches for bugs. Apple may continue to offer some security updates to these older devices, as it’s done with iPhone 5 and iPhone 6 devices. But even if it does, it’s likely the updates will only include critical vulnerabilities, which could still leave devices open to attack. To keep up with potential vulnerabilities and to see what, if any, security updates will be available to you, be sure to keep your eye on Apple Security updates. 

See also

• WWDC 2022 Recap: iOS 16 and Everything Else Apple Announced
• Apple M2 MacBook Air Hands-On: Bigger Screen, Higher Price
• iOS 16 Features iPhone Users Are Going to Love Most

For more, read up on everything Apple announced at WWDC 2022. This includes WatchOS 9, MacOS Ventura and the M2 MacBook Air. 

The post Will Your iPhone Get iOS 16? Everything to Know first appeared on Joggingvideo.com.

Some members of Congress have raised concerns that a new 5G cellphone service’s potential interference with airplane altimeters could disrupt flights and further delay the service’s full rollout. 

The deal wireless carriers and the Federal Aviation Administration had agreed to earlier this year, which delays the carriers’ activation of some 5G towers close to airport runways, is expiring later this summer. And lawmakers in Congress want to make sure another public spat doesn’t erupt during the busy travel season. 

“We’re seeing passenger travel go up. We know that we have supply chain problems, and I’m very worried that we could be back in a situation for those approximately 5% of airports where 5G has not been turned on near them,” Sen. Susan Collins, a Republican from Maine, said during an oversight hearing in April. 

Collins was referring to a debacle earlier this year in which the wireless industry and the aviation industry publicly clashed over deployment of the newest version of 5G service. On one side were wireless providers eager to activate the high-speed networks for their customers, and on the other were aviation regulators and airlines warning that the signals could interfere with key equipment in airplanes. 

Tensions came to a head in January when AT&T and Verizon started turning on that 5G service around the country using newly acquired wireless spectrum in what’s known as the C-band. Concerned that the signals could disrupt aircraft altimeters used for landing in poor visibility, major international airlines, including Emirates, Japan Airlines and ANA, started canceling flights involving Boeing-made planes to several major US airports.  

Now playing:
Watch this:

How 5G Sparked a Battle Between Airlines and Wireless…

9:20

But within days, airlines resumed flights as the FAA began issuing new approvals that allowed almost 80% of commercial airliners to perform low-visibility landings at airports covered by both Verizon’s and AT&T’s rollouts. 

The battle, however, may not be over, as US Department of Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg told senators last month that the technological fix to address the FAA’s concerns “won’t be completely resolved by this summer” and that it remained a “top concern.” 

While he added that the wireless and aviation industries are now working well together to resolve these issues, the public spat revealed just how dysfunctional the coordination efforts among some federal agencies has been in terms of repurposing and getting critical airwaves into use for new 5G communication services. Specifically, the drama between the FAA and the Department of Transportation (which runs the agency) and the wireless industry and its regulator, the Federal Communications Commission, has a long history, which resulted in a high-stakes game of chicken. 

Related Stories

• Verizon’s and AT&T’s C-Band 5G Upgrade: From Airports to Rollouts, the Latest on What You Need to Know
• AT&T and Verizon Agree to Pause 5G Rollout Over FAA Safety Concerns
• Airline Industry Warns Upcoming 5G Deployment Could Cause Hiccups for Travelers

Now playing:
Watch this:

Why the FAA is freaking out about 5G

12:25

There’s a lot at stake. In an FCC auction last year, AT&T and Verizon, the nation’s two largest wireless companies, spent a combined $70 billion to acquire the spectrum needed to roll out their much-hyped 5G services to customers. Though they’ve continually disputed the aviation industry’s predictions that the networks will endanger passenger flights, the carriers twice agreed to delay the network deployments as they negotiated with the DOT and the FAA. Amid the airlines’ threats of massive flight disruptions, AT&T and Verizon announced yet another agreement with the aviation regulator. They would deploy their 5G service but delayed turning on some 5G towers near airport runways. 

That voluntary agreement is set to expire in July. The FAA says it is making significant strides to identify planes that may have problematic altimeters and to clear planes that use altimeters with appropriate filters that mitigate interference risk. The agency has put together an interactive map depicting which airports around the country may be affected. The vast majority of airports around the US have 90% or more of their planes cleared for landing in low-visibility approaches. 

Buttigieg said it will take time to resolve the issues fully, but he’s confident a solution will be found.

“We are doing everything we can to pursue the technological solutions that I think will be the ultimate long-range fix for this, while in the meantime continuing to pursue and support the negotiated solutions, which I would note have have really worked on a voluntary basis up to now and I think that is a credit to the collaborative spirit that we were able to reach across industries and players,” he said.

AT&T and Verizon echoed Buttigieg’s optimism that the two industries will continue to work together until the technical issues are sorted out without major disruption to air travel or 5G service. 

“We continue to work closely and collaboratively with the FAA, and we are encouraged by the progress made thus far. We expect that progress to continue,” said Alex Byers, director of Corporate Communications at AT&T.

Verizon said in a statement that it is “very encouraged by the collaboration and pace in which the FAA, the FCC, and the airline and communications industries have addressed and cleared issues with 5G networks around many airports.”

The company also added that it’s “highly confident that the small and declining number of outstanding questions will be resolved sooner than later, without a significant impact to airline operations or the availability of 5G at airports.”  

So how did we get here? This FAQ will explain.

What is 5G again?

5G is the next generation of wireless service, which is built to increase network speeds and make them more responsive. The technology could help make applications like autonomous vehicles a reality and will deliver new AR and VR experiences to smartphones. 

Midband spectrum, such as the C-band, is important for 5G deployments because it offers both geographic coverage and the capacity to transmit large amounts of data. This combination is especially appealing to wireless giants that have been trying to fill out their spectrum portfolios. 

Why are the airlines worried about interference issues with 5G?

The aviation industry is concerned that wireless carriers’ 5G radios using C-band spectrum will interfere with aircraft altimeters, which are used to measure altitude. Altimeters calculate the distance between an airplane and the ground by transmitting radio frequency signals and measuring the time it takes for those signals to bounce back. Though a malfunctioning altimeter is a big problem anytime during flight, it’s especially dangerous in foggy or hazy conditions when pilots are descending during approach and can’t clearly see a runway. A crash could result, which is at the core of the FAA’s worry. 

The problem is that altimeter receivers operate in the 4.2GHz to 4.4GHz range on the radio frequency spectrum. The C-band of spectrum that the wireless industry is using to deploy 5G service is between 3.7GHz and 3.98GHz, which is basically next door. 

Did the FCC do anything to mitigate interference with altimeters or anything else?

Yes, because the agency regulates the nation’s airwaves. Interference is a common problem whenever spectrum is reallocated, but the FCC and other wireless experts say there are ways to ensure coexistence between applications using spectrum in close proximity. For example, filters on altimeter receivers could reduce the interfering “noise” from the 5G signals emanating from towers near airports.

To help reduce the chance for interference between 5G users on C-band and altimeters, the FCC allocated a large guard band of 220MHz where no one would transmit signals, a significant buffer. The FCC had actually doubled that guard band from what Boeing had originally requested in its filing to the agency during the public comment period, and the FCC’s engineers concluded the guard band was sufficient. 

So what’s the problem? Why are the FAA and the airlines still worried?

The aviation industry and the FAA cite a report from October 2020 that concluded even with the guard band, there was possible harmful interference. The agency contends that the FCC has ignored its concerns about interference. Now that the spectrum is being deployed, the FAA believes the possibility of interference poses too great a risk to the public, which is why it has issued warnings and restrictions.

What does the FCC say about these interference issues? 

The FCC says it hasn’t ignored these concerns. It just disagrees with the FAA’s conclusions. It has reiterated that after years of study, its engineers believe there’s no meaningful interference between 5G devices operating in C-band and aircraft systems.

In a statement on Jan. 18, FCC chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel said she is confident that 5G “deployment can safely co-exist with aviation technologies in the United States, just as it does in other countries around the world.” 

What about the wireless carriers? What’s their reaction been?

The wireless industry trade group CTIA and the carriers themselves expressed frustration early on in the conflict with the FAA and the aviation industry. They stand with the FCC and point to the fact that roughly 40 countries have deployed the C-band spectrum for 5G without reports of harmful interference with aviation equipment. Japan, the home country of both JAL and ANA, is one of them.

AT&T CEO John Stankey and Verizon CEO Hans Vestberg said in a letter to Buttigieg and FAA Administrator Steve Dickson in early January that the concerns are overblown. 

“The laws of physics are the same in the United States and France,” they said. “If US airlines are permitted to operate flights every day in France, then the same operating conditions should allow them to do so in the United States.”

Still, AT&T and Verizon reluctantly made concessions. In November, they agreed to delay deployment of 5G until early January, allowing more time to the FAA to test altimeters. They also offered to reduce the power levels on their 5G radios around airports. 

When the FAA said it still needed more time on the eve of the 5G launch in early January, they agreed to another two-week delay, to Jan. 19. At that time, they also agreed to put in place 5G exclusion zones within 1.5 miles of airports, which is the same standard used in France, where similar spectrum is deployed for 5G.

But it was clear at the time that the carriers were unhappy about the situation. They felt the DOT, FAA and aviation industry were being unreasonable. 

Why did airlines start canceling flights? What happened to the earlier agreement? 

Days before the carriers were set to deploy their networks, the FAA put out a notice stating that only 45% of the aircraft used by US airlines had been cleared to fly. This meant that for the remaining 55% it was unknown whether 5G interference would be a problem. 

As a result, airlines began canceling flights for airliners that weren’t part of the FAA’s initial clearance list. The airlines stated they couldn’t fly their planes if there was a chance of a catastrophic accident. 

Which airplanes were initially deemed to be problematic and why?

The airlines canceled flights that used a variant of the Boeing 777. It has a radio altimeter that was thought to be particularly susceptible. A long-haul, high-capacity plane, the 777 is popular with airlines both in the US (like American and United) and around the world. Also affected was the Boeing 747-8, which flies largely with cargo airlines. But following an FAA update, the two aircraft were cleared. 

A new deal was struck. What’s in the new agreement? 

Verizon and AT&T went ahead with their deployment, as planned. But they agreed to enlarge the exclusion zones to two miles around certain airports for six months. This is the agreement set to expire in July. By expanding the exclusion, they have turned down the power or turned off transmission of 5G radio signals on the C-band spectrum in these areas around key airports. 

Meanwhile, the FAA has continued its work to test altimeters. The agency has put together an interactive map where the public can check which planes have been cleared and what airports may still be affected by the issues. 

Why did the FAA and aviation industry wait until just before 5G service on this spectrum was launched, to make these concerns public?

They didn’t, says Diana Furchtgott-Roth, a former deputy secretary at the Department of Transportation, who has worked on spectrum issues. She said the DOT, FAA and industry have been vocal about their concerns for more than a year. 

She pointed to a letter the DOT and the FAA sent in December 2020 before the C-band auction to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, the government agency tasked with being the go-between for government agencies and the FCC on spectrum issues, expressing their concern of interference. They wanted to ensure that their comments were part of the FCC’s public record on reallocating the C-band spectrum. 

But Furchtgott-Roth said NTIA never submitted that letter to the FCC. Meanwhile, 12 aviation trade groups, including the Aerospace Industries Association and the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association, filed concerns with the FCC to halt the C-band auction amid interference concerns. 

Furchtgott-Roth said that a letter from another federal agency would have held more weight in terms of the public record had it been filed.

“It would have been a signal to these wireless companies that there was something problematic with the spectrum,” she said. “And they might have altered their bids for the spectrum.”

How does this whole debacle impact wireless consumers? 

AT&T and Verizon have been deploying 5G using the C-band spectrum largely as they had planned. But until the voluntary agreement expires this summer, 5G signals using this spectrum will be diminished within the two-mile exclusion zones around airports. That means that anyone living in areas close to these airports or passengers waiting for flights will either not have access to this 5G service or it will be greatly diminished in performance or capacity. 

It’s unclear exactly how many consumers have been affected. Some airports don’t have residential areas within the two-mile exclusion zone, while others, like LaGuardia in New York City, likely have thousands of homes nearby. 

This is a situation where the wireless carriers are taking their cues from the FAA and not the FCC. How unusual is this?

This is highly unusual. It could signal bigger problems down the road, as the FCC looks to free up more spectrum for commercial use.

What’s next? What’s the long-term fix to this issue? 

 A number of things still need to be done in order to resolve this issue once and for all. 

1. The aviation industry and the FAA need to identify which altimeters are vulnerable to interference. The FAA is already working on this. 
2. Once problematic altimeters are identified, there needs to be a process to change them or add filters so that they’re no longer vulnerable to interference from 5G signals. 

3. There needs to be a set of standards for altimeters going forward so that any new devices have the proper filtering technology so they can coexist with 5G signals. 

All of this requires continued collaboration among the wireless and aviation industries and their regulators. That is already starting to happen. In February, the FCC and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration or NTIA, which helps coordinate the use of spectrum among federal agencies, announced a new initiative to “address gaps” in how they manage spectrum allocation. As part of the effort, the agencies will update a memorandum of understanding on spectrum duties. 

“Now more than ever we need a whole-of-government approach to spectrum policy,” the FCC’s Rosenworcel said earlier this year  “Over the past few years, we’ve seen the cost of not having one, and we need a nonstop effort to fix that.” 

But at the end of the day, Furchtgott-Roth said, the American public should be grateful the FAA has remained vigilant. 

“It might be a mess, but passengers are going to be safe,” she said. “No one has to be afraid of flying, because the FAA always errs on the side of safety. They’re simply not going to let a plane land or take off unless they’re absolutely sure it’s safe.”

The post The Aviation Industry’s Ongoing Beef With 5G: Everything You Need to Know first appeared on Joggingvideo.com.

What’s happening

The FCC is adopting new regulations to stop international scam robocalls.

Why it matters

Robocalls are the No. 1 complaint to the FCC, and scammers have swindled billions of dollars out of Americans. Slowing the flow of these calls is a top priority for the agency, and it’s trying to close remaining loopholes.

The US Federal Communications Commission has prioritized fighting illegal robocalls over the past few years, and the agency continues to turn up the heat in 2022. Last week, the agency passed regulations targeted at overseas phone scammers, but the push to end robocalls is far from finished.

At its May public meeting, the FCC voted on its latest effort to protect consumers. It’s going after international scam robocall campaigns that enter American networks through so-called gateway providers. These gateway providers, which are smaller, low-profile companies that hand off calls from network to network, are often used by foreign scammers to disguise phone calls entering the US. The new FCC requirements will ensure that the gateway providers are verifying calls before they pass them on to other operators in the states. 

“Robocalls are aggravating,” FCC Chair Jessica Rosenworcel said at the FCC’s May open meeting.  “What is worse is when we crack down on these junk calls, the scam artists behind them find new ways to reach us. Increasingly, that means robocalls are coming in from overseas.  In fact, one study suggests that last year as much as two-thirds of this stuff may now come from abroad.”

She added that now is the time to “get tough on international robocalls” and to “cut these calls off before they reach our shores, our homes, and our phones.”

These new rules for gateway providers, which were adopted unanimously by the FCC at its meeting last week, are the latest in a long series of actions taken by the FCC to curb illegal robocalls. In February, Rosenworcel proposed another set of rules aimed at protecting consumers from automated ringless calls. 

For years, the scourge of illegal robocalls has plagued the public. It’s the No. 1 consumer complaint and a top priority at the FCC. Since June 30, 2021, every major voice provider in the US, including phone companies AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile and cable provider Comcast, has been required to implement a technology called Stir/Shaken, which is designed to curb the tide of spam calls by requiring voice providers to verify where calls are coming from. 

In addition to implementing Stir/Shaken, the FCC has also been building partnerships with state and district attorneys general to ensure cooperation in robocall investigations. In March, the agency announced it was adding seven AGs to its list, bringing the total number of partnerships to 22. 

Here is what the FCC and others have been doing to stamp out robocalls:

Now playing:
Watch this:

Robocalls from spoofed numbers truly seem off the charts….

11:29

What is Stir/Shaken and how does it fit into the FCC’s efforts to curb illegal robocalls? 

Stir/Shaken is a technology that ensures calls traveling through phone networks have their caller ID “signed” as legitimate by originating carriers and validated by other carriers before the calls reach you. In short, the technology authenticates a phone call’s origin and makes certain the information on the caller ID matches.

In 2019 Congress passed the Telephone Robocall Abuse Criminal Enforcement and Deterrence (Traced) Act, which mandated that the FCC come up with rules requiring all voice service providers to use this protocol to stop caller ID spoofing. The FCC set a deadline of June 30, 2021, for all major carriers to implement the technology. 

What is caller ID spoofing?

Spoofing is when callers disguise their identity to deliberately falsify information transmitted to your caller ID display. Scammers do this to make calls less easily traceable. Also, by using so-called neighbor spoofing, which makes it appear as though the number is a local one that you may already know or trust, scammers try to trick you into picking up a call. 

What else was included in the Traced Act to fight illegal robocalls?

In addition to the Stir/Shaken mandate, the legislation required the FCC to set up the Robocall Mitigation Database, and it required all voice providers to provide detailed information to this database that describes how they are implementing Stir/Shaken and to explain what other efforts they’ve made to stop illegal robocalls. The law also gave the FCC authority to fine companies that fail to certify their efforts to stop robocalls.

Additionally, the law required the FCC to establish rules and to select a single industry group to be in charge of tracing the origin of suspected illegal robocalls. In 2020, the FCC designated USTelecom’s Industry Traceback Group as the official consortium for coordinating traceback efforts. By law, voice providers are required to cooperate with traceback requests from ITG. 

The law also expanded the authority and reach of state and federal law enforcement to go after illegal robocallers. 

Are all carriers required to use Stir/Shaken?

Previously, the FCC had given small providers, those with fewer than 100,000 subscribers, until June 30, 2023, to implement Stir/Shaken. The extension was meant to allow smaller providers to evaluate the implementation costs and plan deployment. But in December, the FCC pushed up the deadline by a year for some smaller providers, because the agency said there’s evidence a large volume of illegal robocalls are coming from a subset of smaller providers.

Has Stir/Shaken slowed the flow of robocalls?

Stir/Shaken on its own hasn’t had a major effect on robocalls, experts say. Like a game of whack-a-mole, whenever regulators or law enforcement smack down one way that robocalls are made, scammers change tactics and use a different method. Experts say that’s what happened after Stir/Shaken went into effect. Illegal robocallers moved away from using spoofed phone numbers made to look like a call is coming from a neighbor. Now they’re buying lists of real phone numbers to trick spam-blocking software into letting the calls through. 

What about other efforts to curb robocalls?

Alex Quilici, CEO of Youmail, which tracks and analyzes robocall traffic, said there are reasons to be optimistic that efforts to curb robocalls are working. He said the total volume of these annoying calls has dropped since its peak in 2019. Americans received 50.5 billion robocalls in 2021, a 14% lower volume than the peak year of 2019, with over 58 billion robocalls, but approximately 10% higher than 2020, with 45.9 billion robocalls.

“Overall, there’s been a decline in robocall volume when you look at it over an extended period of time,” Quilici said in an interview.

He attributes this to increased enforcement action by the FCC, the Federal Trade Commission and state law enforcement. He said that traceback efforts have helped identify scammers and that those efforts are leading enforcement agencies to shut down these operations and to impose hefty fines. He added that wireless operators are also taking a more active role in tracing and blocking calls, which has also helped. 

So does this mean that Stir/Shaken has been a big failure?

No, not at all. Qulici said Stir/Shaken has been very helpful because it’s pushed the bad actors to use legitimate phone numbers, which can be more easily traced. 

“Stir/Shaken has definitely been helpful,” he said. “But it’s just one piece of the puzzle.”

The real problem is that there’s a lot of money to be made in scamming people, which is what continues to fuel criminals’ efforts. Robocalls are cheap to make, and scammers all over the world use them to defraud billions of dollars from Americans every year. 

Why is the FCC focused on gateway providers?

While Stir/Shaken and other FCC efforts have made a dent in slowing these annoying calls, experts note there’s still a big problem in stopping the calls coming from outside the US, because US regulators and law enforcement are unable to enforce US laws overseas. 

“We’re hearing from a lot of the domestic carriers that an increasing number of calls are coming from abroad — the ones that look like they’re scams,” the FCC’s Rosenworcel said in an interview with CNET last summer. She added that it has been especially challenging for US regulators and law enforcement to trace criminals back into “jurisdictions where there might be some actors who can scurry away before we can find them.” 

While the US may not be able to go after these criminals overseas, they can try to stop the calls from entering the US. And that’s where the new rules for gateway providers comes in. 

The new FCC regulations will require gateway providers to stop robocalls as they enter the US. The proposed regulation would put additional requirements on US-based gateway providers that pass voice traffic to other networks in the states. 

What will the FCC’s latest rules actually do?

The new FCC regulations require gateway providers to cooperate with FCC enforcement efforts and react quickly to trace illegal robocalls to their source. Failure to follow the proposed rules could result in fines from the FCC and could lead to mandatory blocking by other network operators in the US, essentially ending the gateway providers’ ability to operate.

What’s next in the fight to end robocalls?

Lawmakers in Congress have proposed legislation to impose stiffer penalties on illegal robocallers and fraudsters. Sens. John Thune, a Republican from South Dakota, and Ed Markey, a Democrat from Massachusetts, introduced the Robocall Trace Back Enhancement Act. It would provide liability protections for privately led efforts to trace back the origins of illegal and abusive robocalls. The two Senate Commerce Committee members had authored the Traced Act.

A group of 51 attorneys general led by North Carolina Attorney General Josh Stein, a Democrat, and Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody, a Republican, are calling on the FCC to reduce unwanted robocallers’ access to real phone numbers.

“With coordinated activity — with many more mallets smacking this problem — we’re going to be more capable of bringing it to a stop,” Rosenworcel said in a CNET interview last year. 

“We’re just getting started. We have more work to do, and we have a new vigor to make it happen.”

Youmail’s Quilici said he’s confident that the combined efforts from the FCC, law enforcement and the carriers, which are also identifying and blocking robocalls, will significantly curb the volume of robocalls. But he said the bad news is that as volumes decline, criminals will likely make their scams more targeted. For example, scammers may target senior citizens with calls about Medicare prescription benefits, or new college graduates may get scammed by callers pretending to be student loan administrators.

“If you’re a bad guy and you can find a way to target just the 50,000 people who are really going to respond to your scam, you don’t need to make 100 million calls anymore,” he said. “That’s good news in terms of not getting bombarded with calls. But without the high volume in traffic to trace and follow, those scams aimed at people like missiles are really hard to detect.”

The post The FCC Wants Scammers to Stop Calling You first appeared on Joggingvideo.com.

The State Department on Monday launched a new cybersecurity bureau in an effort to make digital security a part of US foreign policy at a time when authoritarian regimes in Russia and China are increasingly trying to influence the internet.

The move revives a bureaucratic structure that had been dismantled by the Trump administration, which was looking to cut red tape and streamline the diplomatic office. The new bureau will put in place a high-ranking cyber diplomat along with other diplomatic personnel and expertise to focus on addressing cyberthreats, global internet freedom, surveillance risks and to work with US allies to set international norms and standards on emerging technology. 

Secretary of State Antony Blinken had announced the establishment of the new Bureau of Cyberspace and Digital Policy at the State Department in October as part of an effort to reorganize and modernize the agency to meet 21st century needs. 

The new agency comes as Russia wages war in Ukraine and experts warn that the war could spur cyberwarfare meant to take out critical infrastructure like electrical grids, banks and communications. Such attacks can cause widespread destruction and are potentially deadly if they close hospitals and nursing homes. While no widespread attack has been waged thus far, the potential exists, experts say. 

Meanwhile, the US has long worried about cyberattacks from China. In July, the Biden administration blamed China for the cyberattack on the Microsoft Exchange email server software in early 2021. It said hackers linked to China’s Ministry of State Security exploited vulnerabilities to “compromise tens of thousands of computers and networks worldwide.”

The US government has also adopted policies to limit or ban certain companies with ties to the Russian and Chinese governments from doing business in the US, for fear that the technologies from those companies could be used to spy on Americans or attack US communications networks. 

The new bureau is being established more than four years after then-Secretary of State Rex Tillerson merged the Office of the Coordinator for Cyber Issues with another State Department office. In the final days of the Trump administration, then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo tried to reestablish the Bureau of Cybersecurity and Emerging Technology.

The establishment of a new bureau within the State Department has gotten bipartisan support. Earlier this year, the House passed the Cyber Diplomacy Act, which would establish a cybersecurity bureau at the State Department and ensure it’s led by an official appointed by the president with the level of ambassador. 

The State Department said Monday that the new office will include three policy units: international cyberspace security, international information and communications policy, and digital freedom. Eventually, the bureau will be led by a Senate-confirmed ambassador-at-large. Until President Joe Biden appoints and the Senate confirms someone to this position, Jennifer Bachus, a career member of the Senior Foreign Service, will serve as principal deputy assistant secretary for the new bureau, starting Monday, the agency announced. 

The post State Department Launches New Cybersecurity Bureau first appeared on Joggingvideo.com.

The Federal Communications Commission banned two more Chinese-owned telecommunication companies from operating in the US market, as it continues to be wary that companies with ties to the Chinese government could pose national security threats. 

In a 4-0 vote on Wednesday, the agency barred Pacific Networks and its wholly owned subsidiary ComNet from providing domestic and international service to customers in the US.  The move is the latest in a series of actions the FCC has taken to guard against potential espionage in US communications networks from China. In January, the FCC revoked China Unicom’s authorization to operate in the US, and last year did the same for China Telecom Americas. It has also banned gear from telecommunications companies Huawei and ZTE. 

The agency’s vote on Wednesday is part of a greater effort by the US government to crack down on China’s role in US telecommunications, amid concerns that equipment or services operated by Chinese companies with close ties to the Chinese government could be used to gather intelligence and spy on Americans.

The move is another indication that President Joe Biden is following a similar hard-line policy toward China to that of his predecessor, President Donald Trump, who also banned 5G wireless technology from Chinese companies. 

National security agencies have warned for years of the dangers of using gear from Chinese companies, such as Huawei and ZTE, and of letting Chinese telecommunications service providers operate in the US. Politicians on Capitol Hill have been sounding the alarm, too.

FCC Chair Jessica Rosenworcel said the agency’s actions are part of a greater effort to ensure that Americans trust the security of the US communications networks. 

“Communications networks depend on trust,” she said. “That’s why during the past year the Federal Communications Commission has made it a priority to increase trust with a series of initiatives to support network security.”

Chinese officials have long denied allegations that state-owned companies are being used for espionage in the US. They say that there is no evidence to support the US claims and that the bans are a tactic to stifle competition from Chinese companies. 

“The US has flagrantly overstretched the concept of national security and abused state power to hobble a Chinese company, which gravely undermines international trade rules and hurts the legitimate rights and interests of global consumers including those in the US,” said Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian, during a press conference in January. “The Chinese government supports companies concerned in defending their own interests in accordance with law, and will continue to take necessary measures to resolutely safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese companies.”

The post FCC Revokes Authorization of More Chinese Telecom Providers first appeared on Joggingvideo.com.

The recent clash between the aviation industry and wireless carriers over safety concerns due to interference with 5G mobile signals has highlighted what many critics say is a dysfunctional process for managing the nation’s spectrum resources. Now the two federal agencies tasked with managing US spectrum say they’ve got a plan they hope will head off disputes before they become major problems. 

The Federal Communications Commission and National Telecommunications and Information Administration announced Tuesday a new initiative to “address gaps” in how they manage spectrum allocation. As part of the effort, the agencies will update a memorandum of understanding on spectrum duties. 

The effort to improve coordination comes just weeks after a major dispute between the Federal Aviation Administration and the FCC resulted in airlines canceling flights due to concerns that wireless carriers’ deployment of 5G using so-called C-band of spectrum would interfere with radio altimeters in planes used for low-visibility landings. The FAA and the wireless industry have agreed to temporary fixes to the issue, but experts say the underlying issue could take years to resolve. 

Now playing:
Watch this:

Why the FAA is freaking out about 5G

12:25

The heads of the FAA and Department of Transportation have criticized NTIA under former President Donald Trump’s administration for not passing along a letter to the FCC before the C-band was auctioned off in late 2020. They claim their safety concerns over potential interference with 5G signals and altimeters weren’t taken seriously The FAA eventually side-stepped NTIA and took their concerns directly to President Joe Biden’s administration. When the issues could not be resolved, the FAA issued warnings to airports, which led to AT&T and Verizon delaying the initial deployment of their C-band spectrum and resulted in some airlines disrupting flights. 

As part of Tuesday’s announcement, the heads of the FCC and the NTIA say they will increase direct communication between the agencies and hold “formal, regular meetings, beginning monthly, to conduct joint spectrum planning.” They also said they would more clearly define their roles for managing spectrum, collaborate on a spectrum allocation policy, and cooperatively develop a process for analyzing spectrum interference and compatibility.

“Now more than ever we need a whole-of-government approach to spectrum policy,” FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel said in a statement Tuesday.  “Over the past few years, we’ve seen the cost of not having one, and we need a non-stop effort to fix that.” 

NTIA is an agency within the Commerce Department that oversees the use of spectrum by federal agencies. It advises the president on spectrum matters. By contrast, the FCC is an independent regulatory agency that manages the nation’s commercial spectrum.  Disputes between the two agencies often arise as the interests of their constituencies, federal spectrum users and commercial users collide. 

One such example is the controversy over the FCC’s allocation of 5G spectrum to satellite company Ligado. NTIA, the Department of Transportation and the US Defense Department argued against the FCC’s move to allow Ligado to use the spectrum, saying that the 5G service would interfere with GPS service that operated using nearby spectrum. 

Spectrum policy experts, like Harold Feld of Public Knowledge, said on Twitter following the announcement that the fact that Rosenworcel and NTIA Administrator Alan Davidson have agreed to work more closely to coordinate spectrum is good news when it comes to spectrum policy. But he added that it will take more than just these two agencies to make a real difference. 

“None of this will work if Congressional Committees keep encouraging turf fights by having one-sided hearings and introducing legislation to undermine FCC decisions,” Feld said in a tweet. “Additionally, because agencies don’t have authority over each other, will need serious White House investment (at least initially) to make this work.”

These coordination efforts are likely to come up Wednesday when Davidson is scheduled to testify at his first oversight hearing as NTIA chief before the House Energy and Commerce Committee. In addition to talking about spectrum issues, lawmakers are expected to question him on NTIA’s role in distributing billions of dollars in subsidies to states to expand broadband connectivity nationwide as part of the $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill that was signed into law in November. 

The post Federal Agencies Agree to Better Spectrum Coordination After 5G first appeared on Joggingvideo.com.

Lawmakers bashed federal agencies Thursday over the chaotic rollout of 5G wireless services earlier this year, accusing them of failing to communicate about potential aviation safety concerns. 

The criticism came during a House aviation subcommittee hearing where Steve Dickson, head of the Federal Aviation Administration, and trade group representatives of the airline and wireless industries testified about the standoff that resulted in a delayed rollout of 5G in January and in several canceled flights.

The House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee called the hearing because of an ongoing clash involving the FAA and the Federal Communications Commission, along with the aviation and wireless industries they regulate, over the deployment of 5G using the newly acquired C-band wireless spectrum. 

The hearing was streamed live on the House Transportation Committee’s website. 

Rep. Peter DeFazio, a Democrat from Oregon, who chairs the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, criticized the FCC for approving the sale of C-band spectrum to wireless carriers last year without seriously considering concerns from FAA officials, who are tasked with regulating the safety of air travel in the US. 

“It’s a pattern of ignoring consequences beyond the consequences to the profitability of the telecom industry; that’s their only focus,” DeFazio said of the FCC. The agency’s chair, Jessica Rosenworcel, had been invited to testify but didn’t attend, citing a scheduling conflict.

“Having a dropped call is way less serious than having a dropped airline out of the sky,” DeFazio added.

Rep. Garret Graves, a Republican from Louisiana, who’s the aviation subcommittee’s ranking member, accused the FAA and FCC of “playing chicken with each other.” He called the interagency standoff “embarrassing, ridiculous and inexcusable.” He said it all could’ve been avoided had the agencies communicated better with each other from the start.

“We already have enough uncertainty related to schedules and weather and other things that we don’t need to create our own problems further disrupting or creating uncertainty in airline travel,” he said.

Who’s to blame?

Though most of the public started hearing about 5G interference concerns only at the end of last year when the FAA issued its first public warning, the dispute has roots that go back more than a decade. For years, the FAA and the aviation industry have worried about whether C-band 5G signals could interfere with airplane altimeters. Their fear is that any disruption to the altimeters, which pilots rely on during low-visibility landings to know how close they are to the ground, could lead to a crash. 

The FCC, which regulates the nation’s airwaves, disagrees with the assessment of the risk by the FAA and the aviation industry. It says the evidence shows there’s no harmful interference between 5G using C-band and the vast majority of altimeters used in planes. Still, AT&T and Verizon agreed to voluntary measures to mitigate possible concerns. 

The clash between the two sides came to a head on Jan. 16, just days before AT&T and Verizon were set to turn on their C-band 5G services. Despite two delays and voluntary agreements from the wireless carriers to alter their deployment plans, the FAA began issuing warnings regarding the 5G interference near airports, and airlines started canceling flights.

The FAA has addressed the situation by issuing notices and directives to commercial airline pilots and requiring them to have alternate means of landing in low-visibility situations. So far the agency has cleared 90% of commercial aircraft flying in the US to operate at airports where 5G C-Band transmitters are deployed.

The very public disagreement between the federal agencies that played out over the past two months shone a bright light on the dysfunction that exists within the government’s process for repurposing valuable wireless spectrum for new services. Lawmakers during the hearing wanted to know why the FCC and FAA had failed to coordinate in the years leading up to 5G deployment. 

FAA Administrator Steve Dickson, who testified first, acknowledged the issue should’ve been handled differently. 

“I think everyone realizes the process didn’t serve anyone well,” he said. But he acknowledged his agency is working cooperatively with the wireless industry to resolve concerns. 

Dickson said that for more than a year, the FAA had asked the FCC for more information to assess the effects of 5G on its altimeters. But it was only within the past few months, once the FAA engaged directly with wireless carriers, that it was able to get the information it needed, such as specific 5G tower locations and transmission power levels. 

“As it turns out, the FCC didn’t even have the data that we needed,” Dickson said. “We discovered that when we started to work directly with the telecommunications companies. They never had to provide this to the government.”

Dickson said the FAA is working to develop new standards that’ll require airlines to upgrade or replace older airplane instruments that are disrupted by 5G signals. 

An ongoing problem

Though the FAA says it’s working toward a permanent resolution, lawmakers and airline officials who testified at the hearing noted that the situation is still problematic. The temporary restrictions the wireless carriers have agreed to will expire in six months and the current practice of issuing warnings and requiring alternate landing patterns for certain situations is unsustainable for long term practice, especially as carriers continue to turn on more 5G service throughout the country.

As a result, airline flight crews have been forced to sift through new FAA restrictions that vary by different runways even at the same airport, requiring pilots to perform extensive work-arounds.

“This is no way to run a railroad,” Joe DePete, president of the Air Line Pilots Association, said in his testimony. “And it’s certainly no way to operate the world’s safest air transportation system.”

Lawmakers and aviation industry representatives urged regulators to come up with a permanent solution to allow 5G service without sacrificing passenger safety. 

“The truth of the matter is that both of our industries have been thrust into this avoidable economic calamity by a government process that failed,” Nicholas Calio, president of the Airlines for America trade group, said in his testimony at the hearing.

Faye Malarkey Black, who heads the Regional Airline Association, complained that smaller regional airlines haven’t received as many FAA clearances, which has put them at greater risk of canceling flights when bad weather occurs. 

“Leaving dozens of airports and millions of passengers vulnerable to sweeping disruptions is unsustainable and unacceptable,” she said. 

Communication breakdown

The consensus among lawmakers and all those testifying was that there was a breakdown in communication among federal agencies. 

But where or how that breakdown occurred is still unclear. While some lawmakers blamed the FCC and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, which represents the president on spectrum issues, for ignoring the FAA, Meredith Atwell Baker, CEO of the CTIA wireless industry trade group and a former FCC commissioner and NTIA official, said the agencies have historically worked very well together “on really hairy spectrum issues” to free up commercial and federal spectrum. She said that in her experience the interagency process has always been able to work out “multiple, really complex deals.”

“This was auction number 107,” she said. “And I’ve never seen anything like this before. So I would say this is an anomaly.”

She said what this situation illustrates is that “we need to get the agency input early and let the spectrum engineers do their job because this is an engineering issue.” 

The post Lawmakers take federal regulators to task over 5G interference debacle first appeared on Joggingvideo.com.