Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
User avatar
By Flintstone
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1889595
".....sensitive aircraft equipment like radio altitude meters.".

Good old BBC.
User avatar
By Flying_john
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1889643
Sir Morley Steven wrote:Boeing and Airbus warn US over 5G safety concerns https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-59737194


To be fair to the "nutters" some of the allocated 5G spectrum 3.3 - 4.2Ghz does lay close to the 4.4Ghz range used in some radio altimeters and i'm guessing that the front end filtering on radio altimeters isn't adequate enough to filter out adjacent spectrum users which, when first allocated for airborne use, very little else was around at those millimetric wavelengths.
User avatar
By Paul_Sengupta
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1889645
This is about choice of frequency and ensuring things are safeguarded. Here in the UK/Europe we are currently using 3.4-3.7 GHz (and a few lower frequencies) which seems to be ok.

In fact the biggest interference issue is that we're now going down to 700MHz which is creeping down further into the TV band.

When they extended the radio broadcasting up to 107.9 MHz we all had to get filters (supposedly!) on our old nav equipment.
Flying_john liked this
User avatar
By Iceman
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1889648
The old ‘FM immune’ issue. Perhaps this will become the ‘5G immune’ issue :roll:.

Iceman 8)
By GAFlyer4Fun
#1889758
We are probably all on the way to being 5 jabs of covid vaccine for immunity of something.

As for 5G, pffft UH can do more than 5G in a suitable aircraft.
User avatar
By foxmoth
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1889766
If 5G is a problem just push hard - basic maths
5G - 5G = 0
Problem solved!
By Cessna571
#1889770
Iceman wrote:The old ‘FM immune’ issue. Perhaps this will become the ‘5G immune’ issue :roll:.

Iceman 8)


One of our boxes has a sticker on it saying “Not FM Immune”

I always wondered what that was all about!
User avatar
By Iceman
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1889775
@Cessna571, was it a KNS80 ? That was a very useful RNAV bit of kit in its time which could relocate VOR/DME beacons to specified offset positions on four independent frequencies. Sadly, when the ‘FM immune’ issue came up, it could not retrospectively be fixed and was always placarded so,

Iceman 8)
By GAFlyer4Fun
#1889911
I used to have SkyDemon plog show the RNAV column just in case the GPS got jammed etc. Then I could tune the KNS80 to my current SD waypoint. Although SD didnt always select the most appropriate VOR if there was a choice of two. Thanks to VOR rationalisation (caused by lack of spare parts etc) the aircraft often cannot receive any VOR signals at typical GA low cruising altitudes.

KNS80 RNAV facilities used to be good for finding hard to spot airfields in the middle of nowhere.
Iceman, Ben K, AndrewE and 1 others liked this
By johnm
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1889918
SN-2021/017: Potential Interference Risk to Radio Altimeters from 5G Mobile Technology

Just appeared in my inbox.......
User avatar
By Iceman
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1889941
Without watching the video, with the illustrated poor band pass filter response over the RadAlt band and the 5G spurious emissions (power level not shown, I grant you), that does look to be potentially problematic.

Iceman 8)
Last edited by Iceman on Thu Dec 23, 2021 6:11 pm, edited 2 times in total.