ACARS Radio

[iMONITOR]

The international airline I work for operates well over 100 aircraft which are equipped with the above-mentioned comm equipment as well as GPS, IRS, eFB, HUD, OPT, FADEC, FBW, BFL, dual or quad BRTs - you name it. I've been flying for over 20 years and this is the first I've ever heard of such a secure comm device especially designed for reporting terrorist events. I'm sure a "need-to-know" principle is in effect at executive-level dealings in the airline, just as in any big business but to expect it is held at operator level (ie: pilots and maintenance staff, etc) is a tad naive.

Are you sure you're not referring to the humble transponder (with which every RPT aircraft is already equipped) with a certain code (which every terrorist already knows)? The concept of such equipment does, however, sound very interesting; would you mind elaborating on it a little please (if you haven't signed a NDA or are classified TS).

I welcome the inquiries from your TSA/Federal agent and will direct him to the company security officials who handled the situation. Is this agent a member of this forum then? What is his or her name, please, so I know for whom to look out? Once again: the strategy is not mine; I merely passed on the information through the most secure means available to me to minimise the oportunity for someone like you (no personal offence) to catch on and start spreading the word.

Guys, since you have taken it as a fundamental right to listen in to the activities of others who have nothing to do with you, and since you hold this to be reasonable and ethical, then you must have some sort of tenet for your behaviour after the fact. If my event (which as is usually the case turned out to be a false alarm) had taken place in the post-911 highly-sensitive US airspace or in the UK and you'd been "lucky" enough to be the one to intercept the information first, what would you have done with that information? What are your guidelines then for dealing with sensitive information gained whilst listening in to the activities of others which do not concern you?

Please try not to use the line that ACARS was developed with people like you and specialist civilian-level monitoring equipment in mind and therefore the user-expectation is that they accept the right of all and sundry to listen in. This holds no more water than if I were to say the police and highway patrol RADAR speed "guns" and cameras are made detectable and therefore the detection systems are legal and ethical because they quite obviously are not (since there are laws in many places banning them).

If I had the details of such a system why would you ask me to publicly post them int his forum? Isn't that contrary to the purpose of your original post? Under the U.S. Patriot Act I would be foolish to do such a thing. In the past when employed by a DOD contractor I had a Secret Clearance. I know when to draw the line.

I don't claim to know any particular Federal Agent active on RR's forums, and if I did I certainly would not expose them, or break their cover. Rest assured, this site is very controversial and is most likely monitored on a regular basis. But as we've said, we're not doing anything illegal, we have nothing to hide.

Here are some web site related to things being discussed here that should demonstrate much of this information if out there in full public view and no one is violating any protected secrets. It's just part of our hobby.

Traffic Control Assigned Airspace (ATCAA)
http://sua.faa.gov/sua/zout.do?selected=2&fromuf=UF#

ACARS
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACARS

AirNav
http://www.airnav.com/

Detroit Spotters
http://detroitspotters.com/

Michigan Mil-Spotters
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MichMilSpotters/

SkyVector
http://skyvector.com/

AirNav ACARS Decoder
http://www.airnavsystems.com/ACARS/

WiNRADiO ACARS
http://www.winradio.com/home/acars.htm

ACARS Software
http://www.dxzone.com/catalog/Software/ACARS/


As for your comments regarding Radar Speed Guns being illegal...they're sold retail to anyone who wants one, no problem.
http://www.radarguns.com/

 

[immelmen]

1. Major Airlines do NOT have a new, secure communications device for reporting terrorist threats.

2. Pilots/dispatchers, although most are unaware there are hobbyists who monitor the system, they are under no disillusion that ACARS is in any way secure.

 

[iMONITOR]

1. Major Airlines do NOT have a new, secure communications device for reporting terrorist threats.

How do you know this?

 

[Capt1B]

1. Major Airlines do NOT have a new, secure communications device for reporting terrorist threats.

How do you know this?

Perhaps immelmen is a pilot amd this is how he knows. Regardless, he is correct. There is no such fantasy equipment installed in contemporary aircraft.

If I had the details of such a system why would you ask me to publicly post them int his forum?

Because it would not be a secret no matter how much anyone wishes it is. In fact, there is NO equipment installed on a modern passenger aircraft which is "SECRET." Any pilot operating an aircraft with your special gear would know about it and would discuss it in the bar or the aero club or on a forum. Would you like me to post the transponder code for Illegal Interference? It is NO secret. Everyone knows it. So where is the info on your special gear for hijack notification?

The hijack code is not a secret however this does not mean we want every spotter in the area to listen in to the transmission of the information. Same with ACARS. It is merely a standardised form of information transmission. ACARS allows for the specific.

Isn't that contrary to the purpose of your original post?

You seem to be the one advocating the lack of secrecy or privacy here.

Under the U.S. Patriot Act I would be foolish to do such a thing.

I am not au fait with the U.S. Patriot Act but I would presume it does not pertain to anyone outside the USA.

I don't claim to know any particular Federal Agent active on RR's forums

Okay, I thought you were trying to give me the hint you knew about some agent of some kind who regularly logs in here looking for miscreants.

Rest assured, this site is very controversial and is most likely monitored on a regular basis.

I believe you. My FBI-o-meter has been red-lining all this week, as a matter of fact!

But as we've said, we're not doing anything illegal, we have nothing to hide.

Illegal, no it appears not. Unethical? Well you can convince some but not me it would seem.

As for your comments regarding Radar Speed Guns being illegal...they're sold retail to anyone who wants one, no problem.

My comments referred to "many places." By this I meant other places outside the USA. This sort of equipment is indeed illegal in MANY places, my friend. As odd as it sounds, some laws even allow for the SALE of such gear but not the USE of the same. I would not be surprised if this is the case in parts of the USA.

2. Pilots/dispatchers, although most are unaware there are hobbyists who monitor the system, they are under no disillusion that ACARS is in any way secure.

I can't quite completely follow your double-negative however I gather you are more or less agreeing with the status quo as posted above. True, we are not of the opinion the VHF process is safe but many pilots I speak to are not aware there is a network of spotters and others who regularly monitor the ACARSystem. Most think this system is secure and are happy to transmit sensitive information by text rather than broadcast it on the radio. The first "A" in ACARS stands for "Airline." At no stage are spotters mentioned. And so information NOT intended for prying eyes is transmitted in written form to the company and nosy people on the ground get their eyes onto it.

It's a simple concept: Is the message intended for you? Is it something transmitted between one station and all and sundry, for example an ATC call? With possible ramifications for anyone in the airspace? Okay fair enough, listen in. Or is it between the airline crew and their Ops staff, with nothing whatsoever to do with anyone else, particularly the assorted spotters and other hangers-on? Do you go around listening in to phone calls on cordless landline phones, which is probably easy to do? This is just as insecure and to your way of thinking just as ethically allowable but to my way of thinking would be just as rude and unethical.

What is so difficult with this concept? I just don't understand why spotters are so insistent upon this "right" to stick their noses into the business of others particularly when most of it is of no particular interest at all. It smacks of voyeurism.

So far, no one, including my learned friend Crayon, has mentioned any form of tenet or creedo regarding the use or subsequent forwarding of such information gained through the deliberate interception of intra-airline information transmissions.

 

[immelmen]

How do you know this?

because I have to sit through a several hour oral exam every six months on the systems of my aircraft...that is not one of them. I spend more time in the cockpit then I do in my own home, in my company's aircraft as well as jump seating on all the other company's to get to and from home. Nobody has this.

I can't quite completely follow your double-negative however I gather you are more or less agreeing with the status quo as posted above. True, we are not of the opinion the VHF process is safe but many pilots I speak to are not aware there is a network of spotters and others who regularly monitor the ACARSystem. Most think this system is secure and are happy to transmit sensitive information by text rather than broadcast it on the radio. The first "A" in ACARS stands for "Airline." At no stage are spotters mentioned. And so information NOT intended for prying eyes is transmitted in written form to the company and nosy people on the ground get their eyes onto it.

I think VHF perfectly safe for what we use it for. There are means in place to convey security related situations/concerns using multiple conventional aircraft systems already in place that would go un-noticed by outside observers/monitors.(all of which is SSI controlled under 49 CFR Part 15 and 1520 and wont be posted on the net.) I have never received any training, or read any manual or other document that stated or inferred an ACARS message was any more secure then VHF voice. Having said that, there are some interesting menus in ACARS that might lead some one to that conclusion, however the reality is those menu items are there to satisfy a legal requirement to be able to convey certain kinds of information to the company independent of ATC channels but are not intended to be more secure.

And while, no other crew member I have mentioned it to was ever aware of people monitoring ACARS, their response to it is always the same...a confused look followed by "...I wonder if the hotel bar tonight will have the 1,2,3 rule..."(nobody cares) FYI, in our manuals the first A in ACARS is for "Aircraft".