3 ms·

An interesting question. Assuming the FAA has the authority to enforce ADSB requirements (an open question post-Chevron), I can’t find any regulation saying no

An interesting question. Assuming the FAA has the authority to enforce ADSB requirements (an open question post-Chevron), I can’t find any regulation saying non-aircrafts cannot transmit ADSB. Only ones saying aircrafts in certain categories must. There’s probably some non-interference requirement somewhere (FCC spectrum licensing perhaps), but I’m not seeing it immediately. All this is in the hypothetical that RF was transmitted, which as others point out it probably wasn’t.

15155 8mo ago
(Assuming this were actually RF) This is easily-prosecutable willful interference or possibly aircraft sabotage: ADS-B operates in licensed bands and uses an already highly-contended modulation scheme and transmission protocol.
- esseph 8mo ago
  No reason to believe RF when you can just upload whatever data you want
- fragmede 8mo ago
  They'll probably try and make a case of wire fraud and CFAA as the usual go tos if it wasn't in RF.
  - habinero 8mo ago
    "Wire fraud" means financial fraud, not "sending data over wires".
deleted 8mo ago
[deleted]
tjohns 8mo ago
It would be under the FCC regs, not the FAA regs. Whatever transmitter you're using would not be type-accepted for operation on the 1080 MHz or 978 MHz band. (47 USC § 301) Additionally, RF operation with the intent of willful interference is inherently illegal. (47 USC § 333)
- TimorousBestie 8mo ago
  Excellent, thanks.
- fc417fc802 8mo ago
  What if you removed a genuine ADS-B unit from a plane and installed it in your vehicle? Also does impersonation necessarily qualify as interference? Naively, I'd expect interference to refer to jamming.
  - jjwiseman 8mo ago
    A transponder in a car is not an "aircraft station" (§ 87.5), therefore it is not covered by aircraft "license-by-rule" (§ 87.18(b)), so transmitting would be operating without a valid authorization (§ 1.903(a)). https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-47/chapter-I/subchapter-D/part-87 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-47/chapter-I/subchapter-D...

15155 8mo ago

(Assuming this were actually RF) This is easily-prosecutable willful interference or possibly aircraft sabotage: ADS-B operates in licensed bands and uses an already highly-contended modulation scheme and transmission protocol.

esseph 8mo ago
No reason to believe RF when you can just upload whatever data you want
fragmede 8mo ago
They'll probably try and make a case of wire fraud and CFAA as the usual go tos if it wasn't in RF.
- habinero 8mo ago
  "Wire fraud" means financial fraud, not "sending data over wires".

deleted 8mo ago

[deleted]

tjohns 8mo ago

It would be under the FCC regs, not the FAA regs. Whatever transmitter you're using would not be type-accepted for operation on the 1080 MHz or 978 MHz band. (47 USC § 301) Additionally, RF operation with the intent of willful interference is inherently illegal. (47 USC § 333)

TimorousBestie 8mo ago
Excellent, thanks.
fc417fc802 8mo ago
What if you removed a genuine ADS-B unit from a plane and installed it in your vehicle? Also does impersonation necessarily qualify as interference? Naively, I'd expect interference to refer to jamming.
- jjwiseman 8mo ago
  A transponder in a car is not an "aircraft station" (§ 87.5), therefore it is not covered by aircraft "license-by-rule" (§ 87.18(b)), so transmitting would be operating without a valid authorization (§ 1.903(a)). https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-47/chapter-I/subchapter-D/part-87 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-47/chapter-I/subchapter-D...