5G and Airline flights?

[El Presidente]

One for our aviators and tech guru's. 

• storm in a  B cup?
• gross oversight?
• How does this play out? 

 

 

Emirates suspends flights to US destinations after major airlines warn about 5G. Could this happen in Australia?

ABC Science

 / 

By technology reporter James Purtill

 

Emirates is acting after major US airlines expressed concerns about 5G frequencies.(Flickr: Rafal Kiermacz)

 

Emirates has announced it is suspending flights to several US destinations due to plans to deploy 5G mobile networks.

Key points:

• US airlines say 5G frequencies can interfere with sensitive airplane instruments
• US telecoms companies plan to roll out the 5G network this week
• 5G is not an issue for Australian airports, the regulator says

 

The announcement came after the chief executives of major US airlines warned the ultra-fast mobile communications networks could cause an aviation "crisis" that could delay hundreds of flights and strand thousands of passengers every day.

The 5G service, which is being rolled out in the US on Wednesday (local time), occupies a band of the electrometric spectrum adjacent to the one used by sensitive aeroplane instruments.

"Unless our major hubs are cleared to fly, the vast majority of the travelling and shipping public will essentially be grounded," wrote the chief executives of American Airlines, Delta Air Lines, United Airlines, Southwest Airlines and others in a letter to the White House.

"To be blunt, the nation's commerce will grind to a halt."

But the rollout of 5G — which is taking place around the world — does not appear to be an issue for Australian airports, according to the Civil Aviation Safety Authority.

So how much disruption should we expect? What's the risk to aircraft? And why aren't Australian airports affected?

Some experts say 5G could blind a plane's automatic landing system 

You've probably heard of 5G, the fifth generation of mobile network technology that uses higher frequencies of electromagnetic waves than the previous 4G network.

These waves allow much larger amounts of data to be transferred, which means faster downloads, better quality videos, and so on.

 

But there's a catch: other devices are already using parts of this sought-after spectrum.

Namely, the devices that prevent planes from crashing.

Radio altimeters measure the distance of a plane above the ground by pinging an electromagnetic pulse and listening for the reflected signal.

They operate at frequencies of 4.2-4.4 GHz.

In the US, the adjacent spectrum of 3.7-3.98 GHz (known as the C-band) has been sold to telecoms providers, for use in the new 5G networks.

The fear is these will interfere with the altimeters, blinding the instruments with signal noise.

Many passenger and cargo planes, for instance, use an automated landing procedure called "autoland" in low-visibility conditions.

Autoland relies on radio altimeters, aviation expert Geoffrey Thomas says.

"Auto-land is a major, major issue," he said.

"At the moment if autoland was not available and Los Angeles was fogged in, then they would have to divert to another airport, and this would require additional fuel and cause disruptions and extra cost."

Pilots use automated landing procedures in low-visibility conditions.(Getty Images: Shaunl)

Radio altimeters are also used to avoid head-on collisions.

In the letter to the White House, US airline chiefs said the flight restrictions will not be limited to poor weather conditions.

"Multiple modern safety systems on aircraft will be deemed unusable, causing a much larger problem than what we knew," they wrote.

"Airplane manufacturers have informed us that there are huge swaths of the operating fleet that may need to be indefinitely grounded."

How big is the problem?

The US Federal Aviation Authority (FAA) has warned that interference substantial enough to halt the use of automated cockpit systems could lead to flight cancellations, delays or diversions in 46 of the largest metro areas in the US.

Aviation trade group Airlines for America has claimed 5G-related interference could threaten to disrupt as many as 350,000 flights per year.

That includes flights from Australia to the US, Mr Thomas says.

"The operations that could be impacted include Qantas flights from Australia to Los Angeles," he said.

But not everyone is convinced that grounding or diverting planes is necessary.

Verizon has spent $74.35 billion on the C-band 5G spectrum.(Getty: Alex Tai)

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the regulatory counterpart of the FAA, says there's no proof 5G will interfere with plane instruments.

Some 40 countries have authorised the use of 5G in the C-band, without a single report of harmful interference, it says.

In a recent letter, six former heads of the FCC say the FAA "threatens to derail the reasoned conclusions reached by the FCC after years of technical analysis and study."

The situation has become an interagency brawl with a lot at stake for not only airlines, but also for the US telecoms companies that collectively paid $US81.7 billion ($113 billion) for access to the C-band spectrum last year.

So … how big is the risk?

Parties on either side of the dispute disagree on the size of the risk itself.

In theory, the 220MHz gap between the top end of the 5G frequencies (3.98GHz) and the lower end of the radio altimeter range (4.2GHz) should mean there's no interference, but studies have found this not always the case.

The US concerns focus on an October 2020 report from the Radio Technical Committee for Aeronautics (RTCA) that found "a major risk that 5G telecommunications systems in the 3.7-3.98 GHz band will cause harmful interference to radar altimeters on all types of aircraft."

Another 2020 study conducted by the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) found 5G emissions in adjacent frequencies have "some potential to cause interference under certain assumptions".

 

Ampalavanapillai Nirmalathas, a professor of electronic engineering at University of Melbourne, said the ACMA study showed that the risk was very low.

"In very, very rare circumstances there may be an inaccuracy in the estimation of altimeter readings due to potential inference from the bands.

"In terms of being able to generate statistical confidence, these studies are not conclusive.

"There's no way of saying how rare or how likely these things are."

Even if the risk of 5G emissions confusing an altimeter is very low, the consequences of a plane misjudging the ground are potentially catastrophic, and include death for the passengers.

In the letter this week, US airline chiefs called on the government to delay turning on the 5G network within 3.2km of the runways at some key airports, to create a buffer zone for altimeters.

"Immediate intervention is needed to avoid significant operational disruption to air passengers, shippers, supply chain and delivery of needed medical supplies," the letter reads.

Why aren't Australian airports affected?

According to CASA, there's been no reports of radio altimeter incidents linked to 5G since the telecommunications technology rolled out two years ago.

Last week, in response to the debate in the US, it published a post on its website titled "No sign of 5G interference in Australia".

One reason there have been no reports of incidents, it says, is that Australian 5G transmissions top out at 3.7GHz, which makes a larger buffer with the frequencies used by radio altimeters.

This is fairly standard internationally — India's 5G services go up to 3.6GHz, while Europe and the UK's top out at 3.8GHz.

CASA says it's monitoring the situation and urges pilots to report any anomalies.

 

[HarveyBoulevard]

Well, lets say the airlines are wrong...no dead bodies.  Now lets say the telecoms are wrong...lots of dead bodies.  I'd tend to err on the side of caution and not just 'wing it' until more is known about the 'possible' side effects of rolling out 5G.

(cause 4G is just to slow for all my needs)

[NSXCIGAR]

Sounds like we have a bunch of "studies" and not a bunch of "evidence". And experts on both sides of the question. 

5G is available in many major US cities. Haven't heard a thing.

As far as the radio altimeters being used in what I assume is the TCAS collision avoidance system wouldn't those incidents occur at relatively high altitudes? Is 5G able to have an impact at 30,000 feet? 

[Chibearsv]

I heard this story this morning and the reporters mentioned two items rather calmly, "The 5G may interfere with the automatic breaking system and altimeters..." 😱

[cnov]

Strange how Emirates fly into Heathrow without issue, we've had 5G over here since just before COVID started.

[El Presidente]

  On 1/18/2022 at 10:37 PM, cnov said:

Strange how Emirates fly into Heathrow without issue, we've had 5G over here since just before COVID started.

Expand  

 

It apparently has to do with operating frequencies. 

One reason there have been no reports of incidents, it says, is that Australian 5G transmissions top out at 3.7GHz, which makes a larger buffer with the frequencies used by radio altimeters.

This is fairly standard internationally — India's 5G services go up to 3.6GHz, while Europe and the UK's top out at 3.8GHz.

[Corylax18]

  On 1/18/2022 at 9:55 PM, HarveyBoulevard said:

Well, lets say the airlines are wrong...no dead bodies.  Now lets say the telecoms are wrong...lots of dead bodies.  I'd tend to err on the side of caution and not just 'wing it' until more is known about the 'possible' side effects of rolling out 5G.

(cause 4G is just to slow for all my needs)

Expand  

There is no "Erring Needed" this issues has been discussed and adjudicated for nearly 6 years. The airlines should have spent the money to upgrade their out of spec planes (less then 50% of active commercial airliners right now) to modern specs that don't interfere with the 5g equipment. Not the other way around.  

My current job is managing the buildout of several thousand new ground stations to feed a constellation of School Bus sized Internet satellites. Our ground stations will broadcast across a wide band of the RF spectrum, for several reasons. Most of which aren't important. 

The important thing is that our ground stations will transmit in several of the C-Band ranges that VZW, ATT, and DISH paid a total of 94 BILLION dollars to acquire the rights to. My company, nor any of the airlines, were willing to pay Billions of dollars for the exclusive use of these chunks of spectrum. So we all have rules that we need to follow. 

I cant get into details on the numbers, but we are spending Millions of dollars, on top of what would otherwise be needed, to "shield" our sites from certain areas. Evacuation routes, high volume rail lines, densely packed urban area, and long list of other "protected areas". The FCC wont issue my company our license if we cant prove we've done everything possible to mitigate potential interference. Its a massive time and cost drain for me and it does Nothing to enhance our network. VZW reviews every, single, license we submit and protests to the FCC, regardless of the work we've done. We then have to pay lawyers $750 an hour to argue with VZW's lawyers about the efficacy of our shielding solution. Its a nightmare. 

No airlines are subject to FCC regulation, so they don't need to prove to anyone that their planes don't interfere with 5G to operate. The FAA doesn't care about the FCC's rules, so they haven't mandated a date by which the airlines need to upgrade or retrofit their planes. They should have. The airlines now look like a third grader finishing his math homework on the bus ride to school.

They should be embarrassed and ashamed of themselves for putting their own employees and customer in this position in the first place. 

They received hundreds of billions in taxpayer aid over the last couple years, still fired employees and ordered new planes. They could have (should have) spent a tiny fraction of that money upgrading their equipment. They've known for 6 Years. 6 Years. They also could have paid the 94 billion dollars to use the spectrum exclusively if it was so important to them. But, they've done nothing to mitigate the problem and they're now blaming everyone else. 

 

Lets not forget. These are the same airlines that have been telling us Our 2G, 3G, and 4G phones need to be in "airplane mode" for the last 20 years. 

Yet, there have been zero recorded cases of any previous generations bringing an airliner down. Despite 10s of millions of flights across 20+ years of opportunities. 

This is just another case of failed bankers, who run their companies poorly, looking for another hand out. Ignore them and move on. 

[HarveyBoulevard]

  On 1/18/2022 at 10:48 PM, Corylax18 said:

There is no "Erring Needed" this issues has been discussed and adjudicated for nearly 6 years. The airlines should have spent the money to upgrade their out of spec planes (less then 50% of active commercial airliners right now) to modern specs that don't interfere with the 5g equipment. Not the other way around.  

My current job is managing the buildout of several thousand new ground stations to feed a constellation of School Bus sized Internet satellites. Our ground stations will broadcast across a wide band of the RF spectrum, for several reasons. Most of which aren't important. 

The important thing is that our ground stations will transmit in several of the C-Band ranges that VZW, ATT, and DISH paid a total of 94 BILLION dollars to acquire the rights to. My company, nor any of the airlines, were willing to pay Billions of dollars for the exclusive use of these chunks of spectrum. So we all have rules that we need to follow. 

I cant get into details on the numbers, but we are spending Millions of dollars, on top of what would otherwise be needed, to "shield" our sites from certain areas. Evacuation routes, high volume rail lines, densely packed urban area, and long list of other "protected areas". The FCC wont issue my company our license if we cant prove we've done everything possible to mitigate potential interference. Its a massive time and cost drain for me and it does Nothing to enhance our network. VZW reviews every, single, license we submit and protests to the FCC, regardless of the work we've done. We then have to pay lawyers $750 an hour to argue with VZW's lawyers about the efficacy of our shielding solution. Its a nightmare. 

No airlines are subject to FCC regulation, so they don't need to prove to anyone that their planes don't interfere with %g to operate. The FAA doesn't care about the FCC's rules, so they havent mandated a date by which the airlines need to upgrade or retrofit their planes. They should have. The airlines now look like a third grader finishing his math homework on the bus ride to school.

They should be embarrassed and ashamed of themselves for putting their own employees and customer in this position in the first place. 

They received hundreds of billions in taxpayer aid over the last couple years, still fired employees and ordered new planes. They could have (should have) spent a tiny fraction of that money upgrading their equipment. They've known for 6 Years. 6 Years. They also could have paid the 94 billion dollars to use the spectrum exclusively if it was so important to them. But, they've done nothing to mitigate the problem and they're now blaming everyone else. 

Expand  

Ok

 

  On 1/18/2022 at 10:51 PM, Corylax18 said:

Lets not forget. These are the same airlines that have been telling us Our 2G, 3G, and 4G phones need to be in "airplane mode" for the last 20 years. 

Yet, there have been zero recorded cases of any previous generations bringing an airliner down. Despite 10s of millions of flights across 20+ years of opportunities. 

This is just another case of failed bankers, who run their companies poorly, looking for another hand out. Ignore them and move on. 

Expand  

All wrapped up here. Nothing else to discuss. 

[Ken Gargett]

there is absolutely no danger to australia. telstra would have to get the installation correct before that could occur. will never happen. 

[MrBirdman]

  On 1/18/2022 at 10:48 PM, Corylax18 said:

They received hundreds of billions in taxpayer aid over the last couple years, still fired employees and ordered new planes.

Expand  

This 👆. Airlines have known about this for years and done nothing despite being granted a virtual oligopoly by lax anti-trust enforcement. They’ve gotten billions in aid the don’t have to pay back and now are essentially holding the country hostage because the didn’t want to pay for externalities. They just want us to pay for their externalities. 

[Fuzz]

Just don't play a flight sim on your mobile when the plane is taking off or landing.

[MrBirdman]

Our illustrious Transportation Secretary might have been on top of this two days before the deadline if he hadn’t taken paternity leave two days after being appointed. 

[dominattorney]

  On 1/18/2022 at 10:51 PM, Corylax18 said:

Lets not forget. These are the same airlines that have been telling us Our 2G, 3G, and 4G phones need to be in "airplane mode" for the last 20 years. 

Yet, there have been zero recorded cases of any previous generations bringing an airliner down. Despite 10s of millions of flights across 20+ years of opportunities. 

This is just another case of failed bankers, who run their companies poorly, looking for another hand out. Ignore them and move on. 

Expand  

Oh. And it's a guarantee that everyone follows the rules all the time. 

[SGD316]

Complete joke. Same was said about 4G. This is yet another attempt to screw with people. 

[HDGSN]

  On 1/18/2022 at 11:26 PM, MrBirdman said:

Our illustrious Transportation Secretary might have been on top of this two days before the deadline if he hadn’t taken paternity leave two days after being appointed. 

Expand  

No blame for Elaine Chao?

[MrBirdman]

  On 1/18/2022 at 11:46 PM, HDGSN said:

No blame for Elaine Chao?

Expand  

It’s not all Mayor Peter’s fault of course, I just can’t get over this smug guy getting a job he’s totally unqualified for during a supply chain crisis and deciding it was a good time to adopt two kids and take leave. Oh but he had time for photo ops and interviews with his new kids.

That man is a walking resume.

[Corylax18]

  On 1/18/2022 at 11:48 PM, MrBirdman said:

It’s not all Mayor Peter’s fault of course, I just can’t get over this smug guy getting a job he’s totally unqualified for during a supply chain crisis and deciding it was a good time to adopt two kids and take leave. Oh but he had time for photo ops and interviews with his new kids.

That man is a walking resume.

Expand  

In all fairness to any politician, the nitty, gritty details of how potential interferences could come about are extremely boring. Even for all but the most dedicated RF Nerds. There is at least .1 GHz or 100 MHz buffer between the frequencies used by commercial airliners and any of the spectrum used by cell carriers.

If the hardware and software filters in the radio altimeters are up to current, modern specifications that buffer is more than enough. Unfortunately some companies decided to spec cheaper, inferior radio altimeters to boost their own bottom lines(cough cough, both members of the airline manufacturing oligopoly) The airlines got a better price on the planes and now they're trying to blame telco carriers in an attempt to get someone else to further contribute to their bottom line. 

Pilots can still land/takeoff/operate the planes as normal. Its only the Autoland systems that are potentially affected. If the radio altimeter is still telling the Autopilot the plane is in the air, then the autopilot wont deploy the thrust reverses. No thrust reversers means only wheel brakes and greatly increased braking distances. Especially on wet or icy/snowy runways. 

The chances of a plane just falling out of the sky from this issue are almost incalculably small. Even if someone wantonly broke all the current restrictions. Once the airlines do what they're obligated to do that chance will drop to zero. 

 

Well, the child's temper tantrum worked again. Another, brief, delay was announced today. I dont blame them, it worked 18 months ago, it worked a couple weeks ago. Unfortunately we dont seem to have enough adults in the room. 

https://simpleflying.com/5g-roll-out-delayed/

[Dynamo320]

  On 1/19/2022 at 12:27 AM, Corylax18 said:

In all fairness to any politician, the nitty, gritty details of how potential interferences could come about are extremely boring. Even for all but the most dedicated RF Nerds. There is at least .1 GHz or 100 MHz buffer between the frequencies used by commercial airliners and any of the spectrum used by cell carriers.

If the hardware and software filters in the radio altimeters are up to current, modern specifications that buffer is more than enough. Unfortunately some companies decided to spec cheaper, inferior radio altimeters to boost their own bottom lines(cough cough, both members of the airline manufacturing oligopoly) The airlines got a better price on the planes and now they're trying to blame telco carriers in an attempt to get someone else to further contribute to their bottom line. 

Pilots can still land/takeoff/operate the planes as normal. Its only the Autoland systems that are potentially affected. If the radio altimeter is still telling the Autopilot the plane is in the air, then the autopilot wont deploy the thrust reverses. No thrust reversers means only wheel brakes and greatly increased braking distances. Especially on wet or icy/snowy runways. 

The chances of a plane just falling out of the sky from this issue are almost incalculably small. Even if someone wantonly broke all the current restrictions. Once the airlines do what they're obligated to do that chance will drop to zero. 

Expand  

No offense man, but this post is absolutely bs, especially regarding Airbus aircraft. You are not landing an Airbus normally, autoland or not, with a dual radio altimeter fault. Such failure takes the aircraft from its “normal” flight control law, to a degraded “direct” law.  Erroneous readings could also prevent the aircraft from entering the landing logic phase if still in normal law. There are rare instances when the pilots were unable to land the aircraft due to radio altimeter errors due to not entering a landing mode. Other cases where the pilots were able to get it on the runway but not without suffering tail strikes.  This is such a rare condition that 99.9% of us have never experienced outside the simulator.  The RA system is crucial on Airbus family aircraft and a dual system fault/failure is a pretty big fricking deal.    I’ve also never heard of the autopilot deploying the thrust reversers. This is manually done by the pilot. 

[CaptainQuintero]

  It was on our news today too. Apparently it's not an issue in Europe because it's just broadcast on a different bandwidth to the US, and the transmitters are pointed down instead of up into the air.

  I mean, it seems there's a pretty simple solution to this issue

[HarveyBoulevard]

  On 1/19/2022 at 12:27 AM, Corylax18 said:

Pilots can still land/takeoff/operate the planes as normal. Its only the Autoland systems that are potentially affected. If the radio altimeter is still telling the Autopilot the plane is in the air, then the autopilot wont deploy the thrust reverses. No thrust reversers means only wheel brakes and greatly increased braking distances. Especially on wet or icy/snowy runways. 

Expand  

So what your telling me is here...I have a chance...

As an ACTUAL pilot, regardless of FAULT...I still have a concern.

And before you say anything...yes, it is probably a lawyers fault, just not mine this time

[Corylax18]

  On 1/19/2022 at 12:58 AM, Dynamo320 said:

No offense man, but this post is absolutely bs, especially regarding Airbus aircraft. You are not landing an Airbus normally, autoland or not, with a dual radio altimeter fault. Such failure takes the aircraft from its “normal” flight control law, to a degraded “direct” law.  Erroneous readings could also prevent the aircraft from entering the landing logic phase if still in normal law. There are rare instances when the pilots were unable to land the aircraft due to radio altimeter errors due to not entering a landing mode. Other cases where the pilots were able to get it on the runway but not without suffering tail strikes.  This is such a rare condition that 99.9% of us have never experienced outside the simulator.  The RA system is crucial on Airbus family aircraft and a dual system fault/failure is a pretty big fricking deal.    I’ve also never heard of the autopilot deploying the thrust reversers. This is manually done by the pilot. 

Expand  

I didn't say this was the case. The FAA Did. Your disagreement is with them, not me. They've already approved all models of the A320CEO family for uninhibited operations at all the "affected" airports. The link at the bottom has more info about what models have already been approved for regular operations. 

I know that on a CAT III B approach Boeing aircraft will deploy the thrust reversers during the rollout, I don't know as much about Airbus though. Regardless of what I know, the FAA doesn't think its a problem. With those models at least. Interestingly enough, all 737NG aircraft registered with the FAA where already approved too.

The biggest omission from the list of approvals was the 787, its radio altimeters may all need to be completely replaced. The A380 also hasn't been approved and neither has the A3XX NEO or any of the MAX versions. It seems like the older hardware may be more robust/better built. 

https://simpleflying.com/faa-clears-planes-5g-rollout/

 

  On 1/19/2022 at 1:41 AM, HarveyBoulevard said:

So what your telling me is here...I have a chance...

As an ACTUAL pilot, regardless of FAULT...I still have a concern.

And before you say anything...yes, it is probably a lawyers fault, just not mine this time

Expand  

Hahaha

I'm only about half way through my PPL License, so I usually only have my life and one other persons at risk. But I have worked in wireless telecom for my entire professional career, so I know that side of this discussion better than I'd like to. Because of that career I fly commercially all the time, just over 300 segments in the last 10 years. I saw this issue coming from a mile away and it pisses me off because it was so avoidable.  

My fuse is also a bit short with the airlines right now. They love to capitalize their gains and socialize their losses. Its embarrassing to see A4A whine about their lack of foresight by floating $1.7 billion per year in "customer losses." Not airline losses, they would make sure that doesn't happen. When you consider the 5G spectrum Auction will end up netting the US Government almost 200 billion dollars by the time its done it becomes pretty clear what the end game is here. The government has been a leaky tap the last couple years so why not swing that bucket underneath. 

[Greenhorn2]

Y'all go ahead. I'm taking the bus.

[El Presidente]

  On 1/19/2022 at 12:27 AM, Corylax18 said:

In all fairness to any politician, the nitty, gritty details of how potential interferences could come about are extremely boring. Even for all but the most dedicated RF Nerds. There is at least .1 GHz or 100 MHz buffer between the frequencies used by commercial airliners and any of the spectrum used by cell carriers.

 

Expand  

ken has sent me a text saying that he will clarify the tech terminology shortly  

[Dynamo320]

  On 1/19/2022 at 1:51 AM, Corylax18 said:

I didn't say this was the case. The FAA Did. Your disagreement is with them, not me. They've already approved all models of the A320CEO family for uninhibited operations at all the "affected" airports. The link at the bottom has more info about what models have already been approved for regular operations. 

I know that on a CAT III B approach Boeing aircraft will deploy the thrust reversers during the rollout, I don't know as much about Airbus though. Regardless of what I know, the FAA doesn't think its a problem. With those models at least. Interestingly enough, all 737NG aircraft registered with the FAA where already approved too.

The biggest omission from the list of approvals was the 787, its radio altimeters may all need to be completely replaced. The A380 also hasn't been approved and neither has the A3XX NEO or any of the MAX versions. It seems like the older hardware may be more robust/better built. 

https://simpleflying.com/faa-clears-planes-5g-rollout/

Expand  

The A320CEO has not in any way been approved for all operations at all affected airports. I fly both CEO and NEO models. I’ve not had any correspondence regarding differences between the two. The FAA issued an airworthiness directive that pertains to ALL aircraft, except 787 which will have its own set of rules regarding Mel’s among other performance related data. All aircraft would be restricted from utilizing autoland, cat 1 SA, ILS cat2, cat 3, and Rnav rnp. That is pretty far from uninhibited ops. 1500 notams have been issued and are ready to be unleashed. Radio altimeter problems are a whole other ball of wax.  It’s data is integral to so many different systems. I’m an operator, not an engineer or telecommunications expert. 

Airliners have been using current radio altimeter technology forever. Playing devils advocate, Why should they be forced to change a system that obviously has worked for a long time to accommodate Verizon and AT&T?  Understand that I know virtually nothing about that technology!

 

Touche on the Boeing data. I’ve got about 15,000 hours in the Bus and zero in Boeing. 
 

edit: I read the link you provided, but that information has not been communicated with me from company or union at this point in time. I’m off, so I’m just reading from my emails. I’m not out there in the workplace right now. I guess 48 of 88 airports approved but that still leaves 40. Who knows?

[BrightonCorgi]

Is it true or a just a shakedown?  Cannot seem to make heads or tails on this one.