Seems like we'd need a modern version that's less susceptible to jamming, otherwise aren't we just replacing one jammable service with another?
There's GPS jamming by the military, mostly in war zones. This seldom effects airliners because they steer clear of active war zones.
Then there's GPS jamming by delivery drivers who don't want their boss watching over their shoulder all the time. When the article mentions jammers as small as a cellphone and costing less than $100, those are sold to drivers.
Delivery drivers don't jam LORAN or VOR, though - so it's not jammed by the second type.
The plane reported GPS signal loss 5 minutes after the jamming started by WSMR. Three other planes in the area also reported GPS loss.
https://www.stripes.com/theaters/us/2026-08-05/ntsb-medevac-...
That one’s going to be on the flight crew, not the GPS jamming test.
HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49181099
One is to actually jam the signal IOW preventing reception. The other is to overpower the satellites' signals and replace them with your own. That defeats the doppler calculations of GPS needed for triangulation, and instead the receiver believes it's where the jammer wants it to be.
If the latter includes altitude information, then it's a huge problem.
If you can say, "oh we were only jamming" when in fact you were spoofing, well that's certainly a super easy excuse to hide behind.
Yes, obviously. Losing signal on your GPS unit, and having your GPS unit tell you that you are in a different position than you actually are, are two very different things.
Also, since other aircraft reported GPS issues, that is evidence that would speak to jamming or spoofing. All three other aircraft reported a loss of GPS, not inaccurate GPS. Coverups are real, government conspiracies are real. But the completely evidenceless “I’m just saying…” or “isn’t it weird…” or “I’m just asking questions” is tiresome.
Sounds like the root cause to me. It should be illegal to use GNSS to track employees, or anyone really.
Jamming is starting to sound a lot like self-defense against surveillance.
The real problem is not really drivers being tracked, but how the tracking data is or might be used. Timestamped delivery notifications might be just as bad in this regard.
As often, the solution is probably more about accessible and pro-human law. No idea how that should work, maybe certain sensitive data services having to be provided by a third party or even the government itself? There are probably much smarter ideas or variations of this...
If this country had good unions and real worker protection laws, like you can't punish drivers for taking a break, then we wouldn't feel as much a need for broader sledgehammer laws banning GPS tracking. (that, lets be honest, will never happen anyways)
How is an insurance company provision an excuse? Do you propose self-insurance? If so, would that be advisable from a fiduciary responsibility standpoint for most small companies?
Who ultimately bears the increased insurance premiums and deleterious effects emerging from legislatively banning GPS on company assets and dashcams? (Hint: not the business)
These antennas have a very good idea of where the signal is coming from, due to delay measurements and can detect and filter ambient noise. They are super hard to jam. The reason why drones have become such a PITA is that these inexpensive antennas are very hard to defeat even with military jammers.
If this becomes a geniune need in the civilian sector, then I'm sure the tech is up to the challenge.
Brad Parkinson, the father of GPS and PNTAB, they've been trying to lobby the US government to remove ITAR from that technology so the civilian can benefit from anti jamming, and finally they managed to do it sometime last year. Now it falls under EAR
Not sure what makes an antenna/sensor ITAR restricted, I suspect if you try optimizing it to military use-cases, you'll get hit with ITAR, but I suspect Brad Parkinson is right - security through obscurity just doesn't cut it any more.
I remember in the 90s, computer security was either missing or an afterthought (you could bypass the Win98 password prompt by pressing escape in the release version). Thankfully the industry got together and figured it out.
Now everyone else needs to follow suit. We already have a bunch of examples of assuming security does not matter (hackable cars, meters that can be switched with a Flipper zero).
Intentionally-designed anti-jam features (active-nulling and electronically-steerable receivers made for this purpose) marketed towards GNSS applications are EAR items (and are incorporated into ITAR by reference.)
"These antennas" is doing an impossibly large amount of work. What you are describing here is a delay-calibrated coherent receiver, not an antenna, and it's absolutely not "inexpensive" to pull this off.
With passive antennas, most of the attenuation of adversarial signals is being done by the relatively-high-directionality of planar arrays: off-boresight signals have far greater attenuation with these (20dB? - tricky because you still do want good satellite data close to the horizon), and most garden variety jammers are terrestrial and off-axis.
Still, these signals are always below the noise floor and mostly unsigned, it's somewhat easy for an airborne (or spacefaring) jammer to fully drown out, replay/time-shift, or spoof the signal.
Similar things already exist - although it's used for increasing GPS precision and detecting faulty satellites, moreso than detecting jamming, so the networks might not be dense enough to detect small areas of jamming.
For one state's example, see [1] - choose 'RINEX archives' if you want historical readings.
The police could probably combine this data with license plate scanners and see the single truck that always exists in the jammed location.
Yeah the FCC could probably pull an ATF and shoot a bunch of people over fairly petty crimes but that costs political goodwill that I'm not sure the FCC has to burn.
https://www.fcc.gov/enforcement/orders you can just look at the enforcement actions.
Yesterday's actions include 7 $25k fines apparently all for companies illegally importing banned drones (a procedural fine just for ignoring the investigation attempts). You can peruse that list and find plenty of things, lots of pirate radio recently. They absolutely do go after apparent small fry and your "mcdonalds manager" absolutely has assets that can be seized.
>Yeah the FCC could probably pull an ATF and shoot a bunch of people over fairly petty crimes but that costs political goodwill that I'm not sure the FCC has to burn.
The FCC doesn't have guns, they can't arrest you
The notices of liability the FCC posts to their website are not final orders. They're the federal equivalent of when your zoning sends a notice saying "your patio is 6in too close to the property line, according to the aerial photos it's been there since <years ago>, you owe use <insane number of dollars>". It's essentially civil enforcement speak for "hey asshole, lawyer up and take this seriously". So then like a naive idiot you reply back "this patio predates my ownership of the property" and the money grubbing commissioner fires back "don't care, pay up". This is what the forfeiture order the FCC post on their website are. That said, the FCC is less slimy and less interested in fine money than your local commissioner probably is and I personally hold them in high regard.
Most of these end in the subject of the enforcement simply changing their behavior and paying a trivial fine (the lawyers are the real winners).
To quote those numbers as if they're final is no less dishonest than to quote lawsuit claims as if they're final judgements.
>They absolutely do go after apparent small fry and your "McDonalds manager" absolutely has assets that can be seized
Once again, you can't get blood from a stone. You might get a little but it's not worth the squeeze It is not politically sustainable to make a habit of ruining small time businesses and individuals (we're not talking about the Sackler family here) over nonviolent violations in technical laws where there is no clear chain of causation from the violation to some sort of harm to life or limb. The Mcdonalds Manager will settle for $5k, throwing away his storage unit of Alibaba stuff and not doing that anymore.
The reason I brought up the ATF is because they have a track record of forcing compliance with arcane arbitrary laws and they do it through flamboyant violence. This comes at political cost.
>The FCC doesn't have guns, they can't arrest you
Right, they'd get the FBI be the muscle like all the other Feds that don't have entry teams do.
The feds effectively all have guns. It's just a question of how many desks the papers must cross before they turn into bullets.
Btw, don't smartphones have this built in? I remember some old and cheap Android phones without GPS that came with this.
Received GNSS power is on the order of -130dBm (10e-16 W) - you can jam that with a 1W terrestrial source for hundreds of meters around. Way more if you're willing to scale the power from car USB power levels to bigger grid-connected supplies.
LORAN, from my quick googling, looks to be about 6-7 orders of magnitude higher received power.