![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Everett M. Greene writes:
It would seem that the German position is rather extreme in that the people on a given aviation frequency have no expectation of privacy (and, for the most part, couldn't care less). Taken to an extreme, it would seem that the German equivalent of the FAA can't record ATC transmissions and use them for quality control, training, or violation proceedings since uninvolved third parties will have been recorded. In Germany, everything is forbidden, except that which is permitted. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Anthony, since you don't fly, your comments are again irrelevant. You do not
need a transponder, two way radio, or even a seat belt. You should go back to the breast feeding forums. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Everett M. Greene wrote:
Michael Huber writes: Peter wrote: You would however get into trouble if you recorded ATC and then openly published the recording, e.g. on a website. I don't know why there is this sensitivity because UK ATC are generally highly professional; Maybe a parallel to Germany might help. In Germany, tapping into any communication not intended by the sender to be heard/read/whatever by oneself is illegal (regardless of whether there are measures taken to prevent this) under privacy laws. There are some exceptions, but that's the general rule. ATC communication is only intended for a limited circle of recipients. Plane spotters are not the intended recipients, thus, they may not listen. It has nothing to do with perceived professionality of the ATC people, and everything with protecting the privacy of ATC and pilots. The law in the U.S. is/was that it's illegal to intercept /and reveal/ the content of a transmission. The courts have repeatedly ruled that intercepting (listening to) a transmission is not illegal. It would seem that the German position is rather extreme in that the people on a given aviation frequency have no expectation of privacy (and, for the most part, couldn't care less). Taken to an extreme, it would seem that the German equivalent of the FAA can't record ATC transmissions and use them for quality control, training, or violation proceedings since uninvolved third parties will have been recorded. It makes you understand why they launched both World Wars. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Sam Spade wrote:
It makes you understand why they launched both World Wars. I'm aware that you're trolling, but how does that follow? The rather strict privacy laws exist to make it harder for a government (or, really, any organization or individual) to collect too much data on a single person - and that is exactly to help prevent a dictatorship. Sadly, though, that lesson seems to have fallen by the wayside, and more and more privacy is being invaded by the government. We are following the US' bad example. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Everett M. Greene wrote:
Taken to an extreme, it would seem that the German equivalent of the FAA can't record ATC transmissions and use them for quality control, training, or violation proceedings since uninvolved third parties will have been recorded. No, it's not. ATC comms are recorded and that is public knowledge (at least among those participating). You basically consent to being recorded by transmitting. Realize that privacy laws do not protect you against other people listening in or recording what you are saying. They are however protecting you against being listened to or recorded *without* *your* *knowledge*. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Michael Huber writes:
Realize that privacy laws do not protect you against other people listening in or recording what you are saying. They are however protecting you against being listened to or recorded *without* *your* *knowledge*. How are you able to determine who is listening to you when you talk to ATC? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Peter,
which display aircraft registrations do it by containing software and database to decode the 24-bit code. Why wouldn't they simply use the flight ID data field? -- Thomas Borchert (EDDH) |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
... Peter, which display aircraft registrations do it by containing software and database to decode the 24-bit code. Why wouldn't they simply use the flight ID data field? For one, not all ModeS transponders have that capability as it's implemented as a level 2 function. I know that many, if not all, areas of western Europe require a ModeS transponder, but I'm not sure if they require a level 2 ModeS transponder. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Garrecht Mode S transponder - USA? | Eric Greenwell | Soaring | 3 | August 20th 07 09:05 PM |
New transponder mode S vs. mode C | Tom N. | Soaring | 39 | November 7th 06 07:40 AM |
KT76C Mode C transponder - what is it worth? | Mike Rapoport | General Aviation | 1 | November 21st 04 05:56 AM |
KT76C Mode C transponder - what is it worth? | G.R. Patterson III | Owning | 0 | November 21st 04 05:56 AM |
WTB: Mode C Transponder | Chris Batcheller | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | February 21st 04 01:31 PM |