Mode S Transponder

[Jethro Tull]

Is it possible to remove my aircraft reg from a Garmin GTX330 mode S transponder?
I am flying VFR ONLY and do not wish my flights to be published on aircraft tracking sites.

[Andrewgr2]

Is it possible to remove my aircraft reg from a Garmin GTX330 mode S transponder?
I am flying VFR ONLY and do not wish my flights to be published on aircraft tracking sites.
I think you can set the transmitted ID to be anything you want. Commercial flights usually transmit their (variable) flight number. Whether it is legal to do so is quite another question. Transmitting your reg certainly makes life easier when talking to controllers because they have often identified you before you call them.

[EXDAC]

Is it possible to remove my aircraft reg from a Garmin GTX330 mode S transponder?
I am flying VFR ONLY and do not wish my flights to be published on aircraft tracking sites.

I think you will find that, even with a blank aircraft registration, your flight can be tracked, and your aircraft identified, by the transmitted ICAO code that is unique to your aircraft.

[Jan Olieslagers]

I think you will find that, even with a blank aircraft registration, your flight can be tracked, and your aircraft identified, by the transmitted ICAO code that is unique to your aircraft.

That's what I thought, too. And while the end-user can change the registration, the ICAO id can only be set by an approved workshop or engineer.

There are lists out on the www that translate icao codes to registrations, too.

[Maoraigh1]

When we fitted a Trig Mode S to our LAA Permit Jodel we set all the info.
You need the installation manual.

[Jethro Tull]

Thank you all for your replies.
Looks like it’s pointless to remove so I will leave it as is.

[SWBKCB]

I think you can approach the likes of FR24 and ask them not to display yr registration

[OvertHawk]

I think you can approach the likes of FR24 and ask them not to display yr registration

I don't know the exact process but I know that it can be done.

I think you have to cite privacy and GDPR regulations as regards their use of data they hold about you.

You have to approach each site individually.

[EXDAC]

"Q: How is ADS-B Exchange different than “other” flight tracking sites?

A: ADS-B Exchange operates a bit differently from other flight tracking sites. As a group of aviation enthusiasts, our primary goal is to answer the question of “what’s up there” rather than “is grandma’s flight on-time”.


You’ll never see an aircraft censored or “blocked” from our site. If one of our feeders is receiving it, the data will be there. This includes military, and other aircraft that attempt to be “unlisted”. Hint: to see some of the planes not shown by other sites, from the map page, right-hand column, Filters -> LADD -> Filter. This primarily applies to US registered aircraft."

[Groundloop]

Of course, anyone who is actually in the UK and is supplying data to FR24 is actually breaking the law - not that many people seem to think that's important!

[Flyingmac]

Of course, anyone who is actually in the UK and is supplying data to FR24 is actually breaking the law - not that many people seem to think that's important!

I can't move without FlightAware and ADS-B picking me up. I appear to be in stealth mode as far as FR24 is concerned.
No idea why.

[Equivocal]

Of course, anyone who is actually in the UK and is supplying data to FR24 is actually breaking the law - not that many people seem to think that's important!I have heard a number of people say this but I've always wondered which bit of legislation is involved. Just curiosity really, but can you explain?

[golfbananajam]

What nefarious activities are you doing that you don't want your flights to be tracked? Why does the fact you only fly VFR make any difference to your conspicuity?

[639]

What nefarious activities are you doing that you don't want your flights to be tracked? Why does the fact you only fly VFR make any difference to your conspicuity?
Not in anyway saying its the case for this poster but I've 'heard stories' of a bloke who after getting done infringing no longer even switches the thing on...I'm sure he isnt alone
Bloody stupid but I'll bet its the number one reason for people not switching their XPDR to alt or even not switching it on at all

[EXDAC]

Not in anyway saying its the case for this poster but I've 'heard stories' of a bloke who after getting done infringing no longer even switches the thing on...I'm sure he isnt alone
Bloody stupid but I'll bet its the number one reason for people not switching their XPDR to alt or even not switching it on at all

I don't know the rules in UK but, in USA, it is illegal not to operate an installed ADS-B Out system or transponder. The penalties for intentionally turning it off may be more severe then the penalities for the infraction you hoped to hide.

The only legal option in USA is to have the system removed from the aircraft and have the removal recorded in the aircraft log by a qualified person. Not an option for me as ADS-B Out is required a my base airport.

[TheOddOne]

In the UK, it's very difficult now to drive your car and not be detected by an Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) camera. It is illegal to remove or deface your number plate so it can't be read by these cameras. This is an interesting parallel to the UK law requiring you to have your transponder on when flying. If you don't like having your car 'pinged' by cameras, ride a push bike. If you don't like your aircraft to show on radar or other sites, don't fly it!
TOO

[Groundloop]

I have heard a number of people say this but I've always wondered which bit of legislation is involved. Just curiosity really, but can you explain?

UK Wireless Telegraphy Act 2006:-

48 Interception and disclosure of messages

(1) A person commits an offence if, [without lawful authority] —

(a) he uses wireless telegraphy apparatus with intent to obtain information as to the contents, sender or addressee of a message (whether sent by means of wireless telegraphy or not) of which neither he nor a person on whose behalf he is acting is an intended recipient, or

(b )he discloses information as to the contents, sender or addressee of such a message.

(2) A person commits an offence under this section consisting in the disclosure of information only if the information disclosed by him is information that would not have come to his knowledge but for the use of wireless telegraphy apparatus by him or by another person.

[TheOddOne]

is an intended recipient,

This is really interesting. The 'intended recipient' of my ADS-B 'out' transmissions is anyone in the vicinity who is airborne or another agency on the ground using the information for my benefit. This includes someone in the clubhouse looking at FR24 to see when the aircraft will be back for sortie planning purposes. In order for this to work, the information needs to be presented on a web site via the internet.
Someone needs to bring a test case to see if transponder transmissions are covered by the definition 'wireless telegraphy'. Strictly, 'telegraphy' means 'the long distance transmission of written messages' (from the ancient Greek).
It's also interesting that in the US (and Canada it seems) we can listen to ATC voice transmissions and get an instant replay on social media whenever there is an accident or incident, whereas in the UK, you never hear a peep - probably due to people being afraid of the WTA 2006.
Freedom of Information seems a lot free-er in some places than others...
TOO

[FullWings]

I did some searching and found a FoI request asking how many investigations and prosecutions have been made so far under the 2006 Act. The answer was three investigations, but that covers the entire spectrum including police, armed forces, etc. Also, OFCOM made excuses and declined to say how many prosecutions, or even successful ones, had resulted, which leads me to think the answer is close to or at zero.

Listening to ATC at home? Technically illegal but probably alongside walking on the cracks in the pavement as something that would actually go to court...

[OvertHawk]

In the UK, it's very difficult now to drive your car and not be detected by an Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) camera. It is illegal to remove or deface your number plate so it can't be read by these cameras. This is an interesting parallel to the UK law requiring you to have your transponder on when flying. If you don't like having your car 'pinged' by cameras, ride a push bike. If you don't like your aircraft to show on radar or other sites, don't fly it!
TOO

But they don't have a website that makes the info on where your car pinged an ANPR camera available to anyone who wants to see it do they?

Your comparison is not especially valid.

[roger4]

This is really interesting. The 'intended recipient' of my ADS-B 'out' transmissions is anyone in the vicinity who is airborne or another agency on the ground using the information for my benefit. This includes someone in the clubhouse looking at FR24 to see when the aircraft will be back for sortie planning purposes. In order for this to work, the information needs to be presented on a web site via the internet.
Someone needs to bring a test case to see if transponder transmissions are covered by the definition 'wireless telegraphy'. Strictly, 'telegraphy' means 'the long distance transmission of written messages' (from the ancient Greek).
It's also interesting that in the US (and Canada it seems) we can listen to ATC voice transmissions and get an instant replay on social media whenever there is an accident or incident, whereas in the UK, you never hear a peep - probably due to people being afraid of the WTA 2006.
Freedom of Information seems a lot free-er in some places than others...
TOO

No test case required. The UK Wireless Telegraphy Act, 2006, Section 116 states:(1)In this Act “wireless telegraphy” means the emitting or receiving, over paths that are not provided by any material substance constructed or arranged for the purpose, of energy to which subsection (2) applies.(2)This subsection applies to electromagnetic energy of a frequency not exceeding 3,000 gigahertz that—(a)serves for conveying messages, sound or visual images (whether or not the messages, sound or images are actually received by anyone), or for operating or controlling machinery or apparatus; or(b)is used in connection with determining position, bearing or distance, or for gaining information as to the presence, absence, position or motion of an object or of a class of objects.Receiving ADSB-out and Mode-S signals, unless you are an intended recipient (as a Flying Club clubhouse would be) is definitely covered by the Act and hence illegal in the UK. Previous versions of the Act only using the information gained was an illegal activity, but the 2006 Act made receiving the information illegal as well.

[EXDAC]

No test case required. The UK Wireless Telegraphy Act, 2006, Section 116 states:(1)In this Act “wireless telegraphy” means the emitting or receiving, over paths that are not provided by any material substance constructed or arranged for the purpose, of energy to which subsection (2) applies.(2)This subsection applies to electromagnetic energy of a frequency not exceeding 3,000 gigahertz that—(a)serves for conveying messages, sound or visual images (whether or not the messages, sound or images are actually received by anyone), or for operating or controlling machinery or apparatus; or(b)is used in connection with determining position, bearing or distance, or for gaining information as to the presence, absence, position or motion of an object or of a class of objects.Receiving ADSB-out and Mode-S signals, unless you are an intended recipient (as a Flying Club clubhouse would be) is definitely covered by the Act and hence illegal in the UK. Previous versions of the Act only using the information gained was an illegal activity, but the 2006 Act made receiving the information illegal as well.


I see nothing in the quoted section that prohibits reception. This section seems to only define what is meant by "wireless telegraphy".

There was an extract of the 2006 act quoted earlier (48 Interception and disclosure of messages) and it specifically relates to "disclosure". What section prohibits reception?

[roger4]

I see nothing in the quoted section that prohibits reception. This section seems to only define what is meant by "wireless telegraphy".

There was an extract of the 2006 act quoted earlier (48 Interception and disclosure of messages) and it specifically relates to "disclosure". What section prohibits reception?

Although Section 48 of the Act is titled "Interception and disclosure", 48 (1) goes on to make it clear that the offence is either (a) obtaining information, or (b) disclosing it. Interception is the same thing as obtaining.

[EXDAC]

How often do UK Short Wave Listeners (SWL) get charged with violating section 48? Should I report any of them that send me a QSL card confirming that they heard my amateur radio transmissions that were clearly not directed at them?

[roger4]

There is clearly a difference between what the Act says is illegal, and what the authorities choose to enforce/prosecute.

Anyone watching enthuiasts at more or less any UK airport will see many using scanners to listen to ATC, and the FR24/ADSB etc websites have large numbers of UK contributors of data in order to give the coverage that they do. There don't appear to be any laws prohibiting the sale of scanners or home ADSB receivers in the UK, so enforcement of the Act looks to me to be a near impossible task.

[639]

I don't know the rules in UK but, in USA, it is illegal not to operate an installed ADS-B Out system or transponder. The penalties for intentionally turning it off may be more severe then the penalities for the infraction you hoped to hide.

The only legal option in USA is to have the system removed from the aircraft and have the removal recorded in the aircraft log by a qualified person. Not an option for me as ADS-B Out is required a my base airport.

ADSB, not sure havnt heard a requirement, but re Transponder, if you have one fitted and its working then legally you MUST switch it on in the UK.

Personally I have a Mode S Transponder fed with GPS that squits out ADSB and one of those Pilot Aware jobs, I switch the lot on every flight not from fear of being technically illegal but because it would be daft not to
Im happy to be tracked in the air, grateful in fact

[639]

I can't move without FlightAware and ADS-B picking me up. I appear to be in stealth mode as far as FR24 is concerned.
No idea why.

Is it a f.u.n.k.e. XPDR?

[Flyingmac]

Is it a f.u.n.k.e. XPDR?

Trig TY91.

[639]

Weird I have the Trig fitted and always show up on FR24, I only asked as I've come across a few Funke transponders that defied all attempts to get them outputting data reliably