

U2 Spy Plane Fries Air Traffic Control Computers, Shuts Down LAX - 001sky
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/investigations/spy-plane-fries-air-traffic-control-computers-shuts-down-lax-n95886

======
dj-wonk
NBC News, you might want to reassign your headline writer to the celebrity
gossip section. Headlines seem to be getting worse, or maybe I just have less
patience for them.

This headline says the plane "fries" the computers, (1) leaving out any
indication that the reports are unconfirmed, (2) suggesting permanent computer
damage, and (3) implying some sort of active jamming. Interesting -- _if_ it
is true.

The article is a bit more cautious -- it doesn't use the word "fries" \--
instead saying it "appears to have triggered a software glitch at a major air
traffic control center in California".

IMO, truly frying a computer only happens when you blast it with a heavy dose
of radiation (like putting it in the microwave!).

------
hajile
I wonder if this problem is related to unexpected elevations over 65,535 feet?

~~~
dalke
I like the conjecture, but believe that that alone shouldn't be enough.
SpaceShipOne, after all, flew to 100 kilometers from Mojave, which is part of
the airspace managed by the L.A. Air Route Traffic Control Center.

Oh! This is nice. SSO was in 2004, and the ERAM system they mention is newer
than that, so my observation doesn't actually mean anything. Even better, the
prime contractor for ERAM? Lockheed Martin. Manufacturer of the U-2? Lockheed
Martin.

~~~
hga
Vandenberg Air Force Base is, what, 150 miles to the NW? Would LAX's radars
see polar orbit launches?

I also find it difficult to imagine a SR-71 didn't mosey on by its radars,
especially since the Skunk Works were in Burbank during the Cold War.

~~~
dalke
It's not LAX, it's the Los Angeles Air Route Traffic Control Center.

Quoting from the link: "As a result, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
had to stop accepting flights into airspace managed by the L.A. Center,
issuing a nationwide ground stop..." including a stop at LAX.

According to
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_Air_Route_Traffic_C...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_Air_Route_Traffic_Control_Center)
\- "the Los Angeles ARTCC controls en route air traffic over southern and
central California, southern Nevada, southwestern Utah, and western Arizona
with the exception of military airspace and lower-level airspace controlled by
local airport towers and TRACONs." This includes Vandenberg.

The last SR-71 flight was in 1999, which is well before the ERAM computer
system which failed here was turned on.

Yes, there have been some launches from Vandenberg. What I don't know is if
rockets are required to have a transponder. I did only a brief search, and
what I found suggests a "no" answer, at least in 2007:

[https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/as...](https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/licenses_permits/sub_orbital_rockets/newregs/media/EP_FR.pdf)

It notes that commercial Mode C transponders have/had "cannot currently report
an altitude greater than 62,000 feet."

That's suspiciously close to the 60,000 feet reported in the link.

~~~
001sky
LA RTC / palmdale has alot of military air-traffic.

Within 100 miles of it are major military installations in ridgecrest, ca
(China Lake Naval Air Station etc).

It would be very interesting (if unfortunate) if a recent SW upgrade could not
handle things flying in and out of that part of the world.

While that did involve the SR71, the US maintains several airframes capable of
65K ceiling including the f15

[http://www.boeing.com/boeing/history/mdc/eagle.page](http://www.boeing.com/boeing/history/mdc/eagle.page)

This is a famous story, and almost surely was LA RTC.

 _" Los Angeles Center, Aspen 20, can you give us a ground speed check?" There
was no hesitation, and the replay came as if was an everyday request. "Aspen
20, I show you at one thousand eight hundred and forty-two knots, across the
ground."

I think it was the forty-two knots that I liked the best, so accurate and
proud was Center to deliver that information without hesitation, and you just
knew he was smiling. But the precise point at which I knew that Walt and I
were going to be really good friends for a long time was when he keyed the mic
once again to say, in his most fighter-pilot-like voice: "Ah, Center, much
thanks, we're showing closer to nineteen hundred on the money."_

[http://oppositelock.jalopnik.com/favorite-
sr-71-story-107912...](http://oppositelock.jalopnik.com/favorite-
sr-71-story-1079127041)

~~~
dalke
I fully confess to being almost ignorant on this topic. I am only
conjecturing.

I'm curious though to know how often aircraft go above 62,000 feet. While the
F-15 reached over 100,000 ft., the same page lists a service ceiling of 65,000
feet. And while the SR-71 easily flew at higher altitudes, it stopped flying
before the affected computer system started running.

I can easily think of other problems; perhaps there was a problem with the
U-2's transponder, or perhaps it's a combination of altitude and speed, ... or
I'm sure you can conjecture scenarios as well as I.

