Loss of public navdata sources = complete BS

[Tabs 2,790]

I don't think I'm overreacting to this news and I hope this thread isn't locked for being slightly political, but this is really the first instance post 9/11 that I can think of where I've really truly felt that the goverment is doing something in the name of "protecting me" that is actually taking away my rights.The people of this country own the airway system, not someone in the Defense Department who just arbitrarily decided that it was a security risk to publish navaid and terminal procedure info to the public. As taxpayers, we pay for the creation of such data - it is our right to access it just as much as it is the Pentagon's.QUOTE:This action is taken to accomplish the following objectives: safeguarding the integrity of Department of Defense (DoD) aeronautical navigation data currently available on the public Internet;This is the only reason that even makes any sense - hacking is a problem, HOWEVER, you're telling me the DoD is putting the master source files for the database on the Internet rather than a copy that they could care less about getting hacked?preventing unfettered access to air facility data by those intending harm to the United States, its interests or allies;Ok, so remove the diagrams dealing with military airports. Btw, if a terrorist wanted this info, couldn't they just buy a Jep subscription for a nominal fee and get even better info than the DAFIF stuff? And hey, those military airbases are in FS already usually with a pretty accurate tarmac layout etc, should the DoD/Homeland Security fly up to Redmond and order MS to strip it from FS2006?upholding terms of bi-lateral geospatial data-sharing agreements;Anyone have the text/link to said agreements?avoiding competition with commercial interests;God forbid the public be able to access the information we pay for already via our taxes without having to pay a private corporation for it. This is in line with the current administration's ideology though - privatize everything. That air you're breathing right now - someone's gonna "own" it before long and you'll be paying them too.and avoiding intellectual property/copyright disputes with foreign agencies that provide host-nation aeronautical data.If this is really an issue, remove the offending portions of the database, leaving at the very least, the USA civilian stuff intact.I'm seriously offended as a simmer by these actions, which clearly are not going to actually produce a tangible "safety" increase, but are just a way for the current goverment to further place itself into a veil of secrecy, unaccountable to those paying the bills for this stuff.I'll be writing letters to both Arizona senators and my district Representative informing them of my disgust for this decision today and I suggest anyone else upset do so as well...

[Guest tango_d]

Hi Ryan,Well said - I've just posted some thoughts also (hadn't seen your thread).Very concerning and equally frustrating !!RegardsEddy:-mad

[Guest monsoon]

100% PURE BS. Besides if soemone really wanted to get a hold of "navdata" they just have to order a freaking set of Jeppesen charts or something. Man if these guys get paid 100K to protect the public, heck i will do it for 90K and actually make sense at it.

[Guest B52Drivr]

Hi Guys,I'm afraid you're on the loosing end of this argument, the hammer has hit the anvil and the die is cast . . .it won't change.BestClayhttp://www.dreamfleet2000.com/gfx/images/F...ers/Dopke01.jpgClayton T. Dopke (Clay)Major, USAF (retired)"Drac"

[ErnieAlston 33]

This is basically a ripple effect of Jeppesen's earlier refusal to pay Airservices Australia license fees for using its public data.My understanding is its now a copyright infringement suit against Jeppesen, which has greatly concerned other Navdata producers. Should Jeppesen lose this fight the effect could be much greater if other countries follow suit and expect Jepp to pay them license fee's to them as well.Its just a direction they 'might' go should this thing go against Jeppesen, and subject the DAFIF producers to similar legal action. It doesn't appear to be a done deal, just the start of a plan should it be needed right now.On the other hand I see it as interesting position for Jepp to be in. As they have basically been using public data, recompiling, and publishing it for their commercial use and charging license fee's. Regards.Ernie.

[Guest panzerschiffe]

I'm actually surprised that the US Military has provided this data with such relative ease to access thus far.Anyway, there's still a little less than a year to find an alternative.

[Tabs 2,790]

I've got an idea:How much does an actual subscription to the Jeppesen data used for the database in real aircraft FMCs cost? If all of us who rely on Richard's service were to contribute to the cost of getting him access to the real deal data, I wonder if the per person cost would be low enough for it to be feasible. In essence this would turn it into a payware product, but if that's the only way to do it, I'd be totally for it. Plus, we'd get a much better database than the DAFIF derived one ever was - it would be exactly what is in the real FMCs.Thoughts?

[Guest bobsk8]

People might not realize it yet, but the government is and has been chipping away at our basic freedoms for a few years now. As long as they get away with it , they will keep chipping. So far, there has been very little protest, by the public. In a couple of years, I may not be brave enough to write a post like this one, if the government keeps going in the direction that it is.

[chumley 0]

We lose access to updated Navdata - so what!This is a game not a matter of life an death. If a new navaid is brought online or one goes offline will it really ruin the simming experience? I doubt it.We must start a campaign of civil disobedience to ensure the governments of the world do not trample on our rights to boot up a computer and enter our reality based dreamworld.Power to the simmer!!Andy b

[chumley 0]

>I've got an idea:>>How much does an actual subscription to the Jeppesen data used>for the database in real aircraft FMCs cost? If all of us who>rely on Richard's service were to contribute to the cost of>getting him access to the real deal data, I wonder if the per>person cost would be low enough for it to be feasible. In>essence this would turn it into a payware product, but if>that's the only way to do it, I'd be totally for it. Plus,>we'd get a much better database than the DAFIF derived one>ever was - it would be exactly what is in the real FMCs.>>Thoughts?What a dumb idea.Probably cost more to transfer the funds than the per person contribution. Andy b

[Guest pagotan]

Hi,Cost of access to commercial datas (Jeppesen in that case) is only one aspect of the problem. By the way the higher side of the cost is in the cycles updates membership not in the purchase of the basic software/datas. No, the real problem is a copyright issue whereby the use of datas is restricted to license user and distribution to third parties or integration of datas in other products / softwares whether sold or freely distributed are forbidden.Michael

[ErnieAlston 33]

>I've got an idea:>>How much does an actual subscription to the Jeppesen data used>for the database in real aircraft FMCs cost? If all of us who>rely on Richard's service were to contribute to the cost of>getting him access to the real deal data, I wonder if the per>person cost would be low enough for it to be feasible. In>essence this would turn it into a payware product, but if>that's the only way to do it, I'd be totally for it. Plus,>we'd get a much better database than the DAFIF derived one>ever was - it would be exactly what is in the real FMCs.>>Thoughts?I don't see how it could be done without Richard violating the Jeppesen license agreement.Unless we all plan on getting a collection together pay all the legal fee's, fines, and judgements against him as well.Regards.Ernie.

[SAS263 1]

Andy, with all due respect, the issue isn

[JimmiG 244]

Scare tactics is very common everywhere but the US is taking it to new extremes all the time. I hope a change of philosophy soon occours over there because freedom and democracy in "the land of the free" has been going downhill for half a decade now. I know Americans who would vote Bush because that would mean lower emission taxes and they have SUV's - there's nothing wrong with voting Republican/Bush if you understand and agree with their program, understand their history and philosophy etc, but deciding who to vote for based on simple things like emission taxes or whatever is a threat to democracy

[Guest B52Drivr]

Jimmy<<<>>I think in every 'free' country, other than perhaps one's who have just obtained their freedom are in the same pinch. Global crisis', terrorism, crime, and such has reduced it for everyone. And no government refuses power when they see the chance to get more of it, its the nature of the beast.Whomever thought this one up, most likely believes that it is a good idea -- I find it rather stupid myself, but the theory is 'somewhere' based on a norm to preserve our way of life.Until we, the people of 'free' nations decide we have had enough of the crimes against humanity that go on in this world, and make an sincere effort to change the world, it is NOT going to get any better, and terrorism and such just gives the power mongers another excuse to make more laws, rules and restrictions in the name of our safety. Remember, freedom is a most costly commodity!"By best definition, terrorism can be weighed as the sustained, clandestine use of physical or mental violence. Be it murder, kidnapping, hijacking or bombing, it usually has a vast political purpose, coercing and intimidating the civilian population, presenting a prejudiced view to affect government policy and attracting the ever aging, news-scrounging media. Killing of civilians, delibertely, to intimidate the general populace is perhaps one of the worst characteristics of contemporary terrorism . . .because it works!I wrote those words about 9 years ago to begin a chapter on a terrorist in a novel I wrote . . . they were true then, they are true now . . . and I doubt seriously if it will change in my lifetime, and yes, it is most frustrating.Best to allClay