Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest vas_yan

DoD Announces Intent to Cease Distribution of Nav Data

Recommended Posts

What's next? Jeppesesn?Who will be allowed to buy/use their charts in the future? Wolfgang

Share this post


Link to post

This is so true, Anthony. Bills are passed and laws are made every day that whittle away at our freedoms with very little protest. The "little things" indeed do need to be squawked about!Dan Brookshire


CPU: Intel i7 920 @ 4gHz for FSX w/Thermalright Ultra 120 Extreme Motherboard: ASUS P6T Deluxe OC Palm Memory: 6GB (3x2gb) OCZ3P1600LV6GK Case: CM690 PSU: PC Power & Cooling 750W OS: Vista64 SP1 Main HDD: 500GB WD Caviar Black SATA FSX Drive: 300GB WD Velociraptor

GPU: EVGA GTX285 Vanilla

Share this post


Link to post

I gotta refute some of this Bob, sorry! ;)>The decision to remove the DAFIF data, which is used>operationally by our armed forces, among other government>agencies, from the public internet, makes it much harder for>someone to hack into the database and do harm. Imagine the>consequences of a hacker changing altitude minimums on an>approach plate, for example, when he knows that weather in a>particular hotspot is going to be bad. With crews using this>data more and more, the last thing we need is a $400 million>C-17-shaped hole in the dirt because the crew descended to an>unsafe altitude and hit a cumulogranite cloud while on>approach to the GWOT Hell Hole of the Week. That's just one>of many conceivable operational risks of having this data hung>out on the public internet. By keeping the data on closed or>restricted-access government networks an added measure of>security is obtained. Absolute security? No such thing. But>you do what you can to tighten things up.This is crazy. As I pointed out in my earlier thread - you cannot tell me that the DoD is putting the ACTUAL master database up on the Internet and that the actual military FMCs or whatever are connecting to the website and using the data as is. The idea of a terrorist hacker changing MSA's on an approach plate and then having a pilot DL it and use it for an actual approach is probably one of the most farfetched things I've ever heard. The Pentagon has a nearly limitless budget - give out the database to the public on the website and keep a secured internal one for the actual distribution to real USAF/Navy personel.>It doesn't say that somebody in the Pentagon is deluded into>believing that this action will prevent access to the data by>those who shouldn't have it. It says *unfetterd* access. In>other words, nobody expects tha bad guys won't be able to get>the data they need, but we're not going to just give it to>them.Again, where does this mentality stop? At what point do our rights as taxpayers take a backseat to "not giving things to the bad guys"? As others have said - should we ban public access to the road atlas so as to not "give" terrorists the "navdata" for our Interstate highways that include the locations of such dangerous items as "exits" and "onramps"? (the land equivalent of airspace fixes) I completely fail to see how knowing the location of CIVET intersection, what the fixes along J92 are, or the what the DPs and STARs at KPHX consist of are going to help a terrorist carry out a hijacking or bombing of an aircraft. This is all not to mention that if they did want that data, all it'd take is a trip to the local FBO or the website to buy some current Jep charts for a nominal fee.>The DAFIF is compiled with data from many sources...most of>which are not American. The agreements made to provide that>data did not include an agreement to allow their data to be>freely redistributed over the internet. The US Govt has a>real interest in keeping as complete a database as>possible...it's not going to be complete at all if sources cry>foul and stop providing the data.Ok I can sort of see this. I would not have a problem (as bad as it would be for people who sim outside the US) with them allowing at least the USA data to still be distributed.>There are many precedents where US DoD actively avoids putting>itself in a position in which it would compete with commercial>interests. The space-available transportation rules, for>example, which allow military members and their families to>fly nearly for free on Air Mobility Command flights, have a>score of rules aimed at preventing AMC from competing with>airlines for domestic travel. It wasn't the military's>idea...it's the result of industry lobbying to the lawmakers>who drive these sorts of restraints. Don't like what>noncompetition policies do? Call your Congressman.This one gets me steamed big time. Who is actually making *REAL* FMS data using the sometimes very incomplete DAFIF database? Is this really taking profit away from companies like Jeppessen? I highly doubt it. We the taxpayers fund the creation of this navdata and the public owns the airspace above the USA, not the DoD or any other agency within the goverment.>A considerable amount of the data contained in DAFIF is the>intellectual property of other governments or organizations. >These governments and organizations have a legitimate right to>expect that their intellectual property rights be respected,>and that the data they sell not be given away by the US>Government for free. Agreed, same response as before about only distributing the USA data publically.>The scathing commentary on this thread suggesting that the>government or NGA is somehow in bed with Jeppeson or the>industry in general places the blame for profit motives quite>wrongly. If these companies are making a profit, it's becuase>their host nations permit it...it's not up to the US>Government to change that.Well you said yourself that these types of agreements are the result of lobbying Congress by the companies - I'd consider that "in bed" if they've succeeded in making private financial interests more important that the public's right to use the data.


Ryan Maziarz
devteam.jpg

For fastest support, please submit a ticket at http://support.precisionmanuals.com

Share this post


Link to post

>I gotta refute some of this Bob, sorry! ;)>>>This is crazy. As I pointed out in my earlier thread - you>cannot tell me that the DoD is putting the ACTUAL master>database up on the Internet and that the actual military FMCs>or whatever are connecting to the website and using the data>as is. The idea of a terrorist hacker changing MSA's on an>approach plate and then having a pilot DL it and use it for an>actual approach is probably one of the most farfetched things>I've ever heard. The Pentagon has a nearly limitless budget ->give out the database to the public on the website and keep a>secured internal one for the actual distribution to real>USAF/Navy personel.None of this is being uploaded directly from the web to an FMC, but the printed data is put up for operational use. For what other reason do you suppose DoD would put it there? Are there other safeguards...you can sure bet there are, but it's one door open to anyone on the internet the way it's accessed today.Limitless budget? Ryan, you need a couple years pounding the halls of the pentagon trying to make a defense program...ANY program...work within the constraints of this so-called "limitless" budget. Not so by a long shot.>Again, where does this mentality stop? At what point do our>rights as taxpayers take a backseat to "not giving things to>the bad guys"? As others have said - should we ban public>access to the road atlas so as to not "give" terrorists the>"navdata" for our Interstate highways that include the>locations of such dangerous items as "exits" and "onramps"? >(the land equivalent of airspace fixes) I completely fail to>see how knowing the location of CIVET intersection, what the>fixes along J92 are, or the what the DPs and STARs at KPHX>consist of are going to help a terrorist carry out a hijacking>or bombing of an aircraft. This is all not to mention that if>they did want that data, all it'd take is a trip to the local>FBO or the website to buy some current Jep charts for a>nominal fee.See my other post in the other thread...you have no "rights" to this data as a taxpayer or citizen. Just because you think it ought to be so doesn't make it so. Your rights as a taxpayer extend as far as your vote. Get enough others to see it your way, and you can affect the course of things. Otherwise, you have the rights codified in the laws of the land...in particular the Freedom of Information Act in this case. >Ok I can sort of see this. I would not have a problem (as bad>as it would be for people who sim outside the US) with them>allowing at least the USA data to still be distributed.It's not DoD's function nor is it in DoD's interest to distribute data to non-DoD users.>This one gets me steamed big time. Who is actually making>*REAL* FMS data using the sometimes very incomplete DAFIF>database? Is this really taking profit away from companies>like Jeppessen? I highly doubt it. We the taxpayers fund the>creation of this navdata and the public owns the airspace>above the USA, not the DoD or any other agency within the>goverment.The US navdata was created by the FAA, the keepers of the NAS, and used by DoD. And a subset of the FAA data is part of the DAFIF, along with data from many foreign nations.>Well you said yourself that these types of agreements are the>result of lobbying Congress by the companies - I'd consider>that "in bed" if they've succeeded in making private financial>interests more important that the public's right to use the>data.Again, there's no public "right" to use this data, beyond that codified in the law. You can argue all day on how you think it ought to be...Finally, protection of private financial interests is absolutely in the government's interest. That includes our own private financial interests. Promotion and protection of free trade on a level market playing field are compelling government and public interests...they're the rails our economy rides on. RegardsBob ScottATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-V L-300Washington, DC


Bob Scott | President and CEO, AVSIM Inc
ATP Gulfstream II-III-IV-V

System1 (P3Dv5/v4): i9-13900KS @ 6.0GHz, water 2x360mm, ASUS Z790 Hero, 32GB GSkill 7800MHz CAS36, ASUS RTX4090
Samsung 55" JS8500 4K TV@30Hz,
3x 2TB WD SN850X 1x 4TB Crucial P3 M.2 NVME SSD, EVGA 1600T2 PSU, 1.2Gbps internet
Fiber link to Yamaha RX-V467 Home Theater Receiver, Polk/Klipsch 6" bookshelf speakers, Polk 12" subwoofer, 12.9" iPad Pro
PFC yoke/throttle quad/pedals with custom Hall sensor retrofit, Thermaltake View 71 case, Stream Deck XL button box

Sys2 (MSFS/XPlane): i9-10900K @ 5.1GHz, 32GB 3600/15, nVidia RTX4090FE, Alienware AW3821DW 38" 21:9 GSync, EVGA 1000P2
Thrustmaster TCA Boeing Yoke, TCA Airbus Sidestick, 2x TCA Airbus Throttle quads, PFC Cirrus Pedals, Coolermaster HAF932 case

Portable Sys3 (P3Dv4/FSX/DCS): i9-9900K @ 5.0 Ghz, Noctua NH-D15, 32GB 3200/16, EVGA RTX3090, Dell S2417DG 24" GSync
Corsair RM850x PSU, TM TCA Officer Pack, Saitek combat pedals, TM Warthog HOTAS, Coolermaster HAF XB case

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Peter Sidoli

BobReading my last post to you I realise it was "heavy" in my criticism of politicians and what has been done.Secondly I am on this side of the pond so mainly directed at our own government.In a previous post I mentioned the fact that our government used the invironment issue to pass increased taxes under the guise of protecting the invironment.Governments do use sensitive issues as a cloak for increasing taxes or passing legislation which normally would not be acceptable.With all the damage that has been done to aviation since 9/11 what has been achieved to stop another 9/11.Airport security has been increased and intelligence has been increased but still a well organised and funded group could still pull off such an atrocity.There is a simple solution which may involve future aircraft design but would cutoff the pilot invironment from the cabin invironment with no access potential to the cockpit and no means of communication for terrorists with the crew.How would this be achieved? Firstly a fuselage door access to the cockpit with no access from the Cabin or a really terrorist proof door / bomb and tamper proof.Secondly without communication no demands can be passed to the crew.Obviously this would mean that the cabin staff also could not communicate directly with the crew.How could this be achieved? by a third ground party ie a communications controller who is used via radio to pass requests, problems or information to the crew.Terrorist requests or demands would be an absolute no go area and would not be passed on making a 9/11 or a hijack a thing of the past.This would not stop someone blowing up an aircraft in flight and that would still have to be done by high tech screening of passengers and loaded items at the airport but with the above moves a 9/11 would never happen again which at present even with all the restrictions and headless chicken implementations could still be a possibility.With the future of huge aircraft carrying 800 people the potential for a massive disaster will be even more worrying and frankly a lot to date has not really addressed the problems but has been more an exercise in public relations, big words and a lot of damage to aviation.Peter

Share this post


Link to post
Guest vas_yan

"Again, there's no public "right" to use this data, beyond that codified in the law. You can argue all day on how you think it ought to be..."Bob, I'm NATO Secret classified...Am I "unpublic" enough to to have access to the data? On the other hand, are you classified? No? Then don't dare turn on that GPS/FMC next time you step on your Gulfstream II-III-IV-V or whatever! Only dead reckoning for you from now on mate!Apologies for my tone, but there IS a general public right to use this data. They only produce it to hand it to the general public! It's not classified or restricted or nothing! As I said in another thread, do you think you are bribing Jeppesen into releasing restricted material? Edit for clarification: I am talking about Navdata in general not just the DAFIF staff they are taking down.Kind regards,

Share this post


Link to post
Guest

and if you'd read the press release and did some background check you'd have noticed they're not even taking it down.They're taking steps in preparation of potentially taking it down if and when such becomes necessary to prevent legal trouble with the suppliers of that data.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest vas_yan

Jeroen, Thanks for the taunting of my impreciseness...Much needed on a Sunday afternoon...Following your suggestion on doing some background reading I read http://www.avweb.com/bizav/10_04/news/186538-1.html I was mostly struck by the phrase "Jeppesen said it opposes license fees for the reuse or redistribution of PUBLIC AERONAUTICAL INFORMATION".Perhaps you could shed some light on what the phrase "legal trouble" signifies. I would be most grateful if you could elaborate as to what is exactly the International Public (or maybe Private? Hmmm...) Law procedure whereby a sovereign State may sue another sovereign State for losses accruing out of copyright infringements..? Or for that matter sue another State at all? I would be mostly interested on your view particularly on the issues of International Jurisdiction, Courts' competence and, ofcourse, applicable law... I'm being silly really, all I want to say is that there's no "legal trouble" involved in the US DoD redistribution of this data...At the most, an exchange of diplomatic communication, on a relatively low level, is all it would take...Take care,

Share this post


Link to post

>"Again, there's no public "right" to use this data, beyond>that codified in the law. You can argue all day on how you>think it ought to be...">>Bob, I'm NATO Secret classified...Am I "unpublic" enough to to>have access to the data? On the other hand, are you>classified? No? Then don't dare turn on that GPS/FMC next time>you step on your Gulfstream II-III-IV-V or whatever! Only dead>reckoning for you from now on mate!The guys around here that know me are getting a good chuckle out of this. But you won't find me discussing security clearances and the like on a public forum. Sorry.The navdata in the Honeywell SPZ-8500 in a Gulfstream V comes from Jeppessen. Doubt they're using DAFIF to build their database...they have one of their own that is considerably more far reaching.>Apologies for my tone, but there IS a general public right to>use this data. They only produce it to hand it to the general>public! It's not classified or restricted or nothing! As I>said in another thread, do you think you are bribing Jeppesen>into releasing restricted material? The navdata contained in the DAFIF does not originate with DoD. The US National Airspace System is managed by the FAA, not DoD, and the FAA's National Flight Data Center is the original source of US navdata, which can be obtained easily by subscribing to the ATA-100 database. Similar agencies and organizations in other countries serve the same function. The DAFIF compilation is created by DoD for DoD use...any decision to restrict distribution of the DoD DAFIF database isn't the same as denying the information to the public.And sure, the public has a right to use any such data they legally obtain...they just have no "right" to obtain it directly from DoD. They can get it from the FAA and similar organizations in other nations, or buy it from Jeppesen or find another supplier/vendor. >Edit for clarification: I am talking about Navdata in general>not just the DAFIF staff they are taking down.I'n not sure where this idea that DoD is somehow trying to corner the market on navigational data came from, but that's not the case, or the issue in this discussion. RegardsBob ScottATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-V L-300Washington, DC


Bob Scott | President and CEO, AVSIM Inc
ATP Gulfstream II-III-IV-V

System1 (P3Dv5/v4): i9-13900KS @ 6.0GHz, water 2x360mm, ASUS Z790 Hero, 32GB GSkill 7800MHz CAS36, ASUS RTX4090
Samsung 55" JS8500 4K TV@30Hz,
3x 2TB WD SN850X 1x 4TB Crucial P3 M.2 NVME SSD, EVGA 1600T2 PSU, 1.2Gbps internet
Fiber link to Yamaha RX-V467 Home Theater Receiver, Polk/Klipsch 6" bookshelf speakers, Polk 12" subwoofer, 12.9" iPad Pro
PFC yoke/throttle quad/pedals with custom Hall sensor retrofit, Thermaltake View 71 case, Stream Deck XL button box

Sys2 (MSFS/XPlane): i9-10900K @ 5.1GHz, 32GB 3600/15, nVidia RTX4090FE, Alienware AW3821DW 38" 21:9 GSync, EVGA 1000P2
Thrustmaster TCA Boeing Yoke, TCA Airbus Sidestick, 2x TCA Airbus Throttle quads, PFC Cirrus Pedals, Coolermaster HAF932 case

Portable Sys3 (P3Dv4/FSX/DCS): i9-9900K @ 5.0 Ghz, Noctua NH-D15, 32GB 3200/16, EVGA RTX3090, Dell S2417DG 24" GSync
Corsair RM850x PSU, TM TCA Officer Pack, Saitek combat pedals, TM Warthog HOTAS, Coolermaster HAF XB case

Share this post


Link to post

Hi Peter;From your previous post:>With all the damage that has been done to aviation since 9/11>what has been achieved to stop another 9/11.>>Airport security has been increased and intelligence has been>increased but still a well organised and funded group could>still pull off such an atrocity.Yes...that's a risk we run in a free society. Absolute security is not achievable in absence of absolute authority, which of course we don't want. There are many people that think the security enhancements in place already have gone too far...and many who think they don't go far enough. It's a balancing act. We have to weigh the costs...in terms of both money and infringement on personal freedoms. To do nothing is an unacceptable risk to public safety. To do everything is an unacceptable loss in personal freedoms. The answer lies in the middle. But neither safety nor personal freedom are absolutes. And that's nothing new.>There is a simple solution which may involve future aircraft>design but would cutoff the pilot invironment from the cabin>invironment with no access potential to the cockpit and no>means of communication for terrorists with the crew.This is essentially the solution that El Al, the Israeli national airline uses. They will not open the (heavily reinforced) door to the flight deck in flight under any circumstances. The cabin crew knows the policy, and the flight deck crews are sufficiently disciplined to keep it locked no matter what...especially post-9/11.On the issue of government, I always frame things in the context of the complexity involved in making anything happen. For example, I don't want to see white-haired 80-year old ladies being searched at the airport...I am absolutely in favor of profiling because we know pretty well what the threat looks like. But we can't, because the American Criminal Liberties Union will be there with a team of lawyers wanting to impress on us the unfairness of common sense. So we end up having to strip-search Granny to get to the more likely threat...I sigh and think it's ridiculous, but I also understand that such accomodations are often the only way to keep moving forward. It ain't pretty, but it works. But too many people criticize government harshly without stopping to consider the unbelievable difficulties in charting a course to anywhere when there are 300,000,000 navigators each with a different idea of where we should go.CheersBob ScottATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-V L-300Washington, DC


Bob Scott | President and CEO, AVSIM Inc
ATP Gulfstream II-III-IV-V

System1 (P3Dv5/v4): i9-13900KS @ 6.0GHz, water 2x360mm, ASUS Z790 Hero, 32GB GSkill 7800MHz CAS36, ASUS RTX4090
Samsung 55" JS8500 4K TV@30Hz,
3x 2TB WD SN850X 1x 4TB Crucial P3 M.2 NVME SSD, EVGA 1600T2 PSU, 1.2Gbps internet
Fiber link to Yamaha RX-V467 Home Theater Receiver, Polk/Klipsch 6" bookshelf speakers, Polk 12" subwoofer, 12.9" iPad Pro
PFC yoke/throttle quad/pedals with custom Hall sensor retrofit, Thermaltake View 71 case, Stream Deck XL button box

Sys2 (MSFS/XPlane): i9-10900K @ 5.1GHz, 32GB 3600/15, nVidia RTX4090FE, Alienware AW3821DW 38" 21:9 GSync, EVGA 1000P2
Thrustmaster TCA Boeing Yoke, TCA Airbus Sidestick, 2x TCA Airbus Throttle quads, PFC Cirrus Pedals, Coolermaster HAF932 case

Portable Sys3 (P3Dv4/FSX/DCS): i9-9900K @ 5.0 Ghz, Noctua NH-D15, 32GB 3200/16, EVGA RTX3090, Dell S2417DG 24" GSync
Corsair RM850x PSU, TM TCA Officer Pack, Saitek combat pedals, TM Warthog HOTAS, Coolermaster HAF XB case

Share this post


Link to post
Guest

you obviously don't want to understand what's happening...Might be caused by your "security clearance" making you only see things you're specifically cleared for or have thought up yourself and being blind to the rest of the universe.The Ozzie data is provided by a private (though likely publicly owned) company.Jep has a license to use that data and I guess so has the US DoD. That company sues Jep over the way they use that data at the moment. DoD appreciates that would Jep loose that they could well be the next target and even if not other companies in other countries providing similar services for their countries may well start charging for use as well.DoD therefore takes preliminary steps to terminate a courtesy service which has no relation to their primary mission at all and is only costing them money before that service will cost even more if they're sued over intellectual property theft (which is I believe the charge brought against Jep).Nothing wrong or weird about that.And if you believe government agencies (or even governments) can't be sued by other government agencies, governments, or private citizens I wonder what closet you've been hiding in as it's a very common practice (though usually not published much outside the immediate nations involved).

Share this post


Link to post
Guest

Jep being sued is the cause of the steps DoD is preparing (not taking, they're just making sure they can take it down if needed)...

Share this post


Link to post

>Jep being sued is the cause of the steps DoD is preparing>(not taking, they're just making sure they can take it down if>needed)...I've seen this said a few times in the last few days, but have no idea what the source is. The announcement in the federal register, which is the only official position of the DoD and NGA, is not the least bit tentative...it says they are removing the DAFIF from public access on 1 Oct 2005. I find myself wondering if this is just a hopeful rumor. Anyone have a source?RegardsBob ScottATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-V L-300Washington, DC


Bob Scott | President and CEO, AVSIM Inc
ATP Gulfstream II-III-IV-V

System1 (P3Dv5/v4): i9-13900KS @ 6.0GHz, water 2x360mm, ASUS Z790 Hero, 32GB GSkill 7800MHz CAS36, ASUS RTX4090
Samsung 55" JS8500 4K TV@30Hz,
3x 2TB WD SN850X 1x 4TB Crucial P3 M.2 NVME SSD, EVGA 1600T2 PSU, 1.2Gbps internet
Fiber link to Yamaha RX-V467 Home Theater Receiver, Polk/Klipsch 6" bookshelf speakers, Polk 12" subwoofer, 12.9" iPad Pro
PFC yoke/throttle quad/pedals with custom Hall sensor retrofit, Thermaltake View 71 case, Stream Deck XL button box

Sys2 (MSFS/XPlane): i9-10900K @ 5.1GHz, 32GB 3600/15, nVidia RTX4090FE, Alienware AW3821DW 38" 21:9 GSync, EVGA 1000P2
Thrustmaster TCA Boeing Yoke, TCA Airbus Sidestick, 2x TCA Airbus Throttle quads, PFC Cirrus Pedals, Coolermaster HAF932 case

Portable Sys3 (P3Dv4/FSX/DCS): i9-9900K @ 5.0 Ghz, Noctua NH-D15, 32GB 3200/16, EVGA RTX3090, Dell S2417DG 24" GSync
Corsair RM850x PSU, TM TCA Officer Pack, Saitek combat pedals, TM Warthog HOTAS, Coolermaster HAF XB case

Share this post


Link to post
Guest vas_yan

w6kd,Your argument was that there exists no public right to use the data. I argued that yes there exists such a right (right to use Navdata in general). I take it that you agreed buy stating "the public has a right to use any such data they legally obtain...they just have no "right" to obtain it directly from DoD". I never argued about who the public is entitled to obtain it from, just that there exists such a right and that subscription to any commercial service that provides such data is not in any way akin to obtaining some sort of "clearance". Anyway, If I misread your original argument somehow, you have my sincere apologies.You also said "The guys around here that know me are getting a good chuckle out of this. But you won't find me discussing security clearances and the like on a public forum. Sorry." That sounds like discussion to me, even if its only by insinuation. I take back what I said, lucky you, I guess you are cleared to turn that Honeywell back on :(Jwenting,You are putting words in my mouth my friend. Wrong tactic...Do you use it often? Did I say that a private person can't sue a Government or a Government agency?Anyway, let's see how this all works. The Australian agency, be it a public or private entity (even though I believe Australians are clever enough not to let this matter of national security in the hands of the, stricto sensu, private sector), that produces local navdata and distributes it freely decides it is time to make some money out of Jeppesen and seeks to charge them with a redistribution fee.Do you honestly believe that this "entity" is next going to start litigation against the US DoD over data they provide to them, for various reasons for which you and I might not have the faintest idea (do you know, for example, if there exists some reciprocal agreement or if an international custom has been established?)?If so, then I think it is you who are hiding in a very dark and soundproof closet. In any event,jwenting, in the majority of countries, the relevant competence lies with some agency directly connected to the State. I stand by my belief that such public agencies would not do anything similar to what Airservices Australia did, at least against those in control of DAFIF. You have my word on it! Let me tell you a secret...there does exist a thing called, sshhh...international politics (not to mention the intricacies of International Public Law which apparently elude you...). Best regards,

Share this post


Link to post
Guest vas_yan

In any case, I don't argue that any agency or authority, might tomorrow deny providing their local Navdata to the DoD. It is however erroneous to suggest that fear of litigation is forcing them to rethink about publicising DAFIF. Can you debate this? Oh, and stop googling stuff you don't know just to reply to a post. It won't help.Regards,

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
×
×
  • Create New...