V Australia - Influenza Warning In Flight
 

With swine influenza reports inceasing every day, forward warning messages for quarantine are starting to appear on ACARS.

VH-VPE VA0002 28/04/2009 10:56 V Australia B777-3ZG(ER) Los Angeles-Sydney

ACARS mode: 2 Aircraft reg: .VH-VPE
Message label: 81 Block id: 6 Msg. no: M52A
Flight id: VA0002
Message content:-
/BNEPHVA.- OPS QUARANTINE UPDATE
3 MORE PAX HAVE REPORTED FLU LIKE SYMPTOMS PAX IN 24G 22A 35K
FA SUZAN HAS ALSO REPORTED SYMPTOMS.
-------------------------------------[28/04/2009 10:56]

I dont believe ACARS messages containing crew or pax names for that matter should be published on this site.

ACARS info is publicly available on the internet, so I'm not sure what the big deal is?

Hope Suzan has a quick recovery.

That may well be the case but if I was the FA would prefer it not to be published on a website. How many people really sit around monitoring ACARS messages anyway? Everyone's different I guess.

I'm with James.

Public or not there is no need to re-publish everything that is sent via Acars.

I don't see the advantages of making this stuff public? Only adds to the media bashing on the subject.

Just my thoughts.

What is the ACARS website address? Sorry for the stupid question but I've never used it before...thanks!

oh well, I find it interesting

only a first name of the FA was released, possibly even abbreviated (could be Sussane)

no big deal...

The point of the thread was that airlines were using ACARS to warn quarantine authorities of passengers with flu like symptoms. Suzan's full name was in the ACARS transmission, however I removed the surname for privacy reasons.

Air New Zealand use ACARS to send emails that include the crew members full email address. If I publish any of these transmissions I always throw in some ??? in the email address to maintain their privacy.

I like reading Grahames ACARS transmissions, don't see the issue anybody can find them online if they want them.

Wednesday UA863 & UA839 was quarantined on arrival, was giving gates 8 & 9 to unload. After unloading UA863 was taxied to its normal gate, UA839 departed to MEL.

It is radio based, not web based. Ie the plane transmits data messages to ground stations, the ground stations then send the data to the 'airline'. With a scanner, sound card and some simple software anyone within range can decode the messages.

Do search of ACARS for greater detail.

Thanks heaps Ash - appreciate your reply!

ACARS flu information is being transmitted by a number of aircraft now including V Australia, United and LAN.

ACARS mode: 2 Aircraft reg: .CC-CQF
Message label: 80 Block id: 6 Msg. no: M29A
Flight id: LA0801
Message content:-
/SYDOWLA SYDOSQF.3B01 OTHER 0801/01 NZAA/YSSY .CC-CQF
THERE IS NO INDICATION OF ILL TRAVELLER ON BOARD
-------------------------------------[02/05/2009 07:37]

and QF

ACARS mode: 2 Aircraft reg: .VH-OGG
Message label: 86 Block id: Msg. no: 4722
Flight id: QF0142
Message content:-
/SYD.
ARI
SYD ETAB 00:25
WH/CH 03 UN/MNR 00
THANK YOU WE HAVE NO ILLNESS ON BOARD ..
-------------------------------------[02/05/2009 09:47]

and Air New Zealand ...

ACARS mode: S Aircraft reg: .ZK-OKE
Message label: 8X Block id: 4 Msg. no: M07A
Flight id: NZ0119
Message content:-
RA INVALID QUSYDKOQF~1
HI
GATE 58
BAY 58
A-C OPS 118 AKL 1530
PLSE ADV ANY ILLNESS ON BOARD DUE SWINE FLU.
QARANTINE NEED TO ISSUE PRATIQUE.
THANKS, QANTAS SYDNEY

-------------------------------------[02/05/2009 13:20]

ACARS mode: S Aircraft reg: .ZK-OKE
Message label: 14 Block id: 9 Msg. no: M09A
Flight id: NZ0119
Message content:-
00AIR02NZAAYSSY041002--01--NNN
L1
L2
000000000000
NO CREW OR PAX SICKNESS
ONBOARD.R PEART 28676
CAT 8/168
-------------------------------------[02/05/2009 13:21]

And Air Vanuatu ...

ACARS mode: 2 Aircraft reg: .YJ-AV1
Message label: 86 Block id: 4 Msg. no: M51A
Flight id: NF0010
Message content:-
ARI
ETAB 0552YSSY
WHLCHR 00 /00MED
ASST 00MINORS 00PAX
SICK N
SI
HI NO SICKNESS ONBOARD DO U HAVE A GATE-ZFW
-------------------------------------[02/05/2009 15:06]

PRATIQUE - Pratique is the license given to a ship to enter port on assurance from the captain to convince the authorities that he/she is free from contagious disease.

every day learn something new!

Banjo

Pratique - a first for me to Andrew.

Not a word you hear very often hey!

Until now, pratique was given to all flights unless the captain declared otherwise, ie it was assumed you were disease free unless the Captain notified the authorities otherwise.

The change is that now that assumption is not made, and flights have to declare yes or no to "disease on board". On some ACARS aircraft the sent arrival message already includes a "Y/N" for sickness, and so by default they were already meeting this requirement. For that reason you won't see any of these "free of disease" statements from the QF744, as it sends it as part of the ACARS message.

The 767 is not so lucky, so every international flight will have a text statement.


As an aside, I am also of the thought that a lot of these messages should not be published. I am well aware that it is possible to intercept ACARS messages, however they ARE company confidential, and are not for public viewing. Confidential and sensitive information is sent, and should not be read easily by the general public. I know that Grahame does filter and sanitise some of the material, but it does not resolve the fact that it is all private information.

Despite the fact that someones name is removed, how would you all feel if your emails to your wife/tennis partner/dog were freely available on the internet for all to read? These are not "over the airwaves" transmissions that everyone knows are available... 95% of crew believe that what they write in a private ACARS message remains that way... private... and as a spotting group we should respect that privacy.

Here Here

another way of looking at it?
 

Leaving the ethics of republishing data aside, any system that relies on security by obscurity can't really be said to be confidential.

The ARINC 800 series specifications includes encrypted datalink messages, if you don't want someone reading your data transmissions (in any system, not just aviation) then you encrypt it, otherwise you can't really expect folks not to look.

So since it is possible to prevent unauthorised access to the data, and the messages mentioned haven't been encrypted, then one can only assume the airlines don't think it is worthwhile to encrypt, but that is a whole different question to that of (re)publishing personal details.

Yes and the orginal poster deleted the surname of the FA thus ensuring privacy. So the whole debate to me seem to be moot.

I have never claimed it to be illegal to recieve the messages (although that would be an interesting area of law, given the retransmission of messages is usually illegal), but that is not the reason I give that we shouldn't publish them.

Crew send those messages knowing that whilst they are probably not entirely confidential, they do not expect them to end up on a spotting website for the world to read.

To those who say that removing the person's name gives privacy...

That is a lot of information given that would enable people to know who the person is, if they wanted to.

I stick with my claim that while we are technologically able to intercept the messages, we are NOT the intended recipient and have no business publishing the content.

I can tell you that the few "non spotting" aircrew I have talked to about this issue were not impressed at all that someone is putting their messages on the internet.

I guess for me I'd just like us to hold the moral high ground and not do something that could potentially damage the standing of spotters in the aviation community.

If they wanted to being the key. The data is public and in this case the poster has IMO hidden it enough to put in on a public board.

and anyone who could readily look up that information probably has access to the ACARS transmissions anyway...

No, the data is NOT public. Just because it is not encrypted does not make it so.

When crew or a company send a message on ACARS, you are not the intended recipient. You are evesdropping. Sometimes ACARS is used to send information that is best not transmitted over the radio. There is no urgent need to prevent someone, if they are interested, from reading it, and obviously some here have the ability at home to do so, and that isn't something that is going to be stopped.

Publishing that information on a board that represents the interests of the spotting group is an entirely different thing which, I believe, (As detailed in my previous post) works contrary to the intent of most here to be an accepted part of the aviation community.

For example, a lot of work seems to have been done in making good relations with the airlines, with Virgin acknowledging the group for the arrival of its first aircraft. I wonder what their ops control/security departments would say if they find their company confidential transmissions and flight attendants details turning up on the spotting website? At the very least I'm sure that it wouldn't do the image of the group much good.

Feel free to disagree, but if you are going to attack my ideas, please make the effort to construct something other than "but the personal details have been removed", as that is not my point.

Light hearted but respectful balance needed
 

It's a fair point to make, Owen.

I'd say the test is whether anyone is going to be embarrassed by something on the board. Grahame is pretty good at sanitising and extracting but your views might require the sanitising to be a little more stringent where someone is identifiable by name or aircraft id or flight number.

Apart from that I think most of what we read is harmless fun and no-one would think that we have any malicious motives. In many ways our being peers and/or supporters of the message senders gives us a degree of legitimacy beyond that of total strangers but given that the board is crawled by search engine robots as well as by journalists from time to time your comments are a timely reminder that we do need to be circumspect and thoughtful if we want to continue to enjoy what is an indulgence not always accommodated in many countries.

Absolutely Philip, I agree 100%. A nice balanced view from you as always!

I should make it clear I am not attacking Grahame for posting what he believes is a fair thing on the board, as I know many wish to read the messages. Aviation is one of those things that gets into your blood and you just want to find out more!

I agree that in most cases Grahame does quite a good job of sanitising messages, however since the ability for some airlines to send personal emails through the ACARS system has come about, we are seeing more and more personal (if sanitised) information coming through.

I know I am not alone in my views about not publishing ACARS, but not being a particulally "close knit" member means I am slightly more free in airing something that could make others unpopular, as I know seeing the ACARS messages is a popular thing. I just hope to start a bit of debate if this is the way the group wants to go into the future. Do we need to be more circumspect in what is published and make it highly sanitised, or remove it altogether? That is a decision for the group and the moderators, not me.

The risk here, as you point out Philip, is not the use of the information by members of the board, who are most likely aviation enthusiasts who read it for entertainment. It is the fact that it is a public board, most likely frequented by the Authorities and the Media, who can make what they want of what is written. Another avenue is a disgruntled passenger. Airlines are forbidden from revealing passenger lists, however some of the messages on the board mean that passengers names and seat numbers have been revealed. Im not sure the airlines would like that very much.

At the moment Spotters in this country are treated relatively well with a good relationship with the airport authorities and police. I'd hate to see what I think is a questionable practice of publishing private communications (intercepting emails as well) potentially ruin those good relationships.

If they are sending via the airways, unencrypted then what ever is said is quite clearly in the public domain, regardless of weather we are the intended recipient or not. It is no different to making a radio call over the public airways or a phone call for that matter.

They are not company confidential if sent over public airways. They are after all broadcast over the public airways unencrypted, then routed via a third party company (often SITA) so they can hardly be called confidential in any way shape or form.

Well I think you have your knickers in a knot over nothing. The OP did enough to protect the identity of the crew member and posted something which gives us an insight into how airlines and the authorities are treating what is a very serious subject. Graham should be congratulated for doing that. It is whinges like this that discourage people from Graham contributing to this board.

Pratique from a QF B747

ACARS mode: S Aircraft reg: .VH-OEE
Message label: 86 Block id: 0 Msg. no: M24A
Flight id: QF0094
Message content:-
ARI
ETAB 2120YMML
WHLCHR 05 / MED
ASST MINORS PAX
SICK N
SI NO SICKNESS ON BOARD CAPTS NAME C????????? BAY PLSE
-------------------------------------[04/05/2009 06:37]

Owen, I presume the SICK N in the above ACARS transmission is what you are refering to above. I see this on many ACARS transmissions from a variety of aircraft.

Side Note: I have a pretty good relationship with airline staff and tech crews, having had email contact with an Air New Zealand A320 crew about the email feature the airline has implemented (I used the email address in the ACARS message for the initial contact and they were cool about the whole thing, and provided me with some good background), and have also supplied ACARS logs to a Virgin Blue tech crew member responsible for the ACARS implementation on the E Jets.

G'day Grahame, yes the N is the one I'm talking about. It is on a few different aircraft, but not on all ACARS equipt aircraft like the 767. At the moment I imagine we'll see a few people sending it when not required, and forgetting to send it when it is, but I'm sure that the company will be right onto it!

For the side - Yes you're right that many crew will be fine with it, but conversely a lot don't know that people read their messages. Most crew couldn't care less that somebody listens in or reads what they say, but I'm not so sure they'd be keen to have all of it published on the internet, where those who are not enthusiasts, but the media, and who knows who else can freely read it. If those people really wanted to, yes they could monitor ACARS, but they won't do that, but they might run with something from a web forum (Media frequently quote PpRuNe and other websites as gospel).

Most of the things that you post are completely harmless, and some are rather amusing (I didn't know we had so many comedians flying haha), but personally I'd rather not see messages that are not aviation related, such as personal emails, or emails regarding crewmembers or the public.

Thats my 2c worth anyway :D

Ash W - Again, and you don't seem to grasp this - my "request" has nothing to do with legality. It is to do with morality. As an aside, unencrypted information is not automatically public domain. And, by the way, don't go listening to telephone calls which you liken to making radio calls. Telephone communications are private, and there are very strong penalties for people intercepting them.

I was talking about the morals of it too. I just do not see it is an issue, especially when the identity of the individual was masked.

As for phone calls, you might want to double check the laws. It is indeed illegal to tap into the (wired) phone network, but listening into the mobile network isn't illegal per se as the signals are in the public domain. That is why Government security agencies like ASIO need warrants to tap someone phones but DSD on the other hand who's role is to intercept radio signals does not need the same warrants.

Deleted - Way too off topic