Radio communication in aviation serves as the crucial link between pilots and air traffic control (ATCO) that ensures everyone remains safe. Unfortunately, however, this link can break without warning, potentially leading to catastrophic results. Due to blocked transmissions or radio interference, pilots may inadvertently copy frequency changes incorrectly or miss important instructions. Interference Airplanes rely heavily on electronic signals for communication, navigation and safety purposes; disruption of these signals could seriously compromise aircraft performance. Signal interference caused by personal electronic devices like cell phones can pose a threat; interference can also come from radio transmitters on the ground or natural events like lightning and solar flares that disrupt these vital systems - effects which may result in autopilot disconnections, erratic flight deck indications, aircraft going off course, among other issues. VHF frequencies used by airplanes to communicate with air traffic control broadcast at 118 to 137 megahertz, while mobile phones use this same range to transmit their own signals. As the aircraft moves further away from towers that transmit this information, these competing signals compete for attention and may disrupt or even completely block transmission and reception of data by the airplane. Problems can arise when an airplane passes over a radio transmitter on the ground. Since an airborne phone signal cannot reach the tower due to being too far above, its signal will likely bounce off of atmospheric particles instead and reach airport terminals instead. This causes interference with their signal. Problematic radio transmissions can be especially hazardous to commercial and passenger flights. When this occurs, aircraft must quickly leave the area affected by such transmissions in order to rely on other forms of information to remain on course and track their position. Interference can temporarily cause Airbus airplanes equipped with Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) input to fail in performing positioning and timing functions, although other inputs such as IRS and VOR data should continue functioning normally as back-up sources. Adjusting the squelch control on their radio may often help alleviate this effect. Some companies have developed technology that enables airline passengers to use mobile phones during flights by creating an onboard network with its own base station, using low power levels that do not interfere with aircraft avionics and creating an independent network from that on the ground. Delta tested this system which allows passengers to turn on cell phones at 30,000 feet or above without interference to use. If necessary, passengers' phones will be disabled during takeoff and landing for safety. In such an instance, passengers can turn them back on at 30kft when necessary for use without interference to be caused. Furthermore, Delta tested this system which disables cell phones during critical phases of flight (takeoff and landing), only turning back on after these stages when necessary - as with cellular base stations using lower power levels which won't interfere with plane avionics systems. Errors Errors may occur if flight crew members do not follow instructions correctly or fail to check-in with air traffic control (ATC) at scheduled intervals, leading them to make mistakes that result in losing track of where their plane is, changing frequencies without authorization, and landing it in restricted airspace due to radio interference. As soon as they detect RFI in foreign or domestic airspace, pilots in command must notify ATC immediately of its presence in order to establish whether their aircraft is entering an area prone to RFI and, if applicable, institute precautionary procedures. Airbus aircraft have been specifically designed to maintain position computation capabilities even without GPS input, by utilising IRS and VOR data as part of their position calculation capabilities. If an aircraft encounters RFI, its GNSS may temporarily become impaired and thus hinder position calculation capabilities; however, when such events do happen they're designed with safety in mind, and Airbus aircraft have an emergency position calculation capability which uses IRS/VOR inputs rather than GPS to maintain a position calculation capacity for flight planning purposes. Communication failures in the cockpit may be caused by several factors, including poor audio signal quality, workload pressures and non-native English proficiency. Furthermore, human error often plays an influential role in these incidents: for instance, failure to read back ATC clearances and instructions correctly may lead to misinterpretations, such as happened during Kuala Lumpur and Nairobi accidents. Pilots must ensure ATC understands their transmissions by speaking clearly and distinctly while using standard phraseology such as pausing slightly before and after numerals in order to reduce confusion. RFI interference can have detrimental effects on other aircraft systems, including Terrain Awareness Warning Systems (TAWS), Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance Systems (TCAS), and Airborne Collision Avoidance Systems (ACAS). Furthermore, RFI can negatively influence aircraft RADAR systems causing them to display incorrectly or malfunction. PEDs carried by passengers are an enormous source of uncontrolled electromagnetic emissions that could disrupt airplane systems and lead to an accident. This type of interference, known as electromagnetic interference or "EMI," causes systems to operate differently from what they were originally designed or intended, potentially leading to dangerous circumstances. Therefore, airlines should discourage the use of PEDs in aircraft cabins in order to mitigate risky operational practices and ensure maximum safety. Injuries Chances of you becoming injured in an aviation accident are extremely slim; however, as with any safety-critical industry, risk cannot be eliminated entirely and must be reduced to an acceptable level. Every year in the UK alone there are approximately 500 never events, 21,000 serious incidents and numerous episodes of patient harm caused by ineffective communication - often an ongoing factor. Strategies used to mitigate this issue include using callsigns unambiguously communicate information readbacks mini briefs similar to healthcare communication techniques such as WHO surgical checklist which are all designed to minimize noise during safety critical moments by eliminating unnecessary noise and conversations during safety critical moments. Privacy Threats threatening airport communication systems come in all shapes and forms; some of them unavoidable while others could result from deliberate or malicious acts by actors. Each can impact confidentiality, integrity and availability - it is therefore crucial that one understands these cyber security incidents in order to address and prevent them effectively. Airplane communication systems are particularly susceptible to attack due to their reliance on open broadcast data, leaving them open to both passive and active attacks from attackers. Passive attacks include eavesdropping and monitoring transmissions while active attacks include jamming or spoofing (using fake aircraft signals to mislead other planes into thinking it is real signal), jamming or spoofing are more dangerous as these may lead to inaccurate information being fed into aircraft navigation systems that causes errors, leading to mismatched terrain tracking or flight paths or collisions occurring with other planes. As smart airports rely more and more on interconnected networks to increase operational efficiency and functionality, they become increasingly vulnerable to network attacks. Passengers, maintenance workers and airport staff all carry smart devices which could become infected with malware that gains entry to the network; plus BYOD devices may interfere with aircraft avionics through electromagnetic spectrum interference. Aviation companies have begun adopting technologies designed to mitigate interference caused by these devices; however, these efforts are still in their early stages and have yet to become widely adopted. Therefore, passengers and crew members are encouraged to limit the use of personal electronic devices while flying. Current CPDLC system vulnerabilities lie in its provision of pilots with access to ATSU via their four-character International Civil Aviation Organization identifier, without checking that they are authorized. As no authentication mechanism exists for pilots to authenticate logon with ATSU and verify as CDA system user. A more secure solution would require aircraft system authentication prior to logon with ATSU and CDA system verification.