I don’t know how long this link will stay live on the New York Times’s site; after a few days, they deny access to their archives. Nonetheless, I invite pilots’ (and citizens’) attention to an issue that will affect all of us: the Pentagon’s proposal to end public access to the topographical / aeronautical data from its main mapping agency. This is the “DAFIF” data that is used in countless charts. The DAFIF issue has been raised in other aviation discussion boards; it actually is important, IMHO.
If the link above doesn’t work, here are the relevant paragraphs (which I can quote by “fair use” standards, and because it’s by me):
In reply to:
Next up, public access to publicly financed data. Previously I mentioned the Bush administration’s admirable decision to let the National Weather Service keep distributing its data on free Web sites, rather than funneling it through commercial services. But now the administration is proposing an enormous step in the opposite direction.
The National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, or N.G.A., is the main map-producing office in the Pentagon. Its detailed topographic studies, produced at public expense, have for decades been the basis of many other products; in particular, virtually every chart used by the nation’s airlines relies on the agency’s data. Citing security concerns and a few other reasons, the administration now proposes to withdraw all of its aeronautical material from public use on Oct. 1. Through June 1, the N.G.A. will accept comments on this proposal at its Web site, http://www.nga.mil>http://www.nga.mil.http://www.cartographic.com, and let the agency hear from you.
Updated PS: Here is the link for the comment form at the DOD’s site. It’s a PDF and loads slowly.
Although you cite Bush security policy for the removal of this data, the NGA Invitation for Public Comment states:
The Agency is considering this action principally because increased numbers of foreign source providers are claiming intellectual property rights or are forewarning NGA that they intend to copyright their source. NGA relies on foreign data obtained through bi-lateral geospatial information sharing agreements and through direct purchase from private foreign companies. This foreign produced source is merged and integrated with NGA produced data to create and maintain the aeronautical data and products in question.
I agree with you on the vital role that DAFIF data plays in allowing product innovation; we’ve seen with GPS how a public information resource can create an entire industry to process and enhance it. I use the freeware CoPilot software with a worldwide DAFIF database for flight planning in my palmpilot, and when I’m trying to understand some international accident or incident, being able to access FLIPS to see approach procedures etc. is a real safety enhancer.
But it sounds like the agency actually is quailing under the attacks of the foreign kleptocrats who want to put fees on every government resource, and some are waiving the national security flag over it for cover. If the copyright/fee issue is the real motivator then there may be different arguments to be made.
ps – for some reason I didn’t know you had a regular NYT column – what’s the schedule for it?? I have NYT RSS feeds on my yahoo home, I’ll have to figure out how to get you onto them.
Thanks for asking. You’ll notice that in the column I said “security concerns and a few other reasons.” That was the terse way of dealing with the frequently-changing stated reasons for the change. This document, from a cartographic company that now uses the DAFIF information, gives a very thorough exposition of the arguments.
In brief:
The “security” reasoning seems strained at best; and
The intellectual-property argument could be resolved in much less drastic ways. Anyhow check it out and see what you think.
I do a technology column for the NYT every 4th Sunday, apart from the “day job” at the Atlantic.
This document, from a cartographic company that now uses the DAFIF information, gives a very thorough exposition of the arguments.
In brief:
The “security” reasoning seems strained at best; and
The intellectual-property argument could be resolved in much less drastic ways. Anyhow check it out and see what you think.
That was a great report; I’ve sent the following letter to aero.ocr@nga.mil:
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposal to remove aeronautical information from public sale and distribution.
This information is a vital national resource, paid for by taxpayers. Its existence creates an information platform for innovation and product development complementary to the DOD GPS facilities. The fact that the USA makes this information available gives our companies a competitive advantage in developing information products compared to the rest of the world. Since the information is available for a fee from other administrations, there is no valid security concern. And finally, if copyrighted material is incorporated in it, it can be handled by redaction or copyright.
I personally make use of this information for flight planning and in the study and teaching of accident and incident reports from around the world.
I figure I’ve already expressed my views in print so shouldn’t write to them myself. But I would hope that any pilot who relies on accurate charting, ie every pilot, would look into this question. Your letter is a very good guide.