Wireless & Aviation Industries Wrestle Over Spectrum

Tony: Hello, I’m Tony Mangino from TC2, and this is Staying Connected—where we talk about what really matters to enterprise buyers navigating today’s technology and sourcing decisions. Today we’re continuing our look at one of the biggest spectrum battles in years-one that’s got aviation and wireless folks at odds. I’m here with Steve Rosen, a partner at LB3 who lives and breathes regulatory compliance and spectrum policy. Steve, great to have you back on our program.

Steve: Good to be here, Tony. And yeah, here we go again-aviation vs. wireless, round two. Last time we tackled the lower C-band. Today it’s all about the upper C-band.

Tony: Let’s break it down for folks who aren’t spectrum policy nerds. What’s going on with this upper C-band and radio altimeters?

Steve: So Congress said last July: FCC, you’ve got to auction off at least 100 megahertz of upper C-band spectrum—that’s the 3.98 to 4.2 gigahertz range—by July 2027. Wireless carriers want it for 5G. The catch? It’s right next to the frequencies aircraft radio altimeters use-4.2 to 4.4 gigahertz. That’s a problem.

Tony: And radio altimeters are pretty critical equipment, right?

Steve: “Critical” doesn’t even cover it. These devices measure exactly how high a plane is above the ground-especially during landing. They’re essential for autoland, terrain awareness, all the safety systems. If wireless signals mess with them, we’re talking serious safety risks. And look, aviation has a safety culture that accepts almost no risk. Many systems are certified for no more than one catastrophic failure per billion flight hours. What wireless folks might call “overly conservative” is just how aviation operates.

Tony: I’ve seen some wild numbers on what this fix is going to cost. What are we looking at?

Steve: The FAA says $4.49 billion to retrofit aircraft with new interference-tolerant altimeters. But the aviation industry says that’s way underestimated-the real number could be anywhere from that figure to over $7 billion.

Tony: That’s a massive range. What’s driving that uncertainty?

Steve: It’s all about retrofit complexity. The FAA figured about $80,000 per unit, but industry experts say it’s closer to $120,000 when you add up equipment, labor, certification, and lost revenue from taking planes out of service. We’re talking nearly 58,600 units across almost 41,000 aircraft. And the aviation folks want a “one-and-done” approach-one coordinated change, not multiple rounds of modifications.

Tony: So who’s picking up this tab?

Steve: That’s literally the billion-dollar question. There’s talk of financial incentives and acceleration payments funded by auction winners. Aviation’s position is clear: they wouldn’t be doing this massive upgrade at this pace without the spectrum auction pushing it. They want reimbursement plus incentives. But here’s the line the pilots have drawn—financial incentives should speed up logistics, not pressure anyone into accepting compromised safety.

Tony: What about the timeline? You can’t exactly swap out 60,000 altimeters overnight.

Steve: Exactly, and that’s where we see real tension. CTIA—representing wireless—wants a 2029 deadline for priority aircraft. Aviation says the realistic timeline is mid-2032 for commercial planes and 2034 for the full civil fleet.

Tony: That’s a three-year gap. Why such a big difference?

Steve: Aviation points to a four-phase process: equipment design, aircraft certification, manufacturing ramp-up, and fleet installation. You can’t rush that. But here’s the bigger issue: the voluntary wireless commitments protecting current altimeters expire in January 2028—well before most planes can be upgraded. Aviation is calling that extension a “safety prerequisite,” not just procedure.

Tony: So there’s a window where aircraft could be vulnerable?

Steve: Right. Without extending those commitments, existing altimeters would be unprotected during the transition. The FAA would have to impose major operational restrictions, including flight delays, cancellations, maybe even groundings. That’s why aviation is adamant: no wireless operation in the upper C-band until all necessary altimeters are retrofitted. They’ve also rejected any “phased approach” like the lower C-band because, as NTIA warned, current altimeters simply can’t handle high-power transmissions in this band.

Tony: There’s also a technical debate happening here. Give us the quick version.

Steve: Good news first: both sides have actually reached consensus on most technical issues. They agree wireless can operate at full power up to 4160 MHz with specific height limits. That’s progress.

Tony: And the bad news?

Steve: Aviation, including the pilots’ association, is pushing back on CTIA’s modeling assumptions. CTIA says the FAA’s coexistence analysis is “overly conservative.” The pilots call that “fundamentally flawed”—they say the FAA’s approach is data-driven and safety-focused. And NTIA backs them up, warning that premature wireless implementation could create unacceptable risks.

Tony: It sounds like there’s a fundamental tension here between maximizing spectrum use and maintaining safety margins.

Steve: Exactly. And aviation won’t budge: maximizing spectrum use can’t come at safety’s expense. They want consistent EIRP limits—that’s Effective Isotropic Radiated Power—across both C-bands. The technical point is that the conducted power standard urged by the wireless industry doesn’t account for antenna gain, which can boost signal strength significantly. That said, both industries also agree the FCC and FAA need to coordinate their rulemaking.

Tony: Let’s wrap up. We’ve covered the congressional mandate, the $4.5 to $7 billion retrofit challenge, a three-year timeline gap between what wireless wants and what aviation can deliver, and ongoing technical debates. The bottom line: this isn’t just regulatory process—it’s a case study in how spectrum decisions have real-world consequences beyond the auction.

Steve: Well put. What makes this so significant is that it forces everyone—the FAA, the FCC, the wireless industry, and the aviation industry to confront the externalities of wireless expansion. Radio altimeters aren’t just avionics; they’re the backbone of safety systems that protect passengers every day. For those of us in telecom policy, this reminds us that spectrum efficiency and public safety need to be balanced carefully. The path forward takes collaboration to achieve what the Commission calls: “on time, on budget, no surprises.”

Tony: Thanks for the update today Steve, always a pleasure to have you here on Staying Connected!  And to our listeners, if you’d  like to learn more about how the conflict between the aviation industry and 5G providers might impact your business or if you’d like to discuss other ICT needs with Steve or me, or any of our LB3 and TC2 colleagues, please give us a call or shoot us an email.

You can also stay current by subscribing to Staying Connected, by checking out our websites, and by following us on LinkedIn.