Black Box Recovery - Why Not Transmit?
alan...@aol.com
sophisticated electronics on a plane, can't the black box data just be
transmitted as it's occurring to a central processing station?
Wouldn't this be a viable solution to investigate crashes, and allow
new safety measures to be put in place faster? Why can't something
like this be implemented? Isn't the data digital? If not, could it be?
It would seem an easier, faster, more efficient method than all the
time and manpower and expense needed to find these black boxes.
Government Shill #2
As electronics advances this could very soon be possible, if it's not
already. However, stop for a minute and consider the 10s of thousands of
aircraft airborne at any given moment in time. You are talking about a
*lot* of data. Data that no one cares about, except in extremely rare
circumstances.
Up till the end of March 2009 there were 2,317,500 domestic and
international airline flights on U.S. Airlines alone.
http://www.bts.gov/press_releases/2009/bts029_09/html/bts029_09.html
Up till the end of April 2009 there were 25 accidents and 3 fatalities on
US civil air carriers.
http://www.ntsb.gov/AVIATION/curr_mo.TXT
--
Shill #2
Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance
to those of us who do.
Isaac Asimov
John Gilmer
"Government Shill #2" <gov....@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:c42i35d0nqukdpods...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 07:39:01 -0700 (PDT), "alan...@aol.com"
> <alan...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>>If this has been addressed before I apologize. With all the
>>sophisticated electronics on a plane, can't the black box data just be
>>transmitted as it's occurring to a central processing station?
>>Wouldn't this be a viable solution to investigate crashes, and allow
>>new safety measures to be put in place faster? Why can't something
>>like this be implemented? Isn't the data digital? If not, could it be?
>>It would seem an easier, faster, more efficient method than all the
>>time and manpower and expense needed to find these black boxes.
>
> As electronics advances this could very soon be possible, if it's not
> already. However, stop for a minute and consider the 10s of thousands of
> aircraft airborne at any given moment in time. You are talking about a
> *lot* of data. Data that no one cares about, except in extremely rare
> circumstances.
1) To an approximation, the A/C was transmitting data to the home base.
That's the primary basis of what the guesses about what happened are about.
2) Since customers enjoy (and are willing to pay for) telephone and
internet services while in flight, there is the potential of having plenty
of bandwidth available to "maintenance." Data storage is cheap and
getting cheaper so at least a "data summary" can be kept 'just in case.'
There is a "privacy" question as to whether cockpit voice should be
automatically "phoned home."
3) It's clear from this accident that the whole issue of the "black boxes"
should be re-visited. First, how should the data recorder be
protected/packaged/and "beeped." What should be monitored? Should the
data be "processed" before being stored? When consumers routinely store an
hour of video on an inexpensive 'chip', the 'technology' of the black boxes
looks that something from a century ago.
Patrick
<jlgi...@localnet.com> wrote:
>
>"Government Shill #2" <gov....@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:c42i35d0nqukdpods...@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 07:39:01 -0700 (PDT), "alan...@aol.com"
>> <alan...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>>If this has been addressed before I apologize. With all the
>>>sophisticated electronics on a plane, can't the black box data just be
>>>transmitted as it's occurring to a central processing station?
>>>Wouldn't this be a viable solution to investigate crashes, and allow
>>>new safety measures to be put in place faster? Why can't something
>>>like this be implemented? Isn't the data digital? If not, could it be?
>>>It would seem an easier, faster, more efficient method than all the
>>>time and manpower and expense needed to find these black boxes.
>>
>> As electronics advances this could very soon be possible, if it's not
>> already. However, stop for a minute and consider the 10s of thousands of
>> aircraft airborne at any given moment in time. You are talking about a
>> *lot* of data. Data that no one cares about, except in extremely rare
>> circumstances.
>
>1) To an approximation, the A/C was transmitting data to the home base.
>That's the primary basis of what the guesses about what happened are about.
With all the real-time data transmitted to the "home base", I wonder
why simple GPS coordinates aren't included? Or are they? In this day
and age, I find it hard to believe that this aircraft "vanished" and
the crash site is still not known with any accuracy.
>2) Since customers enjoy (and are willing to pay for) telephone and
>internet services while in flight, there is the potential of having plenty
>of bandwidth available to "maintenance." Data storage is cheap and
>getting cheaper so at least a "data summary" can be kept 'just in case.'
>There is a "privacy" question as to whether cockpit voice should be
>automatically "phoned home."
>
>3) It's clear from this accident that the whole issue of the "black boxes"
>should be re-visited. First, how should the data recorder be
>protected/packaged/and "beeped." What should be monitored? Should the
>data be "processed" before being stored? When consumers routinely store an
>hour of video on an inexpensive 'chip', the 'technology' of the black boxes
>looks that something from a century ago.
>
It does sound like outdated technology. Again, it might help to
transmit GPS location along with just a beep, beep, beep....
I realize at the bottom of the ocean it would be difficult for a
device to pick up GPS satellites, but last known location could be
transmitted.
Eeyore
Patrick wrote:
> "John Gilmer" <jlgi...@localnet.com> wrote:
> >"Government Shill #2" <gov....@gmail.com> wrote
Well, the ACARS data got through, so that's one good thing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACARS
Why the protocol doesn't allow for position reporting in the event of what seemed
like an almost endless stream of error codes seems to have been an oversight in
its inception.
Note that para 1 in the above link says " ACARS will over the next 20 years be
superseded by the Aeronautical Telecommunications Network (ATN) protocol for Air
Traffic Control communications and by the Internet Protocol for airline
communications. "
Maybe it's time to add in real time emergency info to that protocol before it's
too late. Perhaps an " oh fuck " button on the panel could trigger a large
release of relevant data without swamping what will doubtless be by then a much
larger data bandwidth.
Graham
p.s. who reckons the pitots froze up after encountering a warm(er) moisture laden
updraught from the ocean making the ASIs ineffective.
I confess I also have some serious concerns about significant use of composite
materials in known heavy thunderstorm regions. They simply don't conduct
electricity as well as aluminium alloy and can blow apart when subjected to
hundreds of kiloamps as in .....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightning#Positive_lightning
" Positive lightning, also known colloquially as "bolts from the blue", makes up
less than 5% of all lightning.[35] It occurs when the leader forms at the
positively charged cloud tops, with the consequence that a negatively charged
streamer issues from the ground. The overall effect is a discharge of positive
charges to the ground. Research carried out after the discovery of positive
lightning in the 1970s showed that positive lightning bolts are typically six to
ten times more powerful than negative bolts, last around ten times longer, and
can strike tens of kilometres/miles from the clouds.[36] The voltage difference
for positive lightning must be considerably higher, due to the tens of thousands
of additional metres/feet the strike must travel. During a positive lightning
strike, huge quantities of ELF and VLF radio waves are generated.[37]
As a result of their greater power, positive lightning strikes are considerably
more dangerous. At the present time, aircraft are not designed to withstand such
strikes, since their existence was unknown at the time standards were set, and
the dangers unappreciated until the destruction of a glider in
1999.[38].................
An average bolt of positive lightning carries a current of up to 300 kA
(kiloamperes) (about ten times as much current as a bolt of negative lightning),
transfers a charge of up to 300 coulombs, has a potential difference up to 1
gigavolt (one billion volts), and lasts for hundreds of milliseconds, with a
discharge energy of up to 300 GJ (gigajoules) (a billion joules). "
Graham
--
due to the hugely increased level of spam please make the obvious adjustment to
my email address
Eeyore
"alan...@aol.com" wrote:
The structure doesn't currently exist to do this but may do in the future.
You could also ask why older CVRs 'overwrite' their content before a
flight may be finished, erasing any info about an in-flight upset.
I am appalled at the number of aircraft accidents these days which are
related to old standards of doing things by people set in their way and
the lack of adoption of newer technologies.
You may find this interesting.
http://www.iasa-intl.com/folders/belfast/AF447.htm
Eeyore
Government Shill #2 wrote:
OTOH it may solve the few remaining mysteries and reduce crash investigation
time. Also, the 'black boxes' do not always survive or contain retrievable
data. In this case they may never be recovered. The CVR would doubtless be
especially invaluable as to the crew's thinking.
Still at Pilatus btw Craig ? The .ch headers suggest so. How's it going ?
bucky3
probably cost.
Bertie the Bunyip
news:4A481475...@notcoldmail.com:
Sez the planespottign fjukkwit.
Bertie
Bertie the Bunyip
news:4A47B77A...@notcoldmail.com:
Fjukkkwit.
Bertie
>
>
Bertie the Bunyip
news:4A47B95D...@notcoldmail.com:
>
>
> "alan...@aol.com" wrote:
>
>> If this has been addressed before I apologize. With all the
>> sophisticated electronics on a plane, can't the black box data just
>> be transmitted as it's occurring to a central processing station?
>> Wouldn't this be a viable solution to investigate crashes, and allow
>> new safety measures to be put in place faster? Why can't something
>> like this be implemented? Isn't the data digital? If not, could it
>> be? It would seem an easier, faster, more efficient method than all
>> the time and manpower and expense needed to find these black boxes.
>
> The structure doesn't currently exist to do this but may do in the
> future. You could also ask why older CVRs 'overwrite' their content
> before a flight may be finished, erasing any info about an in-flight
> upset.
>
> I am appalled at the number of aircraft accidents these days which are
> related to old standards of doing things by people set in their way
> and the lack of adoption of newer technologies.
>
Bullshit, You are a planespotting fjukkktard and know NOTHING.
Bertie
>
Eeyore
Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Eeyore <rabbitsfriend...@notcoldmail.com> wrote
Speaks the man who known nothing about modern electronics and control
systems.
Bertie the Bunyip
news:0097e881$0$7764$c3e...@news.astraweb.com:
Bwawhahwhahw!
The irony.
Bertie
>
>