• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7
 
tortugamon
Topic Author
Posts: 6674
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 2:19 am

The purpose of this thread is to discuss what changes need to happen in civil aviation so that accidents like MH370 do not happen in the future, -or- if they do happen, what changes need to happen so the response is better than what we are currently witnessing. We do not know the outcome of this accident but we have plenty of information to understand where deficiencies lie. I will suggest a few:

Communication
>Black Boxes that communicate in real time with the ground giving us data on the aircraft without the physical black box
>ATC with better radios with more range and less interference allowing for easier communication with pilots
>Satellite phones
>Rules that force airlines to report aircraft missing sooner, communicate with effected next of kin sooner
>Aircraft wifi improvements

Radar / Knowing Where the Aircraft is
>GPS in the cockpit
>Better ATC Radar so missing aircraft are acknowledged sooner, vitals are more accurate, and fewer areas of poor radar coverage.
>Better radar that allows aircraft to know where they are relative to other aircraft

Security
>Airport security with better access to no-fly lists, passport information, and a oversight to make sure it is used properly

Search and Rescue
>Quicker initiation of S&R operations
>Better equipment located in the right places

Improvements to the aircraft itself outside of the cockpit may become more of topic once we know what happened but certainly can be discussed. Improvements to pilot training will inevitably be a component as well but I do not think we have enough to go on there.

Here is a solid article on some of the dated cockpit technologies:
http://english.martinvarsavsky.net/g...he-60s-a-reflection-on-mh-370.html

This is not a thread about the accident itself as there is a dedicated thread for that. This thread is about how the industry can improve from here.

tortugamon

[Edited 2014-03-09 19:22:58]
 
D L X
Posts: 11639
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 2:23 am

Quoting tortugamon (Thread starter):

The purpose of this thread is to discuss what changes need to happen in civil aviation so that accidents like MH370 do not happen in the future,

Hmm... do you know what caused this crash yet?

I mean, they haven't even found the plane yet. We might actually find the plane exactly where all the information said it would likely be. This thread is probably premature.
 
KD5MDK
Posts: 694
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 4:05 am

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 2:27 am

Improvements in aircraft tracking will not prevent an aircraft from falling out of the sky, exploding or whatever else caused the crash. But knowing the location of all aircraft to within 1km or less in all 3 dimensions at all times would make a huge difference in SAR procedures.
 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5807
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 2:28 am

Quoting D L X (Reply 1):
I mean, they haven't even found the plane yet. We might actually find the plane exactly where all the information said it would likely be. This thread is probably premature.

This, my friends, is an attitude that inhibits societal progress. You do not need to know what caused to crash to see what issues cropped up during the investigation. Clearly, there are problems with the ability to locate this aircraft.

Quoting tortugamon (Thread starter):
The purpose of this thread is to discuss what changes need to happen in civil aviation so that accidents like MH370 do not happen in the future,

One observation with many of your items is that they are de rigueur in many regions.

[Edited 2014-03-09 19:33:25]
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' -Theodore Roosevelt
 
Julian773
Posts: 98
Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2009 9:39 pm

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 2:28 am

This thread is probably premature.

Agreed. Right now the main focus is on locating and recovering the aircraft and passengers.
 
kiwiinoz
Posts: 1999
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 3:07 pm

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 2:34 am

Whilst some lessons, (particularly physical changes to aircraft) are too early to call, I think it is probably fair to say that more stringent passport control is a lesson learnt.

I am all for placing microchips in people's heads. I am so sick of filling out immigration forms.
 
D L X
Posts: 11639
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 2:40 am

Quoting N328KF (Reply 3):
This, my friends, is an attitude that inhibits societal progress.

Baloney.

First off, what is the rush to fix the investigatory process when it hasn't even been shown what has failed in the investigatory process yet? I'm all for speculation, but declaring items on the fix list is a whole different animal. We simply do not have any information to know what went wrong (if it even did go wrong) to address it for the future.
 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5807
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 2:43 am

Quoting D L X (Reply 6):
We simply do not have any information to know what went wrong (if it even did go wrong) to address it for the future.

You don't have to know what went wrong in this case to have ideas about what to improve. There are plenty of recent cases (AF447, for starters, but there are many others) where the investigation has provided sufficient information that recommendations can be made.
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' -Theodore Roosevelt
 
SEA
Posts: 235
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 10:21 pm

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 2:45 am

How can you know what to change when we don't know what went wrong? This thread makes more sense months later but not now.
 
apfpilot
Posts: 684
Joined: Wed Jun 05, 2013 4:19 pm

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 2:45 am

That is a terrible article you linked to. I'd bet my paycheck that the 777 involved had:

a)GPS
b)SATCOM and CPDLC with ADS-C


Not sure what you mean by wifi improvements, wi-fi is just a way to connect to the LAN and improving that wouldn't really do anything as there isn't any pipe to the aircraft that is higher speed than what 802.11 can already do. Better radar letting aircraft know where they are in relation to each other? What do you mean by this and what would be the point? Wouldn't TCAS suffice for now and with ADS-B coming online and CDTI will be better than any radar could be. As far as "streaming" black boxes, the amount of data that would be coming off the aircraft and the infrastructure to receive that data would be enormous, and a lot of that information would be extemporaneous to anything other than a crash investigation where as ACARS data already provides a lot of relevant information that is dual purpose.
Opinions are my own and do not reflect an endorsement or position of my employer.
 
rolfen
Posts: 1539
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 6:03 am

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 2:45 am

Quoting D L X (Reply 1):
Hmm... do you know what caused this crash yet?
Quoting Julian773 (Reply 4):
This thread is probably premature.

No it's not. We do know that we don't know where that aircraft is, almost 2 days after it's disappearance.

That could have been different with some forethought. Technology is pretty advanced nowadays.

That's not the first time such a thing happens - I'm thinking about that poor Air France flight that disappeared over the Atlantic.

[Edited 2014-03-09 19:48:59]
rolf
 
D L X
Posts: 11639
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 2:46 am

Quoting N328KF (Reply 7):
You don't have to know what went wrong in this case to have ideas about what to improve. There are plenty of recent cases (AF447, for starters, but there are many others) where the investigation has provided sufficient information that recommendations can be made.

That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that we don't even know how the investigation is going, where it is going right, and where it is going wrong, because we have not found the plane yet. We may be exactly on the right path to finding the plane right now, but if we were to assume that because we haven't found the plane then we've failed, we could propose changing from the plan that would eventually work to a plan that will eventually fail.

You're issuing grades before the students have completed the assignments, in other words.
 
illinicmi
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 4:21 pm

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 2:48 am

For those who think this thread is premature, I invite you to point out the glowing successes of this search and rescue operation so far. Some of us have clearly missed them.

I don't think the investigation needs to be complete in order to discuss the problems. I'd say 48 hours with no hint of where she went is something of a problem.

No, I don't expect miracles. Just pointing out that room exists for improvement. Hence, the OP's reason for this thread.
 
FlyingSicilian
Posts: 1373
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 7:53 pm

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 2:50 am

Quoting tortugamon (Thread starter):
Security
>Airport security with better access to no-fly lists, passport information, and a oversight to make sure it is used properly

Interpol makes its lost/stolen passport database available to all member countries now, most just do not use it.
The three main users are the USA, UK, and UAE. Others could easily follow suit.
“Without seeing Sicily it is impossible to understand Italy.Sicily is the key of everything.”-Goethe "Journey to Italy"
 
LAXdude1023
Posts: 4431
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:16 pm

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 2:51 am

Quoting N328KF (Reply 3):
This, my friends, is an attitude that inhibits societal progress. You do not need to know what caused to crash to see what issues cropped up during the investigation. Clearly, there are problems with the ability to locate this aircraft.

Rubbish.

Quoting N328KF (Reply 7):
You don't have to know what went wrong in this case to have ideas about what to improve.

Yes, you do.

We can't know what to improve or what lessons to learn until we know what went wrong. This is putting the cart before the horse.
It is what it is...
 
apfpilot
Posts: 684
Joined: Wed Jun 05, 2013 4:19 pm

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 2:51 am

Quoting illinicmi (Reply 12):

For those who think this thread is premature, I invite you to point out the glowing successes of this search and rescue operation so far. Some of us have clearly missed them.

Then how about throwing out some feasible solutions instead of defending the thread?
Opinions are my own and do not reflect an endorsement or position of my employer.
 
ltbewr
Posts: 12362
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 2:51 am

No, I don't think some of the ideas in the initial post are premature to consider, especially as to the passport issues and security at some airports.
As to improving tracking and transmission in real time of the status of the status of operational aircraft, there could be serious technical issues as well as costs almost all airlines are not going to be interested to spending on for very rare occurrences.
 
Viscount724
Posts: 18858
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 2:52 am

Quoting SEA (Reply 8):
How can you know what to change when we don't know what went wrong? This thread makes more sense months later but not now.

I agree. Best to wait until there's at least some indication of what happened. For example, one topic mentioned was improving search and rescue. We have no idea whether there's any need for improvement yet. Just because the aircraft hasn't yet been sighted doesn't mean there's a SAR problem. And many countries, especially developing countries in Asia/Africa etc. such as several on the route of this flight, don't have the resources to spend millions on a fleet of SAR aircraft and ships etc, especially for an event like this that may never happen again.
 
Markam
Posts: 318
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 6:17 am

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 2:53 am

Quoting tortugamon (Thread starter):
>Black Boxes that communicate in real time with the ground giving us data on the aircraft without the physical black box

There is an interesting article on The Guardian about this issue: http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...ia-airlines-flight-mh370-black-box
 
User avatar
Web500sjc
Posts: 634
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 4:23 am

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 2:54 am

How about a streaming gps/low jack system. It would consistently transmit the airplane location, for the sole purpose of locating aircraft, not ATC service. It would help if airplanes were lost over remote areas, or if an airplane is stolen.

Speaking of stolen planes, anyone find the AA 727 yet?

[Edited 2014-03-09 19:59:14]
Boiler Up!
 
D L X
Posts: 11639
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 2:57 am

Quoting illinicmi (Reply 12):
For those who think this thread is premature, I invite you to point out the glowing successes of this search and rescue operation so far.

It is not time yet to point out the successes or failures. Haste does not make science. I'll say it again, you're issuing grades before the students have completed the assignments.

This thread may make a whole lot more sense a month from now or a year from now that it does currently. You know, after you actually know where you failed. Don't believe me? I'll bow out and let this discussion unfold. Then we'll bring it back up in 3 months and a year and see what new information we find that shows where what we thought was a failure turned out not to be a failure.
 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5807
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 3:00 am

If you don't think the thread is a good idea, then don't post in it. It'll help the Signal:Noise ratio. As it is, you're just making things worse.

Conclusions can be drawn from previous instances. I think even if real time FDR for all data isn't feasible, they could certainly accommodate the key parameters.

We also need better radar in outlying areas.
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' -Theodore Roosevelt
 
rolfen
Posts: 1539
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 6:03 am

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 3:01 am

Why don't airliners have some kind of battery-operated, crash-proof, powerful transmitter attached to the FDR, which would broadcast their position, along with a special emergency code, as soon as the FDR stops receiving power, or when a high G deceleration, or any other sign of a crash is detected?

I know the FDR and (or?) CVR have some kind of (weak?) transmitter which helps locating them, and which keeps transmitting for a while, but that doesn't seem to be effective in many cases where the location of the wreck is not known.

An emergency transmitter as described would not need to transmit for a long period of time, just for long enough to get the location out there, into ADS or a similar system.

If this aircraft was equipped with ADS, why would it be so hard to find the wreckage? Same thing for AF447.

In addition to helping to find the wreckage, this would also kick off the search an rescue operations much sooner.

[Edited 2014-03-09 20:05:55]
rolf
 
rfields5421
Posts: 5549
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:45 am

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 3:06 am

Most of your post reads like the recommendations from BEA in the Air France 447 reports.

Quoting tortugamon (Thread starter):
Communication
>Black Boxes that communicate in real time with the ground giving us data on the aircraft without the physical black box

Not possible with current technology. However several groups / companies are working on burst transmissions under certain trigger events. And more real-time data reporting. There are of course issues with costs (up to $100K per aircraft is best guess along with data transmission costs, staffing to monitor the data, etc.

Quoting tortugamon (Thread starter):
>ATC with better radios with more range and less interference allowing for easier communication with pilots

Do you know of a technology that the communications industry hasn't identified? The radios are the best possible given the coverage requirements and cost factors. Plus once an aircraft gets out of VHF range - HF is the best current technology.

Quoting tortugamon (Thread starter):
>Satellite phones

Satellite phones take time and effort to establish a connection. Time the pilots in an aircraft with problems don't usually have. The technology and reliability in aircraft is about equal to today's HF communication.

Quoting tortugamon (Thread starter):
>Rules that force airlines to report aircraft missing sooner

I haven't seen a timeline on this aircraft yet - but it appears that the airline and government authorities were very aware of the loss of communication, and reacted quickly. This was a big issue with AF447. BEA and the working groups proposed many changes to the system. So far it appears that those changes were implemented in this instance. You do realize that dozens to a few hundred aircraft lose communication or data contact with their company every day. For many technical reasons. Most of the time communication is quickly restored. Setting a much shorter alert period is going to create a false report of a missing aircraft almost every day.

Quoting tortugamon (Thread starter):
communicate with effected next of kin sooner

How would you do that? Require every airline passenger to fill out a NOK notification form for every flight. I've had some experience with NOK notifications while in the US Navy.

I'd love to hear you ideas on hour to (1) identify the NOK earlier, (2) confirming notification, (3) dealing with 'family' in multiple locations, (4) verifying that all NOK have been notified before releasing names.

Quoting tortugamon (Thread starter):
>Aircraft wifi improvements

How would this help anything? Other than taking power away from the other aircraft systems in an emergency, and using up bandwidth needed for wifi that would be better used to send aircraft data.

Quoting tortugamon (Thread starter):
>GPS in the cockpit

Already in aircraft.

Quoting tortugamon (Thread starter):
>Better ATC Radar so missing aircraft are acknowledged sooner, vitals are more accurate,

There are many reasons an aircraft transponder will fail. There is sufficient data available in areas of good radar coverage.

Quoting tortugamon (Thread starter):
and fewer areas of poor radar coverage.

There really isn't a way to fix that problem in the open ocean. Or in mountainous areas like the western United States or Europe at some altitudes.

Quoting tortugamon (Thread starter):
>Better radar that allows aircraft to know where they are relative to other aircraft

Pilots need to be flying their aircraft, not acting as ATC for other aircraft.

Quoting tortugamon (Thread starter):
>Quicker initiation of S&R operations

It's a big ocean, and the authorities respond to many alerts every year which turn out to not be real emergencies. As I said above - this looks like a fairly good response - though I'll withhold judgement until I see a complete timeline.

Quoting tortugamon (Thread starter):
>Better equipment located in the right places

Which equipment would you fund in which places?
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17058
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 3:11 am

Most of these things already exist and have for years!

Quoting tortugamon (Thread starter):
>Black Boxes that communicate in real time with the ground giving us data on the aircraft without the physical black box

Hideously expensive to implement and maintain for very very little benefit. Example AF447. Would this have saved anyone on board? Nope.

Besides, ADS-B already transmits position data every second.

Quoting tortugamon (Thread starter):
>ATC with better radios with more range and less interference allowing for easier communication with pilots

Already in place for years with datalink.

Quoting tortugamon (Thread starter):
>Satellite phones

Already in place.

Quoting tortugamon (Thread starter):
>Rules that force airlines to report aircraft missing sooner, communicate with effected next of kin sooner

There are rules already.

Quoting tortugamon (Thread starter):
>Aircraft wifi improvements

I don't see how this is relevant.

Quoting tortugamon (Thread starter):
>GPS in the cockpit

Already in place for years.

Quoting tortugamon (Thread starter):
>Better ATC Radar so missing aircraft are acknowledged sooner, vitals are more accurate, and fewer areas of poor radar coverage.

Very expensive for very little benefit. Besides, ADS-B already transmits position data every second in most areas.

Quoting tortugamon (Thread starter):
>Better radar that allows aircraft to know where they are relative to other aircraft

Already in place with TCAS II.

Quoting tortugamon (Thread starter):
>Airport security with better access to no-fly lists, passport information, and a oversight to make sure it is used properly

This can certainly be improved, but it will take time as it is a complex task.

Quoting rolfen (Reply 22):

Why don't airliners have some kind of battery-operated, crash-proof, powerful transmitter attached to the FDR, which would broadcast their position, along with a special emergency code, as soon as the FDR stops receiving power, or when a high G deceleration, or any other sign of a crash is detected?

Already in place today on all DFDR and CVR boxes. The problem is that if you dunk a radio even 50 meters under water, the range is cut down drastically. Stronger transmitters are possible, but that adds a lot of weight given you need a stronger battery.

Quoting rolfen (Reply 22):
If this aircraft was equipped with ADS, why would it be so hard to find the wreckage? Same thing for AF447.

Simple answer: Because the ocean is large and the plane is small.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
rolfen
Posts: 1539
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 6:03 am

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 3:22 am

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 24):
Quoting rolfen (Reply 22):
If this aircraft was equipped with ADS, why would it be so hard to find the wreckage? Same thing for AF447.

Simple answer: Because the ocean is large and the plane is small.

What do you mean? I understand that ADS broadcasts position periodically. If you have a position and a radius, how much do you have to search?

Your simple answer makes no sense. The size of the ocean is irrelevant here. We're not searching the whole ocean.

[Edited 2014-03-09 20:23:30]
rolf
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17058
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 3:31 am

I'll add that while it is admirable to make aviation safer, there is always a compromise. There are plenty of investments to be made in making aviation safer, but they all come at a cost. Feasible does not mean the same as economically defensible. Aviation is already safer than ever, and safer than pretty much any other form of transport. Certainly orders of magnitude safer than driving. Improvements will keep happening, but I daresay there seems to be no need for dramatic changes right now.

Also, a lot of the things quoted here are all well and good, but none of them would save anyone's life in an AF447 type scenario.

Quoting rolfen (Reply 25):

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 24):
Quoting rolfen (Reply 22):
If this aircraft was equipped with ADS, why would it be so hard to find the wreckage? Same thing for AF447.

Simple answer: Because the ocean is large and the plane is small.

What do you mean? I understand that ADS broadcasts position periodically. If you have a position and a radius, how much do you have to search?

Your simple answer makes no sense. The size of the ocean is irrelevant here. We're not searching the whole ocean.

Ask anyone who works in search and rescue and they'll tell you finding stuff is not that easy.

Also you are now making assumptions about ADS broadcasts. Is it really the last position? How can we know? It is a place to start of course.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
9VSIO
Posts: 653
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 5:00 pm

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 3:34 am

Quoting rolfen (Reply 25):
What do you mean? I understand that ADS broadcasts position periodically. If you have a position and a radius, how much do you have to search?

Now which radius are you referring to? Range of a/c at time of disappearance? That's a pretty big area...
Me: (Lining up on final) I shall now select an aiming point. || Instructor: Well, I hope it's the runway...
 
apfpilot
Posts: 684
Joined: Wed Jun 05, 2013 4:19 pm

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 3:35 am

Quoting N328KF (Reply 21):
Conclusions can be drawn from previous instances. I think even if real time FDR for all data isn't feasible, they could certainly accommodate the key parameters.

This already exists in many aircraft however there has to be something wrong for it to broadcast. ACARS can squirt out MX data. As far as key parameters what is it going to broadcast?

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 23):
Satellite phones take time and effort to establish a connection. Time the pilots in an aircraft with problems don't usually have. The technology and reliability in aircraft is about equal to today's HF communication.

Satcom is much more advanced than HF as well as more reliable. With Iridium you can make a call anywhere anytime with quality that is comparable to a long distance phone call With Inmarsat the coverage is near globe as well.

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 24):
Besides, ADS-B already transmits position data every second.

ADS-B broadcasts over UHF so there needs to be something to receive it. Oceanic FANS uses ADS-C which broadcasts over Satellite.
Opinions are my own and do not reflect an endorsement or position of my employer.
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17058
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 3:38 am

Quoting 9VSIO (Reply 27):
Quoting rolfen (Reply 25):
What do you mean? I understand that ADS broadcasts position periodically. If you have a position and a radius, how much do you have to search?

Now which radius are you referring to? Range of a/c at time of disappearance? That's a pretty big area...

Quite.

Assuming that the initial position is correct, a hypothetical airliner gliding from 35k feet has a range in excess of 150km. That's about 17500 square kilometers as a bare minimum search area. Think of it this way: You now have to search about three and a half million football fields, any one of which could swallow an entire airliner. At a minimum.*

Needle. Haystack.

* Apologies for any possible maths screwups.

[Edited 2014-03-09 20:39:39]
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17058
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 3:38 am

Quoting apfpilot (Reply 28):
Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 24):
Besides, ADS-B already transmits position data every second.

ADS-B broadcasts over UHF so there needs to be something to receive it. Oceanic FANS uses ADS-C which broadcasts over Satellite.

If memory serves, a poster in the big thread said it is satcom in this area.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
apfpilot
Posts: 684
Joined: Wed Jun 05, 2013 4:19 pm

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 3:46 am

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 29):
Quite.

Assuming that the initial position is correct, a hypothetical airliner gliding from 35k feet has a range in excess of 150km. That's about 17500 square kilometers as a bare minimum search area. Think of it this way: You now have to search about three and a half million football fields, any one of which could swallow an entire airliner. At a minimum.

Needle. Haystack.

ADS position data also contains uncompensated latency so in addition to what you mentioned before the position data is broadcast off of the airplane it already contains a slight inaccuracy. Then their is the latency factor going up to and then back down from the satellite (Inmarsat Satellites are bent pipe repeaters at an altitude of 22K miles) it is then received by a service provider (SITA or ARINC) and then to the control station. That adds uncertainty to the equation.
Opinions are my own and do not reflect an endorsement or position of my employer.
 
apfpilot
Posts: 684
Joined: Wed Jun 05, 2013 4:19 pm

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 3:49 am

Just as another example of how difficult it can be to find an aircraft a cessna crashed at BNA and wasn't found for 6 hours due to fog as it burned on the field.
Opinions are my own and do not reflect an endorsement or position of my employer.
 
PHX787
Posts: 7877
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:46 pm

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 3:53 am

I think there should be camera links to the ground to the cockpit at all time. If this is indeed a cockpit breach, or even if its pilot error, we would know immediately.
Follow me on twitter: www.twitter.com/phx787
 
MesaFlyGuy
Posts: 3815
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2012 8:36 pm

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 4:01 am

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 33):
I think there should be camera links to the ground to the cockpit at all time. If this is indeed a cockpit breach, or even if its pilot error, we would know immediately.

How would they monitor that, though? They would need an unrealistic number of people to monitor every flight in the air. I suppose they could have a button pilot that pilots press when there is a breach, however they may not always have enough time or notice to press it.

I think it is a really cool idea, however I think it would be a bit hard to execute.
The views I express are my own and do not reflect the views and opinions of my company.
 
tortugamon
Topic Author
Posts: 6674
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 4:04 am

Quoting D L X (Reply 1):
I mean, they haven't even found the plane yet. We might actually find the plane exactly where all the information said it would likely be.

I think the fact that we don't know where the plane is and what happened to it and it has been three days is enough of a problem to know that we don't want this to happen again. Too many very upset people with no answers and right now this thread is meant to be about how we could have given these people answers quicker nothing more, yet.

Quoting kd5mdk (Reply 2):
Improvements in aircraft tracking will not prevent an aircraft from falling out of the sky, exploding or whatever else caused the crash.

Agreed. We don't have the piece of the puzzle yet. We have others. When that is known I hope we can discuss it here.

Quoting apfpilot (Reply 9):
Not sure what you mean by wifi improvements

One of the articles posted mentions how passengers with wifi in the cabin could have access to better weather information then the pilot in the cockpit. This is one example.

Quoting illinicmi (Reply 12):
For those who think this thread is premature, I invite you to point out the glowing successes of this search and rescue operation so far. Some of us have clearly missed them.

I agree.

Quoting FlyingSicilian (Reply 13):
Interpol makes its lost/stolen passport database available to all member countries now, most just do not use it.
The three main users are the USA, UK, and UAE. Others could easily follow suit.

In which case this could be about better global policies in a global aviation environment. Not sure, but I think you are probably right.

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 16):
As to improving tracking and transmission in real time of the status of the status of operational aircraft, there could be serious technical issues as well as costs almost all airlines are not going to be interested to spending on for very rare occurrences.

Cost is a deterrent for sure. I think a lot of the reason we don't have it is because the OEMs know the airlines don't want to pay more for it so the OEMs don't want to spend the money. I agree but I believe improvements need to be made.

Quoting Markam (Reply 18):
There is an interesting article on The Guardian about this issue

Solid article indeed, thanks for posting.

Quoting rolfen (Reply 22):
Why don't airliners have some kind of battery-operated, crash-proof, powerful transmitter attached to the FDR, which would broadcast their position, along with a special emergency code, as soon as the FDR stops receiving power, or when a high G deceleration, or any other sign of a crash is detected?

An emergency surface beacon that is ejected from the aircraft as soon as there is a major event on the airplane. Not sure but you could be on to something there.

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 23):
Not possible with current technology.

We have a rover walking around on Mars doing science experiments for us and sending us back results. Of course its possible, it just isn't a regulation or it isn't profitable. I am sure the technology can exist if it doesn't already.

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 23):
I'd love to hear you ideas on hour to (1) identify the NOK earlier, (2) confirming notification, (3) dealing with 'family' in multiple locations, (4) verifying that all NOK have been notified before releasing names.

I proposed the question but you obviously can offer more answers. OZ just got penalized a lot of money by the FAA for their failure to notify NOK in a timely manner. The public wasn't aware of this flight being in trouble until 5 hours (?) after it went off radar. Some might think that is too long.

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 23):
Do you know of a technology that the communications industry hasn't identified?

Nope. I don't. I know the F22 fighter can see another fighter aircraft 5-10 times faster on its radar than any other fighter in the sky so we know that exists. I know the US has missile defense that detects missiles in the sky and sends up another missile and blows it out of the sky. Something tells me we have the technology somewhere in the system to detect a large commercial airliner that wants to be seen everywhere it goes if we can detect fighter jets and missiles that don't want to be seen. Won't be cheap but is a watered down version necessary?

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 23):
There really isn't a way to fix that problem in the open ocean

Satellites, floating beacons, I don't know but I wasn't really talking about just the Ocean. Malaysia to Vietnam isn't really that big of a distance. Canada ATC reaches past Greenland so the technology certainly exists; it could just be about cost.

Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 23):
Pilots need to be flying their aircraft, not acting as ATC for other aircraft.

Right now ATC is asking pilots to contact other pilots because they cannot reach themselves. Pilots are already being distracted because they have to listen to ATC for all communication in their area in case that ATC needs them. There are already lots of distractions. I wonder if we have the technology to allow pilots to not be so distracted so they can focus on flying the plane.

You have a lot of negative things to say; it would be great if you have anything to add because you do seem to be knowledgeable. Do you have any ideas on how the system can improve or do you see it as perfect as is?

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 24):
>Satellite phones
Already in place.

Not in many commercial cockpits.

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 26):
I'll add that while it is admirable to make aviation safer, there is always a compromise.

I agree. I think that is the crux of a lot of the issues; its not cost effective. 1 aircraft per 5 years may not be enough for all airlines to want to spend the money.

Quoting apfpilot (Reply 28):

Great post. Thanks for adding to the conversation.

tortugamon
 
planemaker
Posts: 5411
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 12:53 pm

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 4:05 am

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 26):
I'll add that while it is admirable to make aviation safer, there is always a compromise. There are plenty of investments to be made in making aviation safer, but they all come at a cost.

Few on A.net seem to understand this very simple concept. They somehow think that no compromise exists. Even when the compromise is pointed out they go into denial. There are many NTSB recommendations which the industry hasn't implemented because of the costs involved.
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
 
rfields5421
Posts: 5549
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:45 am

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 4:06 am

Quoting rolfen (Reply 25):
If you have a position and a radius, how much do you have to search?

The problem is the radius from the last know position is never a constant, it can vary quite a bit.

AF447 did a 270 degree descending turn and actually back tracked over a dozen miles from the last reported position. All the previous searches until the wreckage had been found assumed the aircraft continued on course.

There is no telling if this aircraft continued on course after the last reported position, turned due to damage, pilot input, aerodynamic forces, etc.

Did it break-up in the air? or remain intact until it struck the ocean surface?

From 35,000 feet - the difference in the two wreckage locations could be dozens of miles.

If the aircraft flew under power and on course for a few minutes after comms were lost - remember those planes can cover over 100 miles in 12 minutes.

Assuming a possible 12 minute gap between lost comms and impacting the water - the search area will be a minimum of 7,850 square miles, and could be over 31,000 square miles. Since it takes a surface ship close to two hours per square mile to search, an helicopter near 4 square miles per hour, a high flying aircraft - maybe 10 square miles - it would be a few thousand hours of searching.

And floating debris moves.

What is a clean sector on one pass, may have debris on the next pass, or vice versa.


The people running the searches know what they are doing. They have trained on searches, and the SAR community worldwide works together on lessons learned.

But as pointed out above - the ocean is very, very large - and unless there is large intact debris floating - the searchers have to get very close to find and identify items as from the aircraft.
 
apfpilot
Posts: 684
Joined: Wed Jun 05, 2013 4:19 pm

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 4:14 am

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 35):
One of the articles posted mentions how passengers with wifi in the cabin could have access to better weather information then the pilot in the cockpit. This is one example.

That simply isn't true though. Pilots can get weather data sent up to them PRN from the ground. Airlines have policies and procedures to use electronic tablets to get weather information in the cockpit if they have the desire to. Remember though weather isn't quite as dynamic as you might think and there are very few situations where a weather update isn't available to them in some way.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 35):
Nope. I don't. I know the F22 fighter can see another fighter aircraft 5-10 times faster on its radar than any other fighter in the sky so we know that exists. I know the US has missile defense that detects missiles in the sky and sends up another missile and blows it out of the sky. Something tells me we have the technology somewhere in the system to detect a large commercial airliner that wants to be seen everywhere it goes if we can detect fighter jets and missiles that don't want to be seen. Won't be cheap but is a watered down version necessary?

That type of technology is a) Militarized and subject to ITAR regulations so would be limited to what aircraft it can be deployed on. The infrastructure that the military has to support these applications are also pretty huge.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 35):
Right now ATC is asking pilots to contact other pilots because they cannot reach themselves. Pilots are already being distracted because they have to listen to ATC for all communication in their area in case that ATC needs them. There are already lots of distractions. I wonder if we have the technology to allow pilots to not be so distracted so they can focus on flying the plane.

On oceanic routes either SELCAL is used (a tone is broadcast by the radio station trying to reach the aircraft over HF), this sets off a chime in the aircraft that is being called and the pilot picks up the HF and makes contact. Most modern aircraft uses FANS which includes CPDLC for most contacts and has a SATCOM component for when voice comms are required. They also use HF as a back up.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 35):
Not in many commercial cockpits.

You'd be surprised. The company I work for has our Iridium phones on DL 739ERs and again many aircraft use Inmarsat SATCOM for oceanic communications.
Opinions are my own and do not reflect an endorsement or position of my employer.
 
apfpilot
Posts: 684
Joined: Wed Jun 05, 2013 4:19 pm

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 4:16 am

Quoting planemaker (Reply 36):
There are many NTSB recommendations which the industry hasn't implemented because of the costs involved.

i.e. something as simple as car seats being mandated for infants.
Opinions are my own and do not reflect an endorsement or position of my employer.
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17058
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 4:25 am

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 33):

I think there should be camera links to the ground to the cockpit at all time. If this is indeed a cockpit breach, or even if its pilot error, we would know immediately.

Imagine the cost of this technology. Economically indefensible with current technology. Besides, how would it save lives?

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 35):
Quoting apfpilot (Reply 9):
Not sure what you mean by wifi improvements

One of the articles posted mentions how passengers with wifi in the cabin could have access to better weather information then the pilot in the cockpit. This is one example.

The pax could get the same weather info as the pilots. And almost none of them would know how to glean the relevant bits from it.

I'd rather let the highly trained experts at the pointy end do the flying.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 35):
An emergency surface beacon that is ejected from the aircraft as soon as there is a major event on the airplane. Not sure but you could be on to something there.

Expensive. Complex. Almost never used. In other words not economically defensible.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 35):
Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 23):
Do you know of a technology that the communications industry hasn't identified?

Nope. I don't. I know the F22 fighter can see another fighter aircraft 5-10 times faster on its radar than any other fighter in the sky so we know that exists. I know the US has missile defense that detects missiles in the sky and sends up another missile and blows it out of the sky. Something tells me we have the technology somewhere in the system to detect a large commercial airliner that wants to be seen everywhere it goes if we can detect fighter jets and missiles that don't want to be seen. Won't be cheap but is a watered down version necessary?

We have had this tech for decades. It's called primary radar. In fact, primary radar was tracking this very flight.

The F-22 claim sounds more like it can discriminate from clutter faster. It's not magic. Just radar and processing.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 35):
Quoting rfields5421 (Reply 23):
Pilots need to be flying their aircraft, not acting as ATC for other aircraft.

Right now ATC is asking pilots to contact other pilots because they cannot reach themselves. Pilots are already being distracted because they have to listen to ATC for all communication in their area in case that ATC needs them. There are already lots of distractions. I wonder if we have the technology to allow pilots to not be so distracted so they can focus on flying the plane.

In long-haul cruise many pilots are probably begging for distractions. Pilots read the paper or a book. They chat. It's not like there's a huge amount of stuff going on. Besides, if acting as a relay would risk the safety of their own flight, pilots simply won't. Most of the time in cruise though, there would be plenty of time for a pilot to relay.

Unless you're in a terminal area, ATC is not a huge chore.

Also, as I said earlier, datalink is already in place in large parts of the world. No need to talk.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
rfields5421
Posts: 5549
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:45 am

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 4:31 am

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 35):
OZ just got penalized a lot of money by the FAA for their failure to notify NOK in a timely manner.

No - the airline was penalized for not following the FAA requirement for providing support and assistance. There is a program and a standard in place. United actually did better than Asiana in San Francisco. Partially because United has a lot more staff in SFO, and United has an excellent team in place for dealing with families in a crash situation.

Asiana simply had not put anything in place before hand as required by regulations for airlines that fly into the US.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 35):
The public wasn't aware of this flight being in trouble until 5 hours (?) after it went off radar. Some might think that is too long.

No it isn't too long.

For many good reasons, public announcements of missing aircraft are not made until the aircraft actually misses its landing time at the destination airport. This practice makes it much easier to notify families because those gathering at the arrival airport can be gathered and informed of the potential status. This also avoids families of people on other aircraft of the airline thinking their flight was involved in a crash.

What is very bad for the families is hearing about a possible crash over the news, and rushing to the airport or jamming the phone lines and airline websites asking for information. Like most largish airlines - Malaysian had several aircraft in the air when this one disappeared. Making sure that not only the authorities, but the airline response staff have the correct flight information is important, and takes time.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 35):
Do you have any ideas on how the system can improve or do you see it as perfect as is?

The system isn't perfect, and neither the airlines nor the aviation authorities are sitting around not doing anything to improve the system.

Some of the biggest issues are over the various nations 'controlling' their own airspace.

AF447 clearly showed that the handoff between oceanic sectors was not monitored closely enough. Even then, the various sectors did not feel they had the authority to declare AF447 missing.

In this case, it looks like the airline and authorities were aware and trying to find the aircraft very soon after the lost comms.

I've been in airborne search aircraft looking for a ship sinking. We saw it burning on the horizon, but when we arrived overhead - we could barely find the six liferafts with 75 people on them. The sea wasn't that rough, but it is very hard to spot, and then keep under observation from a fixed wing aircraft.

That was day time. At night it is much worse.

The system hasn't failed completely. I don't even see anything that it has not been working optimally. But don't really have data to support either conclusion.

When an aircraft, or ship, goes missing - it takes a lot of time, a lot of people and a lot of money to search.

We all want a quick resolution - but sometimes that just isn't possible.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 9762
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 4:32 am

Quoting tortugamon (Thread starter):

The purpose of this thread is to discuss what changes need to happen in civil aviation so that accidents like MH370 do not happen in the future, -or- if they do happen, what changes need to happen so the response is better than what we are currently witnessing. We do not know the outcome of this accident but we have plenty of information to understand where deficiencies lie. I will suggest a few:

Way too early for this thread, you are asking people to speculate on nothing factual.
We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
 
D L X
Posts: 11639
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 4:32 am

Quoting N328KF (Reply 21):
If you don't think the thread is a good idea, then don't post in it. It'll help the Signal:Noise ratio. As it is, you're just making things worse.

No, I'm really not. But I would point out that you haven't addressed any of my arguments.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 35):
I think the fact that we don't know where the plane is and what happened to it and it has been three days is enough of a problem to know that we don't want this to happen again.

The fact that it has been two (not three) days is of very little importance unless it turns out that people survived, but succumbed waiting to be rescued. Of course we don't know that yet, and that's why this series of questions is too premature. If they are all dead, as cold as it may sound, three days versus three years is not going to make a big difference. In my opinion, the problem is impatience.
 
Mir
Posts: 19092
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 4:48 am

Quoting tortugamon (Thread starter):
>Black Boxes that communicate in real time with the ground giving us data on the aircraft without the physical black box

Cost-prohibitive at the moment. We're to the point where maintenance messages are economically viable, but the amount of data that current FDRs record would take up far too much bandwidth.

Quoting tortugamon (Thread starter):
>ATC with better radios with more range and less interference allowing for easier communication with pilots

That's a physical limitation. High-clarity radios are limited by line of sight - there's no way around that. Beyond line of sight, lower-clarity (i.e. HF) radios must be used.

Quoting tortugamon (Thread starter):
>Satellite phones

Already exist.

Quoting tortugamon (Thread starter):
>GPS in the cockpit

Is already there, has been there for a long time.

Quoting tortugamon (Thread starter):
>Better ATC Radar so missing aircraft are acknowledged sooner, vitals are more accurate, and fewer areas of poor radar coverage.

Radar has the same limitations as radios do. You're not going to get radar coverage over long stretches of water - there is no way around that except for the ADS capability that the aircraft already had and was using.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
jpheym
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 4:08 am

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 4:59 am

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 24):

Quoting tortugamon (Thread starter):
>Black Boxes that communicate in real time with the ground giving us data on the aircraft without the physical black box

Hideously expensive to implement and maintain for very very little benefit. Example AF447. Would this have saved anyone on board? Nope.


The per-aircraft initial and maintenance costs should be the same order of magnitude of installing or maintaining an aircraft GPS receiver. Iridium modems sell for $400 to $1000. A satellite data transmitter is therefore a relatively low cost piece of equipment, not counting initial development and certification costs.

And yes this could prevent an accident like AF447.

Real-time flight data collection provides the following:

* Emergency crews have better information. Find MH370 faster. It is embarrassing that we need 40 aircraft and 24 ships to search an ocean given today's navigation and communication technology.

* Pilot errors can be automatically caught in real-time (alert the crew), then scrutinized off-line to improve pilot training. Prevent another AF447. For every loss of life accident, how many near miss incidents are there? Are all incidents being documented and analyzed properly? Are all rough landings being analyzed to tell the pilot how he could have performed better?

* Equipment anomalies can be scrutinized better by engineers.

The value of real-time "black box" data is enormous. I can't think of anything more valuable to aviation that was easily achievable with technology from 20 years ago, let alone from today's technology.
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 17058
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 5:04 am

Quoting jpheym (Reply 45):
The per-aircraft initial and maintenance costs should be the same order of magnitude of installing or maintaining an aircraft GPS receiver. Iridium modems sell for $400 to $1000. A satellite data transmitter is therefore a relatively low cost piece of equipment, not counting initial development and certification costs.

And yes this could prevent an accident like AF447.

How?

Quoting jpheym (Reply 45):
Pilot errors can be automatically caught in real-time (alert the crew),

Again, how would this analysis of errors be done? Errors that bring down planes tend to be very complex affairs. In any case I really don't think it is a good idea to second-guess the crew when they are managing a crisis. Do you really think the crew of AF447, screwing up by the numbers as they were, would have done better with some guy sitting in a cozy office in Paris giving them his views? Any pilot would have turned that radio off right quick.

In situations where there is time to evaluate things, pilots already consult expertise on the ground today.

Quoting jpheym (Reply 45):
The value of real-time "black box" data is enormous. I can't think of anything more valuable to aviation that was easily achievable with technology from 20 years ago, let alone from today's technology.

Name one accident in the last twenty years that would not have happened if this kind of technology had been implemented.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
Mir
Posts: 19092
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 5:13 am

Quoting jpheym (Reply 45):
* Pilot errors can be automatically caught in real-time (alert the crew)

You're being very optimistic about the ability for someone on the ground to look at some data and draw good conclusions in a short period of time and deliver them to a very busy crew. Remember also that a contributing factor in AF447 was the failure of flight instruments - someone on the ground could have seen what was coming off the instruments and correctly deduced the problem and informed the crew, but it would be an entirely reasonable reaction of the crew to ignore the warning on the grounds that the instruments were unreliable and thus the people on the ground were getting bad data.

Quoting jpheym (Reply 45):
Are all incidents being documented and analyzed properly?

Yes, or as close as we can get.

Quoting jpheym (Reply 45):
Are all rough landings being analyzed to tell the pilot how he could have performed better?

Not necessary - pilots generally know what went wrong with a landing.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
jpheym
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 4:08 am

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 5:18 am

Quoting Mir (Reply 44):
Quoting Mir (Reply 44):

Cost-prohibitive at the moment. We're to the point where maintenance messages are economically viable, but the amount of data that current FDRs record would take up far too much bandwidth.

Bandwidth for two-way in-flight high speed internet is already economically viable.

In-flight internet uses the same class of high-power geostationary satellites pioneered by Hughes that provide internet for the Hilton Hotel chain and the HughesNet residential satellite internet service. There are terabits of excess bandwidth available in geostationary orbit.

The antennas are low-profile active phased arrays similar to the $3000 antennas sold for mobile satellite TV.

And that's high bandwidth (megabit). Real time "black box" can be compressed and only needs kilobit speeds, therefore a cheaper antenna and modem.
 
apfpilot
Posts: 684
Joined: Wed Jun 05, 2013 4:19 pm

RE: MH370 - Lessons Learned, Changes In Civil Aviation

Mon Mar 10, 2014 5:22 am

Quoting jpheym (Reply 45):
The per-aircraft initial and maintenance costs should be the same order of magnitude of installing or maintaining an aircraft GPS receiver. Iridium modems sell for $400 to $1000. A satellite data transmitter is therefore a relatively low cost piece of equipment, not counting initial development and certification costs.

You discount the infrastructure needed to then receive catalog and monitor that data as well as the cost of getting that data off the aircraft (inmarsat data is in the range of $3-8MB) keep in mind that the FDR is required to monitor the follow parameters 1 time per second:

1) Time;
(2) Pressure altitude;
(3) Indicated airspeed;
(4) Heading--primary flight crew reference (if selectable, record discrete, true or magnetic); (5) Normal acceleration (Vertical);
(6) Pitch attitude;
(7) Roll attitude;
(8) Manual radio transmitter keying, or CVR/DFDR synchronization reference;
(9) Thrust/power of each engine--primary flight crew reference;
(10) Autopilot engagement status;
(11) Longitudinal acceleration;
(12) Pitch control input;
(13) Lateral control input;
(14) Rudder pedal input;
(15) Primary pitch control surface position;
(16) Primary lateral control surface position;
(17) Primary yaw control surface position;
(18) Lateral acceleration;
Flight Data Recorder Handbook for Aviation Accident Investigation
vii
Federal Legislation and Regulations (cont.)
(19) Pitch trim surface position or parameters of paragraph (a)(82) of this section if currently recorded;
(20) Trailing edge flap or cockpit flap control selection (except when parameters of paragraph (a)(85) of this section apply);
(21) Leading edge flap or cockpit flap control selection (except when parameters of paragraph (a)(86) of this section apply);
(22) Each Thrust reverser position (or equivalent for propeller airplane);
(23) Ground spoiler position or speed brake selection (except when parameters of paragraph
(a)(87) of this section apply);
(24) Outside or total air temperature;
(25) Automatic Flight Control System (AFCS) modes and engagement status, including
autothrottle;
(26) Radio altitude (when an information source is installed);
(27) Localizer deviation, MLS Azimuth;
(28) Glideslope deviation, MLS Elevation;
(29) Marker beacon passage;
(30) Master warning;
(31) Air/ground sensor (primary airplane system reference nose or main gear);
(32) Angle of attack (when information source is installed);
(33) Hydraulic pressure low (each system);
(34) Ground speed (when an information source is installed);
(35) Ground proximity warning system;
(36) Landing gear position or landing gear cockpit control selection;
(37) Drift angle (when an information source is installed);
(38) Wind speed and direction (when an information source is installed);
(39) Latitude and longitude (when an information source is installed);
(40) Stick shaker/pusher (when an information source is installed);
(41) Windshear (when an information source is installed);
(42) Throttle/power lever position;
(43) Additional engine parameters (as designated in Appendix M of this part);
(44) Traffic alert and collision avoidance system;
(45) DME 1 and 2 distances;
(46) Nav 1 and 2 selected frequency;
(47) Selected barometric setting (when an information source is installed);
(48) Selected altitude (when an information source is installed);
(49) Selected speed (when an information source is installed);
(50) Selected mach (when an information source is installed);
(51) Selected vertical speed (when an information source is installed);
(52) Selected heading (when an information source is installed);
(53) Selected flight path (when an information source is installed);
(54) Selected decision height (when an information source is installed);
(55) EFIS display format;
(56) Multi-function/engine/alerts display format;
(57) Thrust command (when an information source is installed);
(58) Thrust target (when an information source is installed);
(59) Fuel quantity in CG trim tank (when an information source is installed);
(60) Primary Navigation System Reference;
(61) Icing (when an information source is installed);
(62) Engine warning each engine vibration (when an information source is installed);
(63) Engine warning each engine over temp. (when an information source is installed);
(64) Engine warning each engine oil pressure low (when an information source is installed);
Flight Data Recorder Handbook for Aviation Accident Investigation
viii
Federal Legislation and Regulations (cont.)
(65) Engine warning each engine over speed (when an information source is installed); (66) Yaw trim surface position;
(67) Roll trim surface position;
(68) Brake pressure (selected system);
(69) Brake pedal application (left and right);
(70) Yaw or sideslip angle (when an information source is installed);
(71) Engine bleed valve position (when an information source is installed);
(72) De-icing or anti-icing system selection (when an information source is installed);
(73) Computed center of gravity (when an information source is installed);
(74) AC electrical bus status;
(75) DC electrical bus status;
(76) APU bleed valve position (when an information source is installed);
(77) Hydraulic pressure (each system);
(78) Loss of cabin pressure;
(79) Computer failure;
(80) Heads-up display (when an information source is installed);
(81) Para-visual display (when an information source is installed);
(82) Cockpit trim control input position--pitch;
(83) Cockpit trim control input position--roll;
(84) Cockpit trim control input position--yaw;
(85) Trailing edge flap and cockpit flap control position;
(86) Leading edge flap and cockpit flap control position;
(87) Ground spoiler position and speed brake selection; and
(88) All cockpit flight control input forces (control wheel, control column, rudder pedal).

Quoting jpheym (Reply 45):
* Emergency crews have better information. Find MH370 faster. It is embarrassing that we need 40 aircraft and 24 ships to search an ocean given today's navigation and communication technology.

Questionable if this would help. If power is lost or comms are lost it is useless.

Quoting jpheym (Reply 45):
* Pilot errors can be automatically caught in real-time (alert the crew), then scrutinized off-line to improve pilot training. Prevent another AF447. For every loss of life accident, how many near miss incidents are there? Are all incidents being documented and analyzed properly? Are all rough landings being analyzed to tell the pilot how he could have performed better?

This is already done through ACARS datalink, exceedence data is monitored and sent to MX on many airplanes either in flight (see AF447) or once the aircraft is parked at the gate and a wi-fi link is established.

Quoting jpheym (Reply 45):
* Equipment anomalies can be scrutinized better by engineers.

See above

Quoting jpheym (Reply 45):
The value of real-time "black box" data is enormous.

Again this is arguable realtime notification and monitoring of the landing gear selector position is pretty much useless, the relevant data is in many cases already squirted off the airplane.
Opinions are my own and do not reflect an endorsement or position of my employer.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7

Who is online