Comments on: What we’re reading: Black boxes that float, don’t fly into storms, BA in fight for survival

By: Tim

Tim — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 21:03:11 +0000

Lyngengr – no, I was not aware of what Formula 1 racing was doing, but thank you for filling me in.

I am not sure how to engineer it either, but the right group should work on it–which is not the TSA. Here in the USA, I think it would be the FAA, but I am not sure.

By: Lyngengr

Lyngengr — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 21:38:42 +0000

Tim, are you aware that Formula 1 race cars send back multiple channels of digital data to the pits? In fact, a few years ago the rules were changed to stop the engineers in the pits from changing the car performance during the race. So the technology to stream bi-directional high frequency data certainly exists. There wouldn’t need to be any on-board storage, just a microwave link to either a satellite or ground station. Remember radio waves do not travel line of sight. The planes that crashed in Brazil were not in communication with controllers, but certainly had the ability to establish radio contact. How do you think the AF flight sent back all sorts of trouble messages, including loss of electrical power and cabin pressure, even though it was not on radar or communicating with anyone? Answer – radio. Why can’t that technology be improved to take the place of the black box entirely?

As for electrical power, the on-board digital transmitter would use separate batteries, just like the tape recorders that are black boxes right now. I’m not trying to engineer this concept, just put out the suggestion that there are far better ways to relay data from moving vehicles that don’t require recovery of analog devices. If TSA was really serious about improving this technology, they would quit worrying about glueing styrofoam to the recorders and make a bold leap into the 21st century.

By: Tim

Tim — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 20:55:08 +0000

Lyngengr–that “central collection point” would probably have to be on the plane unless it is beamed to a satellite first.

The reason I say this is because of two stories out of Brazil: the recent tragedy of the Air France flight–they were out of radar range but did have voice communications. Would that be enough to transmit to a central point? The second happened last year (I believe) when a B-737 clipped a personal jet and crashed, killing everyone on board the 737. Miraculously, the little jet managed to land and everyone on board survived. This second crash happened over a remote area of Brazil when neither plane had any contact–neither radio nor radar. It would have been hard to send data to a central point.

Also, what would happen if the plane lost electricity? The sending of data could be hampered–unless the communicator had batteries like what the black boxes have. Another thought is the weather could hamper data sending.

Going digital has potential issues too–like the hard drive being damaged by the crash or magnetic interference. I am not sure if SSD technology (like thumb/jump drives) would be better.

I am not sure how a floating black box could free itself from the wreckage; perhaps having a tethered transmitter float up from the black box would help? I am not sure.

But I do agree–keep the TSA out of it, and allow some tech firm come up with a good answer.

By: Lyngengr

Lyngengr — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 18:36:01 +0000

Re: Black boxes that float

It would seem to me that rather than trying to add something new to what is essentially old analog technology, the airlines should be looking at digital wireless. I can imagine each airline having all their planes transmitting continuous, real-time data to a central collection point. In addition to basic flight data and cockpit voice recording, the information could include latitude/longitude from the nav system so a plane would not be “missing” anymore. Of course, if the TSA is in charge of this program, look for tin cans and string.