Originally Posted by
60plus
Quote:
I have often wondered why these, valuable to the search and subsequent enquiry, items are not given some form of barostatic release. If so designed they could then automatically deploy to release themselves to the surface if the lost aircraft were to descend below a certain depth of water.
Probably because if they were still in an intact piece of the aft fuselage they would be required to unscrew themselves from their mounts, open the cargo door and swim to the surface?
Originally Posted by
Flightmech
Probably because if they were still in an intact piece of the aft fuselage they would be required to unscrew themselves from their mounts, open the cargo door and swim to the surface?
Agreed. And every bit of complexity you design in to a system increases the testing and certification effort and also increases the ongoing maintenance effort. All of this then increases the failure rate. This is true of both complex electronic solutions as well as complex mechanical solutions. Don't forget that after the box mechanically unmounts itself from the structure, it has to disconnect the harnesses that provide it power and data.
Is it technically possible? I'm sure it is. Something along the lines of an ADELT used on SAR aircraft, perhaps. But you impose all those penalties (weight, cost, opportunity for error and failure rate) on every aircraft built.
It leaves a bad taste in one's mouth to think it comes down to a willingness to spend money. But, it still has to be feasible to design, manufacture, sell and service. And that includes economic feasibility. And it is more than just money. You also increase the risks.