Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Air Asia Indonesia Lost Contact from Surabaya to Singapore

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Air Asia Indonesia Lost Contact from Surabaya to Singapore

Old 13th Jan 2015, 02:37
  #1901 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Numerous news reports about the recovery of QZ8501's flight data recorder say it might take up to a month to read the data. Can anyone tell me if this is true and why it takes so long, especially if the FDR is intact, as this one seems to be?
If the FDR is in great condition then the data readout will be quick (hours or days).

Even so, after the data has been downloaded, all the information collected must then be validated / checked for quality. E.g., suppose we read out a series of sidestick movements -- how do we know that those were the actual movements of the sidestick, and not representing a sensor malfunction, or perhaps a recording error from the FDR itself?

There are hundreds of parameters which much be checked for correctness. Normally this quality check can be completed quickly as well, but in cases of discrepancy it can take many months to fully validate the data.

Various regulations stipulate that each FDR/CVR must be checked and analyzed for data quality (including a full-flight parameter readout) at least once every 12 months. Unfortunately there have been recorder errors undetected until after an accident, making retrieval & analysis a very long and tedious process.
peekay4 is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2015, 02:43
  #1902 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: On the equator
Posts: 1,291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Numerous news reports about the recovery of QZ8501's flight data recorder say it might take up to a month to read the data. Can anyone tell me if this is true and why it takes so long, especially if the FDR is intact, as this one seems to be?
And how long will it be before the data gets leaked to social media? My guess is, give it a week and we'll be discussing about it here .
training wheels is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2015, 02:53
  #1903 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Of course they would. And what's the problem? None
First they are found, and even if thousand miles away, they contain all data, even the position of crash.
The problem is more along the lines of accidental ejection, especially if such an accidental ejection could itself cause safety issues (damage to the aircraft, etc.)

Airbus vs. Boeing have been debating this for months. From an NTSB meeting last year:

Boeing, Airbus at odds over black boxes that eject
peekay4 is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2015, 02:56
  #1904 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Not far from a big Lake
Age: 81
Posts: 1,454
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
And how long will it be before the data gets leaked to social media? My guess is, give it a week and we'll be discussing about it here .
Give it 2 weeks to be safe.
You should probably see selected FDR data first. The voice will probably be held back while they discuss what is proper to release.
Machinbird is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2015, 02:57
  #1905 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: On the equator
Posts: 1,291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Don't know whether this has been posted before, but it shows a detailed map of what's been found in this area.



Object 18 could be the engine. Object 9 could be the fuselage. "Jenazah" is deceased (body).

Source: Twitter
training wheels is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2015, 03:43
  #1906 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 68
Posts: 4,395
Received 180 Likes on 88 Posts
Having looked at lots and lots of digital FDR data over the years (most for incidents, not accidents), it does take some time to make sense of the data. Data corruption is not uncommon, nor is valid but 'miscaled' data (e.g. off by a factor of 2 or 4, that sort of thing), and things like power transfers or momentary power interrupts can corrupt data for several seconds.

Actual CVR recordings are seldom (never?) released after a fatal accident - only a transcript will be released to the public, and that's not likely to be real soon. I listened to one CVR when I was actively involved in an investigation (there was a 'click' that they wanted my opinion of what the sound was). Let's just say that listening to doomed pilots last words is not pleasant.

There will undoubtedly be complaints that more information is not forthcoming over the next several weeks. That's by design - during an active investigation the participants are effectively under a gag order. Unauthorized release of information can be career limiting - all data release is to be from the investigating authority. Sure, there'll be some leaks, but much of it may well be wrong (or at least inaccurate), which is why all the information is supposed to be released through channels.


So cool it with all the conspiracy theories for a while. The information will be released in due time.
tdracer is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2015, 04:19
  #1907 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Washstate
Age: 79
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thumbs up CVR RECORDINGS

So cool it with all the conspiracy theories for a while. The information will be released in due time
AMEN AMEN AMEN
SAMPUBLIUS is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2015, 04:31
  #1908 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Australia
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
@NSEU

Good luck getting the black boxes to float!

Armour plated for crash resistance, for their size, they would have to be the heaviest boxes on the aircraft. You'd have to find a crash resistant/fire proof floatation device of considerable size.
Indeed... not to mention this little comment right at the end of the article.

"It would also help to indicate the exact point of impact at the time of the crash and to find the wreckage."

Airbus to get ejectable black boxes
JSmithDTV is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2015, 07:09
  #1909 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: NNW of Antipodes
Age: 81
Posts: 1,330
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
formationdriver

There have been many interjections in threads in this forum dedicated to the A v B aspects, along with those addressing the never-ending theories about a supposed recorder substitution. None have ever been proven with a degree of conviction that "sticks".

This particular thread is not about Airbus versus Boeing, its about a mishap to a flight that involved an A320 aircraft. A relationship between the events associated with the flight and all the junk that has been portrayed in the past is a tenuous call.

Let's just deal with the facts around this particular incident, and let the facts that emerge speak for themselves, and never forget that its people like you and me who are always potential witnesses and victims to things that go wrong in aviation.
mm43 is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2015, 07:58
  #1910 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Herts, UK
Posts: 748
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Good luck getting the black boxes to float!*

Armour plated for crash resistance, for their size, they would have to be the heaviest boxes on the aircraft. You'd have to find a crash resistant/fire proof floatation device of considerable size.
Would the duplicates need to be 'duplicates' as such?

That is would they need to be fully armored (and so heavy) if they were
for ejecting over water surrounded by a floatation device... maybe a compromise
could be made... ?
HarryMann is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2015, 08:24
  #1911 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: England
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
you don't need much of a lift-bag to float a surprisingly heavy object.

you only have to displace the same weight of water, and at 1Kg's/Litre a 20l bag will 'lift' 20Kg's (think something the same volume as a jerry can)
Scuffers is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2015, 09:25
  #1912 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: WA
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Barsarnas Chief has apparently clarified that they have found the wings and an engine, but not the main body of the wreckage. The number of "clarifications" gets quite confusing.
Blake777 is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2015, 09:27
  #1913 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: KSAN
Age: 62
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Crash Position Indicator

The appropriate ejectable/floatable/ELT/CVR/FDR technology is over 50 years old and well known in the military airlift and offshore rotary-wing communities, just Google "Crash Position Indicator".
Sawbones62 is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2015, 10:03
  #1914 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
@NSEU

Good luck getting the black boxes to float!

Armour plated for crash resistance, for their size, they would have to be the heaviest boxes on the aircraft. You'd have to find a crash resistant/fire proof floatation device of considerable size.
One type is made from fibreglass filled with foam...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pj-aOVUQMEE
cwatters is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2015, 10:14
  #1915 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: N5552.0W00419.0ish
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by airbus DR article
'The change is generally quick,' the spokesman added on Monday
I can't see how such a thing can be quick, unless it already exists, awaiting approval. I can only imagine that the 'change' in question is to the specification. The engineering/R&D folks have no doubt got a fair amount of the spec in mind, and that may be the basis for any change. However, if Airbus & Boeing have differing, but equally valid views on what it should be, then already you have a delay. Not so quick, then.
Implementing these ideas would be a whole new set of considerations for the product and design folks. Recorders as they stand now are due to a process of evolution, still ongoing, rather than just a simple 'lets do this'. As is their placement. Where will it be fitted? How will it be ejected? when would it be ejected? Being just some very simple questions

Originally Posted by Harry
Would the duplicates need to be 'duplicates' as such?

That is would they need to be fully armored (and so heavy) if they were
for ejecting over water surrounded by a floatation device... maybe a compromise
could be made... ?
Duplicates? Not necessarily. The main considerations are survivability and recovery, surely. So, it needs to be quickly obvious that it has been detached from the aircraft, and start transmitting. There also would need to be a well established response in this event. Not hoping for the best, surprised by the worst, which has been alluded to in several comments both here and the MH370 discussions.
In the event that the aircraft ends up in the sea, then the capsule should float. But would the 'capsule' end up in the sea, too? Defining the incident as being only over sea, or only over land will surely ignore a vast amount of other scenarios, such as coastal areas. So, It would need to be as survivable as the main unit. If the ejectable capsule is unable to survive an unexpected impact with rocks for instance, then the whole exercise becomes futile.

Transmission of data then, becomes an option.
But do you need to transmit it all? Or just snap shots? Maybe just critical phases, such as take off and landing, passing transition alt/level, anytime RadAlt is triggered, anytime GPWS/TCAS are triggered being just a few events when it would be needed.
Lancelot de boyles is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2015, 10:25
  #1916 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Maryland USA
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Why do you all think the floating beacon/CVR/FDR would be a literal duplicate of the one currently in the airplane with a huge float tied to it
You need duplicate DATA, not a duplicate box. The memory to store a copy of the data would fit within the form factor of current production floating EPIRBS.
island_airphoto is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2015, 10:27
  #1917 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: On the equator
Posts: 1,291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
This is apparently a photo of the CVR which has just been retrieved.



Source: CNA (6.57 PM Singapore time)
training wheels is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2015, 10:29
  #1918 (permalink)  
TWT
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: troposphere
Posts: 830
Received 29 Likes on 15 Posts
Good on the Indonesians for finding the boxes.They have achieved success with a lot of hard work.
TWT is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2015, 11:12
  #1919 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Sawbones62
The appropriate ejectable/floatable/ELT/CVR/FDR technology is over 50 years old and well known in the military airlift and offshore rotary-wing communities, just Google "Crash Position Indicator".
They have been around for years on C-5 and C-141. See http://c141heaven.info/dotcom/traini...n_6_20_elt.pdf just the look of the document will tell you how old it is
Ian W is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2015, 11:48
  #1920 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: England
Age: 65
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It's clear that (at least within this forum) the consensus is that the way we handle aircraft flight data needs changing.

Ejectable data capsules are workable concept, Island_airphoto has a good point, you don't need to eject the the FDR/CVR, you need the data not the whole shooting match.
Solid state memory is fairly robust and light, ejectable data capsules could be modular so more than one could be carried for little gain in weight, heaviest component would be the battery for the location beacon.
Also rather than broadcasting till it dies, some sort of algorithm to broadcast high power for location purposes for 1 minute, then low power for a period, then shut down and repeat. This would extend battery life/reduce battery size required.

Multi-facted approach would be ideal, data streaming via satellite, squawk changing to either 7700 or a new code (7400?).

The trigger mechanism(s) and parameters need careful consideration, don't want it triggered unnecessarily but it could be staged, heavy turbulence could invoke data streaming, ROD over a prescribed limit below 15k (to allow for emergency descents due pressurisation issues), etc.
Momoe is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.