|
Airbus choose data streaming to replace black boxes
UK Guardian:
European plane maker Airbus is to install technology built by British firm Inmarsat that will render the black box virtually obsolete and could prevent air disasters. Inmarsat, the satellite company that helped Malaysia Airlines pinpoint the likely flight path of the downed MH370 airliner, said the technology was a “gamechanger” for airline safety. It beams flight information via a satellite to an airline’s control centre within seconds, capturing real-time data about what is happening onboard the plane. This is particularly important if an aeroplane crashes into the sea, because signals sent by a flight recorder, or black box, typically stop within weeks as its batteries run down. This leaves investigators unable to access crucial data about the cause of an accident, as in the case of MH370, whose black box has yet to be found. Inmarsat said the new technology – called SwiftBroadband-Safety (SB-S) and dubbed the “black box in the cloud” – could prevent a crash by speeding up communication between the cockpit and the ground in the event of a mechanical problem or terrorist incident. Airbus will fit SB-S technology in A320 single-aisle planes and A330 wide-body aircraft from 2018 if it gets regulatory approval.... |
Originally Posted by John Marsh
(Post 9426145)
Airbus choose data streaming to replace black boxes
SwiftBroadband Safety takes flight for first time - Inmarsat |
The system for set up for Hawaiian is also used to send/receive inflight weather data.
|
It will have to run in parallel for a number of years until it reliability is proven, then it probably will take over. Similar to how cloud storage is replacing individuals physical storage media.
|
I am (as anyone who knows me, and my "phones" ) a bit Jurassic, so am totally unwilling to trust, for example, my photo library to anyones "cloud" (clouds can evaporate right ? ) I possess an impressively expensive collection of Memory Cards.
Surely this idea is best seen as an addition to proven technology (the proven technology being, I would imagine, fairly cheap/trouble free ) No doubt the new system would help to bring some alleviation from MEL/ CDL requirements, but , nonetheless, would be best (in my opinion ) viewed (in the short term at least ) as an enhancement rather than replacement. |
Originally Posted by captplaystation
(Post 9426319)
I am (as anyone who knows me, and my "phones" ) a bit Jurassic, so am totally unwilling to trust, for example, my photo library to anyones "cloud" (clouds can evaporate right ? ) I possess an impressively expensive collection of Memory Cards.
Surely this idea is best seen as an addition to proven technology (the proven technology being, I would imagine, fairly cheap/trouble free ) No doubt the new system would help to bring some alleviation from MEL/ CDL requirements, but , nonetheless, would be best (in my opinion ) viewed (in the short term at least ) as an enhancement rather than replacement. |
I'd have thought the key vulnerability would have been in transmission, not data storage. You are also trusting the storage provider to stay in business and continue their existing product strategy forever. |
It could be like digital speed cameras, where the ticket can be in the post before you finish your journey. The chief pilot could be looking at your approach and landing before the engines are shutdown.
|
Airbus choose data streaming to replace black boxes Usually the CVR and DFDR are on different busses, so there is some redundancy in this respect. |
Perfect tabloid spin.
MH370 is not yet found, so no browny points to Inmarsat. Inmarsat charges arm and a leg, no airline will be willing to pay $100k for installation and monthly subscription charges. SpaceX and others will not just let Inmarsat eat the cake. India has similar satellites, may want to provide free or cheaper rates for their airlines. Technically this is a incomplete and inferior solution ie., there are million ways to loose satellite connection. They cannot even provide good internet connection, now want to replace black boxes. Bottom line a crashing plane cannot maintain satellite connection. |
the feed will be thru the IFE systems, forget anything single source, it will not evolve.
looking at the recent incidents, the 'black box' system has not performed, and most have been damaged where significant repair has been required and data lost., or as with MH370, the entire ac is lost. It is obvious that the current system simply does ot work, and had been reliant on statistical data that supposed ac really do not catastrophically crash, nor land in water..as they say "Fix It". Military ac has a system that ejects, likely as a lesson learned. Aside from that, the data rates through the IFE systems are a significant evolution in many respects, and are already in use. Much of the article appears to be an IMMARSAT advertisement. |
..and how many times do we get "DATALINK STANDBY" or the ATSU unit isn't working. Is that then a no-go MEL item?
Why not have both. We have redundancy in most other systems. |
It could be like digital speed cameras, where the ticket can be in the post before you finish your journey. The chief pilot could be looking at your approach and landing before the engines are shutdown. |
Inmarsat said the new technology – called SwiftBroadband-Safety (SB-S) and dubbed the “black box in the cloud” – could prevent a crash by speeding up communication between the cockpit and the ground in the event of a mechanical problem or terrorist incident. I will admit that there may be SOME benefit in locating an airplane that has already crashed, and in analyzing causes of a crash. However, any "prevention" of a crash would be limited to measures implemented that were ONLY detectable by the system. Take the case of AF447, for example. How many crashes were there between the time of that crash and the time the FDR and CVR were found? How many were caused by pilots who froze on the controls after a high-altitude stall? How many would have been prevented if we knew that earlier? Has AF changed their training, or has Airbus changed their control laws as a result? |
Originally Posted by Intruder
(Post 9426639)
Inmarsat said the new technology – called SwiftBroadband-Safety (SB-S) and dubbed the “black box in the cloud” – could prevent a crash by speeding up communication between the cockpit and the ground in the event of a mechanical problem or terrorist incident. Don't believe everything you read in the newspapers. :O |
Folks,
Should do wonders for Inmarsat's cash flow. Or am I just being cynical?? Tootle pip!! |
It's inevitable that constant connectivity becomes the norm. I know some of QF's fleet have sensors installed that collect atmospheric data and automatically transmit it to the MET office.
|
LeadSled is indeed being too cynical; Inmarsat are hardly a "tech start up". They have occasional holes in their cash flow when a satellite launch goes haywire, but that's about it. The global deep sea shipping industry is a captive customer and a pretty satisfied one.
|
Originally Posted by NSEU
(Post 9426498)
So if Satcom fails (or perhaps during periods of strong sunspot activity), there are no recording facilities? All aircraft grounded?
Usually the CVR and DFDR are on different busses, so there is some redundancy in this respect. Instead of patching different areas - this one looks at access to information - others finding the DFDR/CVR in deep water - making recorders more survivable etc etc. I would suggest that a formal systems analysis is carried out from scratch: what is required, how can that be captured/stored in a secure only accessible after an incident way, how and who would access that data etc. The capabilities of modern technology are significantly ahead of the regulations and standards currently in place. Do a formal design of what could be done instead. Connection oriented comms to a secure data storage in 'escrow' by a trusted 3rd party are completely feasible - possibly backed up by multiple self-powered small survivable onboard recording devices. |
At best, this would be something of a 'proof of concept' - the FDR and CVR would still be required as I don't see the feds changing the regulations anytime soon. Any attempt at obtained an "ELOS" (Equivalent Level of Safety) for at satellite based system to allow removal of the FDR and CVR would get laughed out of the office.
Before the regulators would even consider changing the regulations, or even an ELOS, you'd need tens, no hundreds of millions of operational hours, plus a significant number of actual crash events where it's demonstrated that the satellite based system provided better (or at least as good as) information than the conventional FDR/CVR systems, and NO events where the satellite system didn't provide equivalent data.:ugh: Maybe in a couple decades...:rolleyes: |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 10:59. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.