News Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 crash

[nsaspook]

It looks like the pings are gone for good. The proposed 90 day battery would have been nice here.
http://time.com/60628/missing-planes-black-box-batteries-may-have-died/

http://abcnews.go.com/International/video/us-navy-captain-shocked-hear-pinger-signals-23253016

 

[jim hardy]

for want of a nail a shoe was lost...

that acars engine reporting handshake might oughta be lengthened slightly to include lat/lon

looks like it'd be substantial return for minimal effort - all software, no new hardware
radar altimeter could trigger a report upon approach to ground..

 

[nsaspook]

for want of a nail a shoe was lost...

that acars engine reporting handshake might oughta be lengthened slightly to include lat/lon

looks like it'd be substantial return for minimal effort - all software, no new hardware
radar altimeter could trigger a report upon approach to ground..

The primary reason it was only pinging instead of transferring location data was because the airline didn't have a paid subscription for acars data via 'Classic Aero' satcom (only VHF/HF) on that plane. The airline choose not to use it due to cost and the normal route of the plane being near land and airports with the needed VHF/HF equipment. In this case the primary acars was turned off (by something or someone) so even if new software was installed on the acars controller it still would have been useless. This type of modification needs to be done at the transceiver physical data link protocol level by an OEM so I don't think it's software only or low cost.

Companies like Inmarsat/Iridium should get paid for providing that service when needed. (This crash is a very rare event so the data usage cost of a 911 emergency event call to them is almost zero) So a fixed fee for general emergency location satcom services from all airlines would seem reasonable if the money spent would actually increase safety by locating the recorders from these rare types of crashes quicker. (unlikely because they are so rare)

There are no specialized space-based systems designed just for tracking 100,000 commercial aircraft flights on a global basis. Maybe there should be but who will pay for it other than the people who buy the tickets.

 

[AlephZero]

There are no specialized space-based systems designed just for tracking 100,000 commercial aircraft flights on a global basis. Maybe there should be but who will pay for it other than the people who buy the tickets.

Designing a system with today's technology is only the tip of the iceberg, considering that planes have a working life of maybe 40 or 50 years (by the time they have filtered down the food chain to third world airlines) and many new ones coming off the production line today have only minor changes from 40 or 50 year old designs. Plus, there is the issue of small manufacturers making high-tech-looking executive jets on a very tight budget and with limited technical resources, etc.

The airworthiness regulations are often a balancing act between what is desirable and what is practically and economically possible - just like any other engineering activity.

 

[jedishrfu]

This is a business opportunity for someone: Use a simple cell phone app that periodically dials up a website or service and transmits gps coordinates and other related info to it for tracking. The only thing needed by the pilots is to start the app and provide flight number. Even then the initial flight path and time of departure might be enough to identify the flight.

 

[nsaspook]

This is a business opportunity for someone: Use a simple cell phone app that periodically dials up a website or service and transmits gps coordinates and other related info to it for tracking. The only thing needed by the pilots is to start the app and provide flight number. Even then the initial flight path and time of departure might be enough to identify the flight.

That happens today with ground based acars equipped planes up to maybe 200 miles from industrially modern locations. The problem with the current system is remote locations far away from cell towers, ground based communication systems and even transponder based microwave tracking radars. The two main options are 'over the horizon' long range tracking systems like Jindalee or dedicated space-based data-streams. Either option is high cost for the nominal amount of extra safety it might deliver in an incident like this (mainly useful as an aid to recover).
For the tracking system to be fault-tolerant (from disconnection from any cause) it must be isolated from human control and powered directly from the FADEC bus like the current satcom status transponders were on the plane that were pinging until the engines stopped.
http://semiengineering.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/extra.png

 

[jedishrfu]

How about a system akin to firechat app where the planes themselves become hubs and one plane can transmit its coordinates to other planes or ships to relay it to a collecting station (eg website)? I'm not sure how far out of range a plane maybe from other planes and ships during its flight.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/alltechcon...pp-might-be-a-step-toward-internet-everywhere

 

[nsaspook]

How about a system akin to firechat app where the planes themselves become hubs and one plane can transmit its coordinates to other planes or ships to relay it to a collecting station (eg website)? I'm not sure how far out of range a plane maybe from other planes and ships during its flight.

Sounds ok as a concept but I don't see it as helping in this case where they were thousands of miles from normal flight lanes at the crash site.
Mandates to use satcom would be far easier to implement as the base equipment is already onboard and could be integrated into a global FANS type system.
http://www.honeywell.com/sites/servlet/com.merx.npoint.servlets.DocumentServlet?docid=D60671A93-51BD-1C36-20CF-446F85B0FD6C

 

[jim hardy]

yet the information put out to public is the engine monitoring system periodically shook hands with a satellite for six hours.

so at least an identifying bitstring was sent to the satellite and records of that communication were accessible to the satellite operator. But it contained no location information.
that's what i propose lengthening just enough to include whereabouts.

We get over-expectant of our technology. There were amateur radio operators in California picking up Amelia Earhart's "i'm lost" calls. I suggest that a low-tech approach would do this job inexpensively.

But who'll pay for it is a good question. If there's not a big profit nobody will be interested.
That's why i suggested tweaking what's already there.

What a PR bonanza for the satellite operator if he'd offer to do his half at cost.

 

[jedishrfu]

Sounds ok as a concept but I don't see it as helping in this case where they were thousands of miles from normal flight lanes at the crash site.
Mandates to use satcom would be far easier to implement as the base equipment is already onboard and could be integrated into a global FANS type system.
http://www.honeywell.com/sites/servlet/com.merx.npoint.servlets.DocumentServlet?docid=D60671A93-51BD-1C36-20CF-446F85B0FD6C

The question is how far away from commercial or naval ships too.

 

[nsaspook]

The question is how far away from commercial or naval ships too.

I have no idea but as a radio operator on a ship talking to helos we were lucky to get >40 mile range on VHF/UHF and maybe 150 miles to high flying aircraft with X-MODE digital devices. I'm sure modern equipment could extend the range some but that's pretty close to the reliable limit in a single voice band FM channel with digital modulation at about a 19k baud rate.

 

[nsaspook]

yet the information put out to public is the engine monitoring system periodically shook hands with a satellite for six hours.

so at least an identifying bitstring was sent to the satellite and records of that communication were accessible to the satellite operator. But it contained no location information.

But it did contain location information that we decoded directly from the physics of EM waves like we do in radar. So maybe another way to track aircraft would be a constellation of small simple satellites dedicated to tracking ping/round-trip timing worldwide that would require no changes to most planes with standard systems and could be as accurate as GPS in providing locations.

 

[jedishrfu]

There's a recent article on wifi usage on planes getting faster so that says it could be done rather cheaply piggybacking on the service.

http://www.nbcnews.com/business/travel/wi-fi-sky-taking-n80101

 

[nsaspook]

There's a recent article on wifi usage on planes getting faster so that says it could be done rather cheaply piggybacking on the service.

http://www.nbcnews.com/business/travel/wi-fi-sky-taking-n80101

That's great for areas that will have advanced coverage due to traffic (and don't really need remote area location services for a plane going down near those routes) but there's a reason the bird in the IO is several years over it's expected lifetime , in a wobbly orbit (that helps in the process to narrow down the flight path in this case) to conserve fuel and is last on the list for upgrades. It' not a big money maker because of the coverage area and nobody (who has to answer to stock holders) is going to invest in the transponder capability need to provide high speed wi-fi type services to a vast amount of nothing when that same transponder can be spot beamed to China, India or Australia for a premium.

 

[nsaspook]

The first dive to find the plane.
http://news.yahoo.com/mini-sub-tries-again-first-search-mh370-aborted-015845573.html

But the dive by the Bluefin-21 detected nothing of interest before it automatically aborted the mission after breaching its maximum operating depth, the US Navy said in a statement.

The Australian agency coordinating the search said the Bluefin-21 "exceeded its operating depth limit of 4,500 metres (15,000 feet) and its built-in safety feature returned it to the surface".

 

[Ptero]

It can be programmed to go deeper.

 

[oneamp]

Two questions:

1) Why all the speculation that batteries took the plane down? The plane was off course. Can the battery cargo cause such
a long (in terms of time and physical space) deviation?

2) Can the pingers that have been heard in the past couple of weeks associated with the missing aircraft to a high level
of certainty? Do we know the plane is in that general area, or not?

Thank you

 

[oneamp]

People who are blinded or in respiratory shock and are in a situation such as piloting an airplane would attempt to contact someone. Everyone on the plane would know, and be trying to contact someone. Cell phone signals would be plentiful if they were in range of towers. They were off course long before they ended up in the middle of the ocean, right?

Oh, I see your second answer involves conspiracy theory stuff. :(

 

[Evo]

Thread is re-opened for discussion of finding the plane, no more battery conspiracies please.

Thank you.

 

[oneamp]

Thread is re-opened for discussion of finding the plane, no more battery conspiracies please.

Thank you.

Um... huh?

 

[nsaspook]

It can be programmed to go deeper.

It looks like they are pushing past the limits to get to the bottom.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...arine-reprogrammed-to-reach-record-depth.html

"The [autonomous underwater vehicle] reached a record depth of 4,695 metres [15,404 feet] during mission four," the US Navy said. "This is the first time the Bluefin-21 has descended to this depth. Diving to such depths does carry with it some residual risk to the equipment and this is being carefully monitored."

 

[berkeman]

Um... huh?

There was a conspiracy theory posted about China or Korea trying to cover up battery issues. Nuff said.

 

[AlephZero]

It can be programmed to go deeper.

That's the easy part. The hard part is knowing if it will come up again still in one piece.

As the guy who jumped from the top of the Empire State Building said as he passed the second floor on the way down, "everything is going to plan so far..."

 

[StevieTNZ]

The search for missing Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 may be forced to re-investigate the possibility that the passenger jet with 239 on board landed, according to new reports.

https://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/world/22875886/mh370-may-have-landed-not-crashed-sources/

 

[nsaspook]

https://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/world/22875886/mh370-may-have-landed-not-crashed-sources/

The New Strait Times has quoted sources close to the probe that the investigation teams are considering revisiting the possibility that the plane did not crash into the ocean and had landed safely at an unknown location.

 

[DevilsAvocado]

Landed where? Atlantis??

 

[Enigman]

Landed where? Atlantis??

Nope, all clear here.

 

[lisab]

Nope, all clear here.

Did you check Lemuria?

 

[DevilsAvocado]

Nope, all clear here.

Phew, that's a BIG relief! I was deeply troubled by the possibility of MH370 clashing* into a horde of Invisible Pink Unicorns on the gold plated runway...

*IPU's are real tricky to spot this time of the year.

 

[Enigman]

Phew, that's a BIG relief! I was deeply troubled by the possibility of MH370 clashing* into a horde of Invisible Pink Unicorns on the gold plated runway...

Use of gold ended with the golden age ; we have used orichalcum since then.