3 ms·

Again, I didn't suggest that plugging an iPhone in is the answer. It was a comparison to the capabilities of consumer electronics vs. those in cockpits of supp

Again, I didn't suggest that plugging an iPhone in is the answer. It was a comparison to the capabilities of consumer electronics vs. those in cockpits of supposedly advanced aircraft. We can, and we should, install more memory into CVR's if they can only record two hours of an international flight. In your example of a catastrophic mechanical failure, a battery powered satellite link wouldn't necessarily lose touch until impact. At the very least, the plane's position would be known and rescuers dispatched. Critical evidence in this incident is likely long gone because of the time that has passed - even if we find it today. Video feeds etc. would at the very least assist in preventing future tragedies and help us understand exactly what happened. We would know, for example, the specific tactics of hijackers (if that was indeed the case) or that the pilot just went nuts, or if there was a mechanical or fire risk issue that must be addressed on other planes. We would know answers to questions we would likely never otherwise be able to answer.

objclxt 13y ago
You're illustrating my point about how people without experience in the field are severely underestimating the harshness of the environment. > a battery powered satellite link Battery powered? Batteries are big fire risks (ask Boeing, they know all about it). Where are you going to put the battery? You can't put it next to the transmitter (which, needing line of sight, would go on the top of the plane), because you want the battery to be serviceable with relative ease. So now you've got a power line running from the battery to the transmitter, which is no different to a power line running from the main power feed. Let's scrap the battery. > wouldn't necessarily lose touch until impact [...] at the very least, the plane's position would be known and rescuers dispatched Satellite linkups are flaky, they need line of sight. Planes at cruising altitude travel extremely fast. The plane's exact position would not be known. > Critical evidence in this incident is likely long gone because of the time that has passed - even if we find it today If the recorders can be recovered this is unlikely. Flight recorders are designed to capture the information needed to figure out what happened. Air France 447 was lost for two years, and yet investigators were still able to establish with near certainty what happened. > Video feeds etc. would at the very least assist in preventing future tragedies and help us understand exactly what happened. I can see how video feeds could possibly be useful in establishing what happened in a terrorist attack or hijacking. In terms of telemetric data and establishing mechanical failure causes they are not very useful. I get that a lot of people on HN have lots of great ideas, but this is an area where you really need to know exactly how harsh the environment is before you can start throwing suggestions around like they're basic common sense.
- ern 13y ago
  When we look at the costs of investigating this disaster and the search for AF447's black boxes (and finding them was not a certainty, as far as I recall),I'm sure the cost equation will shift in favor of more extensive (certificated) in-flight monitoring technology, after all, if this lead turns out to actually be the plane, it will be because of a remote monitoring system that the pilots couldn't turn off.

objclxt 13y ago

You're illustrating my point about how people without experience in the field are severely underestimating the harshness of the environment. > a battery powered satellite link Battery powered? Batteries are big fire risks (ask Boeing, they know all about it). Where are you going to put the battery? You can't put it next to the transmitter (which, needing line of sight, would go on the top of the plane), because you want the battery to be serviceable with relative ease. So now you've got a power line running from the battery to the transmitter, which is no different to a power line running from the main power feed. Let's scrap the battery. > wouldn't necessarily lose touch until impact [...] at the very least, the plane's position would be known and rescuers dispatched Satellite linkups are flaky, they need line of sight. Planes at cruising altitude travel extremely fast. The plane's exact position would not be known. > Critical evidence in this incident is likely long gone because of the time that has passed - even if we find it today If the recorders can be recovered this is unlikely. Flight recorders are designed to capture the information needed to figure out what happened. Air France 447 was lost for two years, and yet investigators were still able to establish with near certainty what happened. > Video feeds etc. would at the very least assist in preventing future tragedies and help us understand exactly what happened. I can see how video feeds could possibly be useful in establishing what happened in a terrorist attack or hijacking. In terms of telemetric data and establishing mechanical failure causes they are not very useful. I get that a lot of people on HN have lots of great ideas, but this is an area where you really need to know exactly how harsh the environment is before you can start throwing suggestions around like they're basic common sense.

ern 13y ago
When we look at the costs of investigating this disaster and the search for AF447's black boxes (and finding them was not a certainty, as far as I recall),I'm sure the cost equation will shift in favor of more extensive (certificated) in-flight monitoring technology, after all, if this lead turns out to actually be the plane, it will be because of a remote monitoring system that the pilots couldn't turn off.