Malaysia Airlines Flight Goes Missing En Route to China - Flight MH370

[iazoniccc]

I'm still trying to understand which problem automatic position reporting is meant to solve. For instance, how many people on this particular flight that are now dead would be alive id this equipment had been installed? The answer is zero.

In fact I can only think of 2 possible instance in the last 30 years where this sort of equipment might have saved lives. No doubt there are some others but they are extremely rare.

How many times in an aircraft's life is its FDR/CVR actually required? Commercial aircraft crashes themselves are very rare when you take into the consideration the amount of them that are in the air at any one time. If one company manufacture 10,000 FDR's, how many in the whole serviceable lifetime are called into service? How many times in the last 30 years have you known a CVR/FDR save lives? As far as I'm concerned if the technology saves just one life in those 30 years it was worth it, which one of us do you think the pax relatives will be in agreement with?

If this aircraft had been equipped with GPS of that kind would it have taken 2 or 3 weeks to reach the ACTUAL search area?

[Exadios]

It seems that one objection to an automatic GPS reporting device is that it could still be turned off either intentionally/maliciously or by a total power failure. A trickle charged sealed unit I would think overcomes this objection. My remark was not specific to this flight other that it points out the need for such a device.

Art this flight we will have to discover what occurred before suggesting the remedy.

What facts?

[speedbird1960]

Its not just about saving lives, its the families of the loved ones not knowing where the Aircraft is, also if an Aircraft is found quicker it cuts down on resources looking for it and the chances of losing valuable data and evidence.

In my opinion the location of a Commercial Airliner should always be known even if it has disappeared of the Radar.

[voyager10]

DAY 19:

[6:14pm]: Highlights from today's press conference:

- New satellite images have spotted 122 objects - between one and 23 metres in length - in a 400 sq kilometre debris field. Some appear to be bright which could indicate that they were solid material.
- Australia has divided search area into east and west, 12 planes will search both areas
- On Malaysia’s image getting hit by international media, Minister Hishammuddin Hussein said attention would fall on Malaysia as there have been no debris linked to MH370 yet. He said Malaysia has done an ‘admirable job’ coordinating 26 countries during the events of the past 17 days. “I think history will judge us well”.
- On engagement with families in China, Hishammuddin said MAS has done everything to support the next of kin and will continue to engage with them, saying Malaysians and people of other nationalities have lost their loved ones as well.

The Malaysian transport minister says the images, taken on 23 March, showed objects up to 23m (75 ft) in length.

Some of the objects captured by France-based Airbus appeared bright and were possibly of solid material.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-26748146

.

I have found this article describing the Technology Used in Search operations for MH370

[Exadios]

How many times in an aircraft's life is its FDR/CVR actually required? Commercial aircraft crashes themselves are very rare when you take into the consideration the amount of them that are in the air at any one time. If one company manufacture 10,000 FDR's, how many in the whole serviceable lifetime are called into service? How many times in the last 30 years have you known a CVR/FDR save lives? As far as I'm concerned if the technology saves just one life in those 30 years it was worth it, which one of us do you think the pax relatives will be in agreement with?

If this aircraft had been equipped with GPS of that kind would it have taken 2 or 3 weeks to reach the ACTUAL search area?

There is some merit to streaming CVR / FDR data for the purposes of aviation industry safety. And the equipment to do so already exists. But had it worked during this flight the outcome would be the same.

The problem of two weeks is a problem of money and politician's careers. These are nothing to do with airline safety.

[voyager10]

Latest video clips of the 212 - search objects found so far,.,.

http://www.youtube.com/embed/297yQAXmlIw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Po8CcX3L1i8

Latest CNN's news clip about the most current development.

http://www.youtube.com/embed/DRuMgdMwOsA

[peterhr]

CVR/FDR uplink wouldn't save lives
- whatever happened would still have happened, and yes you would have known more about why
- it would be expensive, expensive enough to install and run that some operators would not be able to afford it
- pilots would resent being spied and it would cause a lot of money

GPS track logged to satellite every 5 minutes (battery backed, trickle charged) would be simple and cheap
- would it save lives? possibly since SAR would know where to go to look
- possibly a military plane could have escorted a disabled plane to a safe landing ... if they knew where it was and the safe landing was possible.
- Maybe the ground systems could be enhanced to give warning that a plane was 'outside' it's planned corridor - as early warning that something is wrong

[smay69]

Yes, I agree. According to Inmarsat, this could be done right away and there is no reason to delay this further.

In this case since it flew for so long after it went missing a device like this would possibly allow a military to scramble jets to get a visual on what was going on, ie did it look like a catastrophic loss of power or something else entirely? Was there movement inside? etc...

[voyager10]

Sharp Images and data of the Objects:





Click above photos,... OR,....

https://t.co/SRrxQwLkp5

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Ministry-of-Transport-Malaysia/178566888854999?ref=stream#!/178566888854999/photos/pcb.741488612562821/741488479229501/?type=1&theater

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Ministry-of-Transport-Malaysia/178566888854999?ref=stream#!/178566888854999/photos/pcb.741488612562821/741488489229500/?type=1&theater

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Ministry-of-Transport-Malaysia/178566888854999?ref=stream#!/178566888854999/photos/pcb.741488612562821/741488512562831/?type=1&theater

[MIT EE]

If this is a unique case then, presumably, it cannot used as an argument for the general case. So I see no necessity for any new equipment. In any case the only convincing argument for additional equipment is only convincing has a basis in safety.

Another position reporting system does nothing to increase the safety of a particular flight. The only change that these functionality provides is to make the search for the wreckage cheaper and faster.

Pre incident CVR / FDR data might be useful, not as a safety measure for this flight, but, for the safety for aviation in general.

I do not interpret the lack of a mayday as evidence that the VHF system was off. At all times pilots aviate, navigate, and communicate in that order. In fact communication is a low priority. The only reason that, after satisfying the first two requirements, to communicate is to get airspace / clearance.

"The only change that these functionality provides is to make the search for the wreckage cheaper and faster................At all times pilots aviate, navigate, and communicate in that order."

Isn't that in of itself a good enough reason to implement this technology? Don't we owe that to the family of the victims? Don't we owe that to the all of us to determine the cause of the crash so that we can make things safer for the next group of passengers? As you point out, later in your post, the mantra is "aviate, navigate and communicate" so why not ease the burden on the pilots by letting a satellite link communicate speed and position? Hypothetically, if an aircraft ditches in the Atlantic half way between the US and England (or in the Pacific somewhere between Western USA and Japan), and the pilot follows this mantra and never gets around to putting out a mayday, the SAR would be a pretty significant undertaking, no?

"Pre-incident CVR / FDR data might be useful, not as a safety measure for this flight, but, for the safety for aviation in general."

I agree that it would be useful for safety in general. That should be reason enough. It might also be useful for a particular flight. For instance, consider the 911 flights, if ATC had access to CVR, fighters could have been scrambled. A terrible decision for the President to order that a civilian jetliner be shot out of the sky but perhaps the WTC victims on the ground could have lived for a while longer. As you may be aware the President now has the authority to have a civilian airliner shot down. Access to the CVR might prevent a terrible mistake and loss of civilian life.

"I do not interpret the lack of a mayday as evidence that the VHF system was off."

Yes, that could be one reason but you still have the simultaneous failure of ACARS and the transponder to contend with. Furthermore, as I pointed out the auto-pilot remained operational. We know (from the Air France crash) that if the auto-pilot does not have access to certain parameters (air speed, for one) that it will disengage. The fact that it continued to be functional on MH370 would militate against a system-wide electrical failure/outage.

[MIT EE]

Indeed there is no place in the flight deck for my desktop pc, I suppose what I am trying to say is that what i have outlined earlier provides an additional layer of security to any post-accident investigation, like this one.

If we're calling a spade a spade, these pieces of equipment probably didn't fail simultaneously. While it remains a far-out possibility, there is also no evidence it was damaged by fire.

Indeed electricity can cause a fire, disconnecting its supply will not extinguish an existing fire, it is the source of ignition. As long as the fire has fuel and oxygen, it will continue on its path. If my set top box caught fire I cannot extinguish it simply by pulling the plug.

A computerised circuit breaker system would obviously have the ability to detect a fire and shut down the component, while at the same time preventing the same component from being shut down without good cause.

Also would like to raise an issue with your previous comments about safety and streaming data/GPS. Human beings have been known to survive aircraft crashes before, who's to say there were no human soul's to have survived this impact only to be killed by the ocean? If SAR had known the exact location they could have got straight to the last known coordinates and possibly found survivors.

"If we're calling a spade a spade, these pieces of equipment probably didn't fail simultaneously. While it remains a far-out possibility, there is also no evidence it was damaged by fire."

Yes.

"Also would like to raise an issue with your previous comments about safety and streaming data/GPS. Human beings have been known to survive aircraft crashes before, who's to say there were no human soul's to have survived this impact only to be killed by the ocean? If SAR had known the exact location they could have got straight to the last known coordinates and possibly found survivors."

Yes. See article below on how to survive a fall from 35,000 feet. More a question of luck, I think . On a sadder note, it would appear that it took a while for MH370 to hit the water.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/aviation/safety/4344036

[voyager10]

Explanation of that last 'Partial' ping received.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ABrm0NKEHHM

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=112587302&postcount=1022

This is sort of an informative vdo, about how the attempt is made to find the black box.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KnAoTa6cIo

[Exadios]

"The only change that these functionality provides is to make the search for the wreckage cheaper and faster................At all times pilots aviate, navigate, and communicate in that order."

Isn't that in of itself a good enough reason to implement this technology? Don't we owe that to the family of the victims? Don't we owe that to the all of us to determine the cause of the crash so that we can make things safer for the next group of passengers? As you point out, later in your post, the mantra is "aviate, navigate and communicate" so why not ease the burden on the pilots by letting a satellite link communicate speed and position? Hypothetically, if an aircraft ditches in the Atlantic half way between the US and England (or in the Pacific somewhere between Western USA and Japan), and the pilot follows this mantra and never gets around to putting out a mayday, the SAR would be a pretty significant undertaking, no?

"Pre-incident CVR / FDR data might be useful, not as a safety measure for this flight, but, for the safety for aviation in general."

I agree that it would be useful for safety in general. That should be reason enough. It might also be useful for a particular flight. For instance, consider the 911 flights, if ATC had access to CVR, fighters could have been scrambled. A terrible decision for the President to order that a civilian jetliner be shot out of the sky but perhaps the WTC victims on the ground could have lived for a while longer. As you may be aware the President now has the authority to have a civilian airliner shot down. Access to the CVR might prevent a terrible mistake and loss of civilian life.

"I do not interpret the lack of a mayday as evidence that the VHF system was off."

Yes, that could be one reason but you still have the simultaneous failure of ACARS and the transponder to contend with. Furthermore, as I pointed out the auto-pilot remained operational. We know (from the Air France crash) that if the auto-pilot does not have access to certain parameters (air speed, for one) that it will disengage. The fact that it continued to be functional on MH370 would militate against a system-wide electrical failure/outage.

As an engineer I have nothing against implementing new technology. But I balk at making the plane unsafer in order to make the SAR more convenient. That is just an example or warped priorities.

Position reporting cannot change the pilot work load. Until the plane is bought under control communication is not part of the pilots work load. In any case the satellite link provides no intentions.

Fighters were scrambled during 9/11. There is no evidence that I know of that they could have ever been in a position to shoot either plane down. But the hijackers did disable the transponders. So why would they have not disabled the satellite uplink as well?

[voyager10]

Social News Photos,....



.

[Exadios]

"If we're calling a spade a spade, these pieces of equipment probably didn't fail simultaneously. While it remains a far-out possibility, there is also no evidence it was damaged by fire."

Yes.

"Also would like to raise an issue with your previous comments about safety and streaming data/GPS. Human beings have been known to survive aircraft crashes before, who's to say there were no human soul's to have survived this impact only to be killed by the ocean? If SAR had known the exact location they could have got straight to the last known coordinates and possibly found survivors."

Yes. See article below on how to survive a fall from 35,000 feet. More a question of luck, I think . On a sadder note, it would appear that it took a while for MH370 to hit the water.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/tech...safety/4344036

Its a matter of probabilities. The fact is that, in this case, the probability that anybody could survive long enough to be rescued under the most optimistic scenario is very low. This is balanced against the probability that people will be killed by knowingly building unsafe aircraft.