Live data from Hacker News

Aviation is stuck in the 60s – a reflection on MH 370

english.martinvarsavsky.net

41–50 of 73 posts

Re: Aviation is stuck in the 60s – a reflection on MH 370

#41
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I just fail to see the point of this post. Haven't you read about the missing aircraft? Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 is a missing international passenger flight operated by a Boeing 777-200ER aircraft: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysia_Airlines_Flight_370 At least two of the passengers were travelling using false identities (stolen passports, tickets bought at the same time). Edit: last known position: http://w…

Oh wow. If it's straight-up missing they could be anywhere in Asia right now... nuts.

Not likely. It was at cruising altitude and then vanished off the radar screen after sudden maneuvering. If it had diverted it would have continued to be tracked on radar. Even if they had shut off transponders and such, primary surveillance radar would have continued to see them. It almost certainly experienced a sudden catastrophic failure in flight (and I would bet due to a bomb).

Re: Aviation is stuck in the 60s – a reflection on MH 370

#42
post #38

Can an aviation expert decipher the following data? MH370/MAS370 Boing 777-2H6ER Registration 9M-MRO Altitude 0ft Speed 471 kt Track 40° Vertical Speed 0 fpm Lattitude: 6.97 Longitude: 103.63 Radar: F-WMKC1 Squawk: 2157 source: http://www.flightradar24.com/2014-03-07/16:46/12x/MAS370/2d8... That particular airplane was delivered new to Malaysia Airlines in May 2002 and was involved in a ground mishap in 2012. While t…

Probably an incomplete or corrupt report. It would be an incredible coincidence of timing for the system to produce a location data point precisely at the moment that the aircraft hit the water and before the system was destroyed. This is probably an incomplete report when aircraft left the coverage area or if the system malfunctioned mid-air and mid-transmission.

Re: Aviation is stuck in the 60s – a reflection on MH 370

#43

Aviation is stuck in the 60s because if it wasn't airliner stuff would all be automatic.

@spiritplumber, I can only assume you've never flown a plane or used a flight simulator (MS Flight will do).

Today's airliners are incredibly advanced. In the 60's they didn't have Terrain Collision Avoidance. Try to fly the plane into a hill and alarms go off and tell you how rapidly to ascent. They didn't have automated traffic collision avoidance (TCAS). Fly two planes at each other and it tells one pilot to dive, the other to climb and how much. They didn't have stick shakers which alert the pilot if the plane is near stalling, before it stalls, so they know to gain air speed to prevent the stall.

Those are the basic standards. Today any aircraft worth it's salt has a full Doppler weather radar to avoid storms, hail and down drafts. Today the entire flight path is computer calculated and tracked from end to end. Just turn on auto pilot or keep the indicators aligned on your artificial horizon and you'll get where you're going. No one gets lost these days without trying. I've not going to even start on CatII and CatIII landings too. Today planes can land in 0, that right 0, visibility.

> if it wasn't airliner stuff would all be automatic

But let's keep going. Ever heard of AutoLand? Yep, plane can land itself. Ever heard of AutoFlare? Yep, plane will tilt back at just the right angle for a pillow soft touch down. Ever heard of AutoThrottle? No need to keep adjusting those engines, plane takes care of that, just tell it where you want to go. Frankly, pilots rarely do much more than tell the plane what it should do. Want to go to flight level 380? Just turn the knob to 38000ft, set the desired vertical speed rate and the plane will adjust the throttles, ailerons and trim itself out at 38000ft for you. Want to go to heading 245? Just dial in 245 degrees the plane will take your speed into consideration and speed up just enough to keep everything constant through the curve.

Funny thing about automation though is not getting everything automated, but keeping pilots from getting stale because too much is automated. Take the Asiana flight, it's what we call Controlled Flight into Terrain. Not a thing wrong with that 777 but the pilot.

We're worlds away from the 1960's and the 777 is among the most sophisticated and advanced craft in the world. Far more advanced than even our spacecraft of the 1960's.

Re: Aviation is stuck in the 60s – a reflection on MH 370

#44

It may be stuck in the 60's but HF radios work sure you can create an automated dispatch system on an iPad. How do you authenticate it? how do you tell if its not working? does it fail safe? Making safe software is hard, and well beyond the wit of your standard programmer. After all, can you gaurentee your software when the CPU is at 100%? can you say with certainty what happens when your CPU is hammered by all the i…

obviously anything that is stuck in the 60's works - and well, or it wouldn't still be used.

author's point is that we could do better using today's technology.

Re: Aviation is stuck in the 60s – a reflection on MH 370

#45

Most modern airliners have satellite links (data and voice) with their dispatch centers. They also use the ACARS system to send and receive clearances (they can acknowledge by pushing a button). The old SELCAL+HF radio is no longer in use, except for backup. Planes have GPS trackers. Not only their company knows where they are, the control center can too. In the case of the north atlantic track system, air control ke…

Modern airliners are also flown by entire teams of ground crews, among them Rolls Royce support engineers that monitor an aircrafts engines in realtime every second of operation trough its entire lifespan trough the hundreds of sensors embedded in each and every engine.

This way, most problems an engine would develop that would be hard to spot by ground service, are detected and acted upon long before they threaten the operation of the engine and airplane.

Re: Aviation is stuck in the 60s – a reflection on MH 370

#46

Aviation is stuck in the 60s because if it wasn't airliner stuff would all be automatic.

@spiritplumber, I can only assume you've never flown a plane or used a flight simulator (MS Flight will do). Today's airliners are incredibly advanced. In the 60's they didn't have Terrain Collision Avoidance. Try to fly the plane into a hill and alarms go off and tell you how rapidly to ascent. They didn't have automated traffic collision avoidance (TCAS). Fly two planes at each other and it tells one pilot to dive,…

Autoland is 60s tech http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoland.

But TCAS and GPS-aware Enhanced Ground Proximity Warning System (EGPWS) are 90s, and automation vs maintaining flying skill is definitely a major challenge.

Re: Aviation is stuck in the 60s – a reflection on MH 370

#47
I am by no means an aviation expert, but my career was largely built on things like putting GPS and modern radios into military aircraft, writing flight planners, and so on.

I ask you to envision the logistics of a simple change. You want to implement X, and gee-whiz do I have some cool, new technology that makes it easy!!

Okay. Let's start. If we make mistakes people die, and careers end. I'll let you draw your own conclusions about motivations re that, but all I'll say is as an engineer I only ever focused on the former. So, huge testing and verification effort to show that my gee-whiz technology that works in some consumer device has acceptably low failure modes, does not negatively affect pilot work flow, can work under the conditions of flight (-55C to 70C anyone?), over the wide performance characteristics (high G, high vibration, salt water, high radiation), and so on.

Okay, you did all that! Let's start bolting it on the planes!

No.

Let's write and get approved training programs for all the maintenance workers. Then, let's train them - across the whole world. Let's write and get approved training programs for the pilot. We will fit it into their refresher training, have new mandated training, or what? Basically, rewrite all the training curriculum that is out there. Get it into the schools, so the pilots coming fresh out of school aren't behind. Again, across the world.

Oh, this interfaces with the towers? Okay, so do all that again with the towers. Hmm, you want this 2013 technology to seamlessly integrate with some core memory technology - that should be easy. Perform a study, put out RFQs, get bids, select the best bidder, have them build the system, manage them through the cost overrun, opps, 3 months before deployment Congress mandates that that core-memory system be retired, and oh, how will this work in the 168 other countries?

Got that sorted. No, wait, no one in the tower knows how to use it, no one knows how to install it, no one knows how to maintain it. Let's throw money and time at that! Oh, unions. I hate unions. ATCs have a union. This could take awhile....

Finally, it is 2020, and I am rolling out, um, 7 year old technology that is entirely obsolete and no longer supported by the manufacturers. Oh, they'll support it if you throw enough money at it - get your $5 microprocessor at $1000 a pop.

Meanwhile, the entire world is filled with aircraft still using the old system. So, we mandate a phase-out by 2035. Just another 15 years of supporting the old and new systems in parallel. I'm sure that'll be pretty cheap.

People who work in the field will rightly accuse me of hand waving, and especially of over-exaggerating some difficulties (not every modernization project hits every possible snag that exists). But this is still a useful sketch the scope of the problem. I've spent time talking to very high people in the FAA. They are not unaware of the old systems and their limitations, nor are they bumbling bureaucrats (pet peeve - it is easy to villanize faceless people, and that is very lazy thinking). We in industry are forever proposing new ideas, better technology, and so on (let's face it, they are all trying to feed at the trough of government spending, and getting your system mandated is a company maker). But the price tag for my handy,dandy system is at the noise level compared to the cost of the logistics of deployment.

I am not arguing that there is nothing to be done, or that everyone is working maximally efficiently right now. Certainly the US is behind other countries in some areas of aviation technology. But it is not in any way a trivial problem, one of "just bolt a new radio to the plane and trash the old ecosystem".

edit: consider, for example, the Rockwell Collins DTU-7000 Data Transfer Module (https://www.rockwellcollins.com/sitecore/content/Data/Produc...). This is absolutely modern hardware in the aviation world. It is PCMCIA. And how exciting it was to get. You would not believe the cost and size of the old system - we would jealously keep tracking logs of, I forget, a few MB of flash memory units that cost thousands and thousands (and thousands) of dollars. There is some even more modern stuff being rolled out that uses usb. But consider, when this is something that contains your flight plan, your maps, and so on, the cost of a stray gamma ray blowing away a byte. Mull on how much testing this hardware goes through. And then factor in all of the logistics above. We already don't have money to own the old system, and now I have to go to all this further expense, to save what is truly chump change (that thousands and thousands and thousands number) in the end? Millions to save thousands.

Of course, we have to modernize, we can't store rich maps on tiny memory, so we spend, and spend, and spend. And then get a front page HN story about how old everything is! Well, there's a reason for that.

Re: Aviation is stuck in the 60s – a reflection on MH 370

#48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reading GPS is cheap and easy. Sending information back is not. Those shipping container trackers use GSM to call home. They're cell phones. What happens when that container is in the middle of the Pacific Ocean?

That's an interesting question. Mini "cell tower" on the ship with satellite link?

The original topic here was "why don't planes have GPS trackers on them and constantly report in, if trackers are so cheap and every car/truck/container/phone on the planet can have one?"

How does a plane get data back to the ground when it's 7 miles up and 1000 miles from shore? You have to have a satellite or long-range VHF link.

Re: Aviation is stuck in the 60s – a reflection on MH 370

#49
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh wow. If it's straight-up missing they could be anywhere in Asia right now... nuts.

Not likely. It was at cruising altitude and then vanished off the radar screen after sudden maneuvering. If it had diverted it would have continued to be tracked on radar. Even if they had shut off transponders and such, primary surveillance radar would have continued to see them. It almost certainly experienced a sudden catastrophic failure in flight (and I would bet due to a bomb).

Or not a bomb, just some maintenance problem. No group claims responsibility. The point of bombing seems to be to strike fear and send a message. The passport thing is curious but stolen/fake passports can be of use for other things that are nothing to do with terrorism.

Re: Aviation is stuck in the 60s – a reflection on MH 370

#50
post #49
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not likely. It was at cruising altitude and then vanished off the radar screen after sudden maneuvering. If it had diverted it would have continued to be tracked on radar. Even if they had shut off transponders and such, primary surveillance radar would have continued to see them. It almost certainly experienced a sudden catastrophic failure in flight (and I would bet due to a bomb).

Or not a bomb, just some maintenance problem. No group claims responsibility. The point of bombing seems to be to strike fear and send a message. The passport thing is curious but stolen/fake passports can be of use for other things that are nothing to do with terrorism.

Indeed. My money is on "bomb" just because it's hard to come up with a maintenance problem that causes such a rapid disaster at altitude. It would have to be something that caused a massive explosion like TWA 800. Possible, but unlikely. The lack of a claim makes a bombing less likely too, but IMO less so than the improbability of a mechanical problem.
Post reply on HN