Version: 2008

Comments on: Tech beyond black boxes? It just won't fly

In a digital era where airplanes are jammed with phones and Wi-Fi, why are flights still relying on older technology to recover data?
Photos: Retrieving data from the cockpit

Add a Comment (Log in or register) (8 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
Black Boxes and Data Transmissions
by smfriedland August 18, 2005 4:33 PM PDT
Data downloads from airplanes have their place - but they will not replace the black box. Data downloading systems would be useful near airports when planes on approach and takeoff could continually download information to the controllers computers - possibly alterting the controllers to a problem before it happens. The vast majority of accidents happen during approach and takeoff. It makes sense for the planes taking off and landing to transmit their data in real time.

As for the two black boxes that were lost during the World Trade Center attacks - it isn't so much as they were lost as they were destroyed beyond identification by the implosion of the buildings they came to rest in.

Black boxes have been recovered from nearly every other airplane accident - including ones over the open ocean. More than one box has been retrieved from the bottom of the ocean. It is easy to imagine an airplane attitude which would prevent any communications - upside down, for example, or pointing straight up/down. I think they will remain as a staple of accident reconstruction.
Reply to this comment
Black Boxes and Data Transmissions
by smfriedland August 18, 2005 4:33 PM PDT
Data downloads from airplanes have their place - but they will not replace the black box. Data downloading systems would be useful near airports when planes on approach and takeoff could continually download information to the controllers computers - possibly alterting the controllers to a problem before it happens. The vast majority of accidents happen during approach and takeoff. It makes sense for the planes taking off and landing to transmit their data in real time.

As for the two black boxes that were lost during the World Trade Center attacks - it isn't so much as they were lost as they were destroyed beyond identification by the implosion of the buildings they came to rest in.

Black boxes have been recovered from nearly every other airplane accident - including ones over the open ocean. More than one box has been retrieved from the bottom of the ocean. It is easy to imagine an airplane attitude which would prevent any communications - upside down, for example, or pointing straight up/down. I think they will remain as a staple of accident reconstruction.
Reply to this comment
Need to imrpove blackboxes not transmit the data
by wazzledoozle August 19, 2005 12:06 AM PDT
I mean come on! Only 30 minutes of recording time! That is so crappy. Take a small handheld digital voice recorder, throw it in a padded titanium box and put 2 mics through a small slit and youve got a perfect blackbox. Those things can record for hours.
Reply to this comment
Well, obviously it's not that simple.
by Titos 2 Cents August 19, 2005 6:36 AM PDT
Black boxes are usually stored in parts of the aircraft most likely to survive impact, not the cockpit. When I worked with these boxes, there were probably miles of wiring connecting the various sensors to the boxes near the tail. Keep in mind the expense of upgrading all of this equipment, particularly on older aircraft. When many of these digital black boxes came out (15-20 years ago) they were cutting edge technology and 30 minutes of digital recording was phenominal. Most of the commercial aircraft you fly in these days are of voting age, or older.
Need to imrpove blackboxes not transmit the data
by wazzledoozle August 19, 2005 12:06 AM PDT
I mean come on! Only 30 minutes of recording time! That is so crappy. Take a small handheld digital voice recorder, throw it in a padded titanium box and put 2 mics through a small slit and youve got a perfect blackbox. Those things can record for hours.
Reply to this comment
Well, obviously it's not that simple.
by Titos 2 Cents May 1, 2008 8:11 PM PDT
Black boxes are usually stored in parts of the aircraft most likely to survive impact, not the cockpit. When I worked with these boxes, there were probably miles of wiring connecting the various sensors to the boxes near the tail. Keep in mind the expense of upgrading all of this equipment, particularly on older aircraft. When many of these digital black boxes came out (15-20 years ago) they were cutting edge technology and 30 minutes of digital recording was phenominal. Most of the commercial aircraft you fly in these days are of voting age, or older.
Toughen future requirements, but let the current systems stay.
by Titos 2 Cents August 19, 2005 7:00 AM PDT
I'm probably one of very few tech guys who have actually worked with black boxes, the sensors, installation and whatnot. I spent some time as an avionics mechanic working on commercial MD-80/88's and did upgrades to flight data recorders to meet new FAA requirements.
These boxes are extremely tough, and are filled with components designed to take a real beating and survive intact. The only downside is the slide rule of technology since these aircraft left the line, and the huge time and money investment to upgrade this system.
A luxury car from 1985 had great bells and whistles for it's day, and the systems work well for what they were intended to do. Current luxury items are far better of course, but would you want to upgrade that 1985 model vehicle with the latest gadgets? None of the original pieces would talk to the newest equipment, and the car would be in the shop for 2 months.
For the airlines, a new mandate would be a similar scenario. None of the sensors, wiring, or collection equipment would be reusable from the analog to the digital systems. It would take downtime from service to comply with the rework, further impacting the dollar line of an already bankrupt industry. And honestly, how often are they used - when the plane crashes. Considering how rarely the devices fail or are lost, is this really a concern or someone's dream of another post-catastrophe safety device?
Reply to this comment
Toughen future requirements, but let the current systems stay.
by Titos 2 Cents May 1, 2008 8:11 PM PDT
I'm probably one of very few tech guys who have actually worked with black boxes, the sensors, installation and whatnot. I spent some time as an avionics mechanic working on commercial MD-80/88's and did upgrades to flight data recorders to meet new FAA requirements.
These boxes are extremely tough, and are filled with components designed to take a real beating and survive intact. The only downside is the slide rule of technology since these aircraft left the line, and the huge time and money investment to upgrade this system.
A luxury car from 1985 had great bells and whistles for it's day, and the systems work well for what they were intended to do. Current luxury items are far better of course, but would you want to upgrade that 1985 model vehicle with the latest gadgets? None of the original pieces would talk to the newest equipment, and the car would be in the shop for 2 months.
For the airlines, a new mandate would be a similar scenario. None of the sensors, wiring, or collection equipment would be reusable from the analog to the digital systems. It would take downtime from service to comply with the rework, further impacting the dollar line of an already bankrupt industry. And honestly, how often are they used - when the plane crashes. Considering how rarely the devices fail or are lost, is this really a concern or someone's dream of another post-catastrophe safety device?
Reply to this comment
(8 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
advertisement

Latest tech news headlines

RSS Feeds

Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.

More feeds available in our RSS feed index.

advertisement