Age of the missing airliner coming to an end

With the latest SpaceX launch Iridium's new satellite constellation is complete and will soon be able to track airliners anywhere around the world.

https://qz.com/1521455/the-age-of-the-missing-airliner-is-coming-to-an-end/

"The age of the missing airliner is coming to an end."

These payloads are designed to detect ADS-B signals wherever they are broadcast, whether over the open ocean or a mountain range, finally providing continuous tracking of aircraft anywhere on Earth.

I don't think so.

There are still humans in the loop, however, which is one source of trouble: Investigators believe that MH370’s radar transponder was turned off, either by a malfunction or by a pilot bent on disaster.

 

ADS-B, like all avionics, can be disabled to deal with an emergency.

Affirmative.

And in part because of MH370, a new international standard will go into effect in 2021, requiring airlines to be able to track their planes in the event of an emergency once per minute.

So a different system or what?

Why don't you think so? Nothing is perfect, but this system will drastically cut down the situations and regions where aircraft can't be effectively tracked. As it stands there are many regions in the world where ground based coverage is basically impossible, and this system will fix that.

Per the Aireon site, this system will be one option for meeting the new ICAO standards.

https://aireon.com/services/globalbeacon/

The thing is that the transponder can be turned off. So if we have another MH370 it may be impossible to track. We'd only get a bearing from the last squawk and that's it.

Something like this should be implemented so that it can't be disabled.

I think the requirements do include making the system tamper proof on the airliner, or at least they are heading that way. However, one issue is what happens if the system has a short or some electrical problem? Right now the pilot can disable it to prevent a fire or further problems. And of course, there is the cost vs benefit side. How many MH370 cases have their been?

http://time.com/5137172/mh370-missing-plane/

I think the requirements do include making the system tamper proof on the airliner, or at least they are heading that way. However, one issue is what happens if the system has a short or some electrical problem? Right now the pilot can disable it to prevent a fire or further problems. And of course, there is the cost vs benefit side. How many MH370 cases have their been?

 

http://time.com/5137172/mh370-missing-plane/

You've answered your own question: There are numerous issues that could impact in the completeness of the coverage. Deliberate sabotage; Unintended switching off; Data incorrectness, electrical transmission interruption through atmospherics; spottiness of coverage, etc etc.

They said the same thing about the implementation of transponders and that turned out to be a waste of time and money.

No system is EVER foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool... :rolleyes:

Well, the interesting thing I got out of this was that at long last ADSB would work world-wide. It was originally supposed to work like that way back when it was first proposed in the last millenium.

One thing that we should have done long ago was to have the voice and flight data recorders send a continuous stream all the time, so that in the event of any accident, we would not have to go looking for the boxes, but merely grab the data from wherever it would be stored. Many airlines now do something like that for maintenance purposes, and that was how we got our first info on Air France in the South Atlantic, but a full stream would be a tremendous benefit. Perhaps we can move in that direction now.

ADSB consists of two elements: a high-integrity GPS navigation source and a datalink (ADS-B unit)- the Mode S transponder. Both rely on a pro-active signal from the transmitting aircraft.

They are neither more reliable nor more accurate: Their primary advantage is lower cost.

Applying that cost to the aviator rather than the organisations tasked with safety in the air is nothing more than abrogation of responsibility and leaves a margin for compliance, easily overcome.

I have given examples above. None have been refuted. We have already had conversations in the flying club about ways round the system, and none are particularly nefarious.

I maintain this a flawed idea, founded on devious rule-making designed only to put the legislative burden on the aviator while lowering costs for the administration. The prevalence of drones and the risks they present are far more important for aircraft safety.

Their primary advantage is lower cost.

ADS-B IN supposedly offers (at least in the US) free weather and traffic information, as well as putting more of the expense on users. And it's my understanding that in areas that have no ATC coverage (remote Alaska, for example), or even little to no radar coverage, equipped aircraft will be able to see each other's data for traffic information.

But the US mandate for nearly everyone to have ADS-B OUT is, IMO, overkill.

But your point is well taken.

The prevalence of drones and the risks they present are far more important for aircraft safety.

They are definitely becoming more and more of a problem, especially given their use by those who don't care about safety (for others); those who ignore rules as applying only to others; those who lack knowledge of aircraft and airspace and safety, and won't learn if they can help it; those who have malicious motives; and other bozos.

But I'm not sure there is a government that can afford full blown enforcement, though they can do well in some areas, given the sheer numbers of remote controlled aerial devices.

All it's gonna take is 300 passengers crashing down in a neighborhood of Queens and you can say goodbye to drones as we now enjoy them today. It's probably only a matter of when rather than if. Unless drones also have ADS-B and other things or we create technology that help prevent drone incursions.

That's just my take on it.

All it's gonna take is 300 passengers crashing down in a neighborhood of Queens and you can say goodbye to drones as we now enjoy them today. It's probably only a matter of when rather than if. Unless drones also have ADS-B and other things or we create technology that help prevent drone incursions.

 

That's just my take on it.

Drones change altitude, speed and position faster than ADS-B updates... `every second` needs to be every tenth of a second or faster before it becomes relevant for drones.

Some kind of electronic barrier is pie-in-the-sky thinking which could have implications for a myriad of electronic devices that rely on real-time live connection - like cell phones, laptops, medical devices and of course, the internet.