Well there's nothing happening on MH 370... oceanic tumbleweed... ... ...
Yup ... apart from the tumbleweed, Bunga Mas Enam is still practicing handbrake turns just north-west of Perth, and Lekiu has headed out to ... well, who knows where? (last update 12 hours ago)
Ocean Shield and Seahorse Standard still happily snoozing at Garden Island.
Nothing new on Hai Xun 01 (presumably still dugong-spotting) or The Purple Pony, last spotted heading for a bit of fettling at the maintenance centre in Cockburn Sound.
EASA is part of one of the world’s most notoriously constipated bureaucracies, the European Union. Before the new recommendations can take effect they have to be adopted by the European Commission. And even then they will cover only the 28 member states of the EU.
In terms of political reality, the most difficult of these recommendations to see through to a conclusion will almost certainly be the striking extension of the duration of the cockpit voice recorders.
Pilots are highly sensitive to the idea of being overheard by what they see as Big Brother vigilance. The pilots unions in both Europe and the U.S. will fight this idea tooth and nail. They fear that some of their idle chatter won’t be politically correct. Or, more seriously, that their “oops!” moments when they suffer a lapse of concentration will go on the record.
Their objections should be heard, but they will need to make a more convincing case than one based on an invasion of privacy.
So, Europe stirs. The executive director of EASA concedes that “the tragic flight of Malaysia Airlines MH370 demonstrates that safety can never be taken for granted. The proposed changes are expected to increase safety by facilitating the recovery of information for safety investigation authorities.”
From the rest of the global aviation industry there is not a word.
What on earth would the families do with the data even if it was released to them? Presumably they are just regular people who wouldn't have any expertise to do anything useful with it.
What on earth would the families do with the data even if it was released to them? Presumably they are just regular people who wouldn't have any expertise to do anything useful with it.
I think the idea is to give it to the guy who led the Air France search, and let him take over.
I think the idea is to give it to the guy who led the Air France search, and let him take over.
If they're talking about the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution which eventually found AF 447, it doesn't say much for their understanding of air crash investigations!
WHOI is involved in deep sea exploration. They need to know where to look, and with AF 447 it was the US company Metron using the Bayesian search theory which came up with the most likely area.
If they're talking about the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution which eventually found AF 447, it doesn't say much for their understanding of air crash investigations!
WHOI is involved in deep sea exploration. They need to know where to look, and with AF 447 it was the US company Metron using the Bayesian search theory which came up with the most likely area.
Exactly... and for the benefit of anyone who doesn't recall the details, they knew where to look because they immediately knew roughly where the plane came down, and surface wreckage was seen within a few days, before it had time to disperse or waterlog and sink. They had at least a couple of week's advantage on the start of the Australian search effort - which was initially in the wrong area anyway IIRC!
And even then, there were at least two aborted underwater searches for AF 447 before it was found, two years after it crashed!
If they're talking about the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution which eventually found AF 447, it doesn't say much for their understanding of air crash investigations!
WHOI is involved in deep sea exploration. They need to know where to look, and with AF 447 it was the US company Metron using the Bayesian search theory which came up with the most likely area.
Yes that's who they are talking about, it's in my link, l posted early this AM. I wonder who is rattling their chains and leading them on.
The first story is about Blue Fin is heading back to the original ping area, but if you scroll down to the second story it seems Sarah is attracting a few weirdos. Strange phone calls, a death threat and 2 break ins and she doesn't seem too worried about. I think I'd be freaking out just a little bit.
Oh BTW I read another fruit loop CT on Face Ache this morning. Apparently as Philip was the only American on board he must have been an undercover agent of some sort and he was involved in the planes disappearance and the cover up.
Oh BTW I read another fruit loop CT on Face Ache this morning. Apparently as Philip was the only American on board he must have been an undercover agent of some sort and he was involved in the planes disappearance and the cover up.
Just another one to add to the list.
why give these blithering t w a t s airtime at all???
WHOI is involved in deep sea exploration. They need to know where to look, and with AF 447 it was the US company Metron using the Bayesian search theory which came up with the most likely area.
In July 2010, the US-based search consultancy Metron had been engaged to draw up a probability map of where to focus the search, based on prior probabilities from flight data and local condition reports, combined with the results from the previous searches. The Metron team used what it described as "classic" Bayesian search methods, an approach that had previously been successful in the search for the submarine USS Scorpion and SS Central America. Phase 4 of the search operation started close to the aircraft's last known position, which was identified by the Metron study as being the most likely resting place of flight 447.
Within a week of resuming of the search operation, on 3 April 2011, a team led by the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution operating full ocean depth autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs) owned by the Waitt Institute discovered, by means of sidescan sonar, a large portion of the debris field from flight AF447. Further debris and bodies, still trapped in the partly intact remains of the aircraft's fuselage, were located at a depth of 3,980 metres (2,180 fathoms; 13,060 ft). The debris was found to be lying in a relatively flat and silty area of the ocean floor (as opposed to the extremely mountainous topography that was originally believed to be AF447's final resting place). Other items found were engines, wing parts and the landing gear.
Cable ship Île de Sein was assigned to assist in the recovery of materials from the ocean floor.
Exactly... and for the benefit of anyone who doesn't recall the details, they knew where to look because they immediately knew roughly where the plane came down, and surface wreckage was seen within a few days, before it had time to disperse or waterlog and sink.
Personally my way of looking at it is it matters very little now who they bring in to search. Anyone or any organisation which has the right equipment and proven experience of deep sea search, is invaluable. The more involved, so much the better.
What will prove interesting though is the aftermath and whether this will bring about changes to aircraft black boxes. The link i posted yesterday regarding that makes for thoughtful reading.
Time will tell.
Shameful in this day and age of such high technology, a huge aircraft can 'vanish' almost without trace, yet any vehicle fitted with Tracker can be located in minutes.....often whilst the thieves are still driving the vehicle. Obviously, time taken is dependent on when the theft is first called in. They even give a 48 hour Guarantee of recovery....:o....or if they fail, refund of cost in full. That's how confident Tracker manufacturers are of their product!
Morning guys, we're back in business, or Ocean Shield and Bluefin are, as both of them have gone back to searching, so I heard on CNN last night. Maybe this time they'll find the plane, hope so anyway.
Google Philip Wood and Diego Garcia, makes for very interesting reading if you like a good conspiracy theory. The Diego Garcia one seems entirely plausible knowing the Americans and CIA
Shameful in this day and age of such high technology, a huge aircraft can 'vanish' almost without trace, yet any vehicle fitted with Tracker can be located in minutes.....often whilst the thieves are still driving the vehicle. Obviously, time taken is dependent on when the theft is first called in. They even give a 48 hour Guarantee of recovery....:o....or if they fail, refund of cost in full. That's how confident Tracker manufacturers are of their product!
Aghhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Using mobile phone GSM services.
The UK has around 30,000 mobile base stations to over a land mass of 94,060 sq miles. The earth comprises of 196,939,900 square miles, 70% of which is ocean / sea.
Over simplification seems to be the issue with your post, yes tracking by satellite is possible, but expensive and complex. Something like the tracker system just wouldn't and couldn't work.
Google Philip Wood and Diego Garcia, makes for very interesting reading if you like a good conspiracy theory. The Diego Garcia one seems entirely plausible knowing the Americans and CIA
My personal take on that ...
Google Philip Wood and Diego Garcia, makes for very amusing reading if you like a good laugh. The Diego Garcia one seems entirely fabricated knowing how easy it is to alter EXIF data. ;-)
Aghhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Using mobile phone GSM services.
The UK has around 30,000 mobile base stations to over a land mass of 94,060 sq miles. The earth comprises of 196,939,900 square miles, 70% of which is ocean / sea.
Over simplification seems to be the issue with your post, yes tracking by satellite is possible, but expensive and complex. Something like the tracker system just wouldn't and couldn't work.
BIB......Inmarsat would disagree with your opinion on that. They've already said it can be done at very little cost. I think they know better than any of us on here what they are talking about.
There is plenty about it if you Google and the link has been up on this thread a few times now.
BIB......Inmarsat would disagree with your opinion on that. They've already said it can be done at very little cost. I think they know better than any of us on here what they are talking about.
There is plenty about it if you Google and the link has been up on this thread a few times now.
I am aware of what Inmarsat said. I was frustrated by this recurring theme that people think the land technologies that are available to less than 15% of earth like mobile phones and traditional trackers work throughout the world.
The amount of time we see "why didn't the passengers ring up and say there was an issue" over and over as if people think normal GSM phone's work globally via some satellite. Forcing all aircraft to have Inmarsat trackers may be initially cheap, but with a captive market it could get costly over time, especially when multiplied over multiple years and over the number of aircraft + the upgrade of equipment costs etc. There may be alternatives like black box upgrades, high-frequency radio transmission and other things that can be done.
I am aware of what Inmarsat said. I was frustrated by this recurring theme that people think the land technologies that are available to less than 15% of earth like mobile phones and traditional trackers work throughout the world.
The amount of time we see "why didn't the passengers ring up and say there was an issue" over and over as if people think normal GSM phone's work globally via some satellite. Forcing all aircraft to have Inmarsat trackers may be initially cheap, but with a captive market it could get costly over time, especially when multiplied over multiple years and over the number of aircraft + the upgrade of equipment costs etc. There may be alternatives like black box upgrades forced transponder transmission and other things that can be done.
MH 370 was already fitted with Inmarsat gear (obviously). All new planes have been fitted with it as standard for some time now. Subscribing to the relevant tracking services could cost less than a dollar an hour per plane. I see no reason why such services should not for some time have been mandatory on all planes that have satellite comms gear already fitted, like MH 370. It's madness that the relevant International regulatory bodies haven't done that at least, 10,000 planes already have the gear on board. Chris McLaughlin is scathing about the lack of action since AF 447 (see above link).
I have no idea of the cost of retro-fitting Inmarsat gear to planes that don't yet have it but I am fairly sure that operators could recover the costs in time by offering associated services to passengers e.g. in-flight phone calls from the planes, which could become a lucrative service.
But it wouldn't become more expensive for airlines in time as you suggest, because if that happened, either regulators would intervene or more likely, other satellite operators would enter the market to bring the costs back down again. The costs would almost certainly come down in time not go up, as with nearly all expanding commercial services when there is the potential for new operators to enter the market.
Sounds simple doesn't it, does the current equipment support live tacking, does the server capacity and satellite bandwidth exist today to switch it on for all aircraft? Do you force all aircraft to be equipped with this, remember the $1-5 was probably for already equipped aircraft, these systems actually cost a lot of money, paid for by charging for in flight calls and content, but what percentage of aircraft have this? it could cost billions to the airline industry to fit this to planes which don't already have it, which would have to be paid by customers on airline tickets.
HF radio links from all aircraft already exist today which could potentially send back GPS data once a minute, would that be a cheaper solution? It'll be interesting to read the full report and recommendations when available, in the meantime fortunately events like this are rare and it may be a decade or more before something similar happens.
I think it probably is now time for satellite tracking as the technology is there and seemingly at reasonable cost, but comparing to car trackers is over simplifying the situation.
Comments
Yup ... apart from the tumbleweed, Bunga Mas Enam is still practicing handbrake turns just north-west of Perth, and Lekiu has headed out to ... well, who knows where? (last update 12 hours ago)
Ocean Shield and Seahorse Standard still happily snoozing at Garden Island.
Nothing new on Hai Xun 01 (presumably still dugong-spotting) or The Purple Pony, last spotted heading for a bit of fettling at the maintenance centre in Cockburn Sound.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/05/07/aviation-leaders-went-missing-along-with-mh370.html
I see that the ICAO is holding a meeting next week to discuss aircraft tracking.
http://www.icao.int/Newsroom/Pages/special-multi-disciplinary-meeting-on-global-airline-flight-tracking.aspx
Seems as though you can watch on-line. :cool:
Just wading through the meeting documents now ... black coffee and aspirins to hand!
Seems there are pingers out there attached to illegal fishing nets.
Good question, what was Tireless doing out there
Oh yeah, I'm sure a lot of info hasn't been released, so come on Malaysia tell all.
For more info re the latest, CNN is place to read it.
As for another ocean don't think so.
Surely this would be wrong, and too soon if ever.
New ship to watch out for.
It looks as though Bunga Mas Enam may have been waiting for them.
By the looks of it, Echo had snuck into Garden Island after leaving Fremantle. Not sure what that was all about!
re searching old ground.
What on earth would the families do with the data even if it was released to them? Presumably they are just regular people who wouldn't have any expertise to do anything useful with it.
I think the idea is to give it to the guy who led the Air France search, and let him take over.
If they're talking about the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution which eventually found AF 447, it doesn't say much for their understanding of air crash investigations!
WHOI is involved in deep sea exploration. They need to know where to look, and with AF 447 it was the US company Metron using the Bayesian search theory which came up with the most likely area.
They are a bit late though, Jean-Paul Troadec is already involved in the official investigation!
Exactly... and for the benefit of anyone who doesn't recall the details, they knew where to look because they immediately knew roughly where the plane came down, and surface wreckage was seen within a few days, before it had time to disperse or waterlog and sink. They had at least a couple of week's advantage on the start of the Australian search effort - which was initially in the wrong area anyway IIRC!
And even then, there were at least two aborted underwater searches for AF 447 before it was found, two years after it crashed!
Yes that's who they are talking about, it's in my link, l posted early this AM. I wonder who is rattling their chains and leading them on.
The first story is about Blue Fin is heading back to the original ping area, but if you scroll down to the second story it seems Sarah is attracting a few weirdos. Strange phone calls, a death threat and 2 break ins and she doesn't seem too worried about. I think I'd be freaking out just a little bit.
Just another one to add to the list.
why give these blithering t w a t s airtime at all???
makes THEM look stupid!
.....
SO THEY FOUND IT YET???
^_^
What will prove interesting though is the aftermath and whether this will bring about changes to aircraft black boxes. The link i posted yesterday regarding that makes for thoughtful reading.
Time will tell.
Shameful in this day and age of such high technology, a huge aircraft can 'vanish' almost without trace, yet any vehicle fitted with Tracker can be located in minutes.....often whilst the thieves are still driving the vehicle. Obviously, time taken is dependent on when the theft is first called in. They even give a 48 hour Guarantee of recovery....:o....or if they fail, refund of cost in full. That's how confident Tracker manufacturers are of their product!
Aghhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Using mobile phone GSM services.
The UK has around 30,000 mobile base stations to over a land mass of 94,060 sq miles. The earth comprises of 196,939,900 square miles, 70% of which is ocean / sea.
Over simplification seems to be the issue with your post, yes tracking by satellite is possible, but expensive and complex. Something like the tracker system just wouldn't and couldn't work.
My personal take on that ...
Google Philip Wood and Diego Garcia, makes for very amusing reading if you like a good laugh. The Diego Garcia one seems entirely fabricated knowing how easy it is to alter EXIF data. ;-)
There is plenty about it if you Google and the link has been up on this thread a few times now.
I am aware of what Inmarsat said. I was frustrated by this recurring theme that people think the land technologies that are available to less than 15% of earth like mobile phones and traditional trackers work throughout the world.
The amount of time we see "why didn't the passengers ring up and say there was an issue" over and over as if people think normal GSM phone's work globally via some satellite. Forcing all aircraft to have Inmarsat trackers may be initially cheap, but with a captive market it could get costly over time, especially when multiplied over multiple years and over the number of aircraft + the upgrade of equipment costs etc. There may be alternatives like black box upgrades, high-frequency radio transmission and other things that can be done.
MH 370 was already fitted with Inmarsat gear (obviously). All new planes have been fitted with it as standard for some time now. Subscribing to the relevant tracking services could cost less than a dollar an hour per plane. I see no reason why such services should not for some time have been mandatory on all planes that have satellite comms gear already fitted, like MH 370. It's madness that the relevant International regulatory bodies haven't done that at least, 10,000 planes already have the gear on board. Chris McLaughlin is scathing about the lack of action since AF 447 (see above link).
I have no idea of the cost of retro-fitting Inmarsat gear to planes that don't yet have it but I am fairly sure that operators could recover the costs in time by offering associated services to passengers e.g. in-flight phone calls from the planes, which could become a lucrative service.
But it wouldn't become more expensive for airlines in time as you suggest, because if that happened, either regulators would intervene or more likely, other satellite operators would enter the market to bring the costs back down again. The costs would almost certainly come down in time not go up, as with nearly all expanding commercial services when there is the potential for new operators to enter the market.
HF radio links from all aircraft already exist today which could potentially send back GPS data once a minute, would that be a cheaper solution? It'll be interesting to read the full report and recommendations when available, in the meantime fortunately events like this are rare and it may be a decade or more before something similar happens.
I think it probably is now time for satellite tracking as the technology is there and seemingly at reasonable cost, but comparing to car trackers is over simplifying the situation.