• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Malaysian airliner feared lost..

J.T.B. said:
Ar-Pharazon said:
^ And put it somewhere it could only be accessed from the outside of the plane...and hard wire it into the power system so no fuses could be pulled, except from the unit itself, which would be inaccessible.
Click to expand...

You can't have something in your aircraft's power system without a fuse or a breaker, unless you want to run the risk of a fire in that circuit burning your plane up.
Click to expand...

Well then have the fuse on the unit, rather than somewhere it could be pulled easily, is what I'm saying.

Making these units tamper proof is something they have to be considering now, even if this case is just an accident.

Of course, considering the options is a far cry from making them happen. I'm sure it'll be "too expensive".
 
Ar-Pharazon said:
Well then have the fuse on the unit, rather than somewhere it could be pulled easily, is what I'm saying.
Click to expand...
Or just not attach it to the plane's power system at all as I suggested. If it's completely self-contained and just bolted on the outside, there is no way for it to be disabled intentionally or by malfunction of the plane during flight. That also makes it easier to retrofit onto existing planes.
 
Ar-Pharazon said:
Well then have the fuse on the unit, rather than somewhere it could be pulled easily, is what I'm saying.
Click to expand...

Well, they are not really convenient to get to already, but if you're at the point you are going down the emergency checklist and pulling breakers to isolate a fire, you need that access.

But is this really an issue? In incidents where CVR/FDRs have not been available for investigations it hasn't been because they were tampered with, and there's no reason to think that's the case with MH370, either.
 
J.T.B. said:
But is this really an issue? In incidents where CVR/FDRs have not been available for investigations it hasn't been because they were tampered with, and there's no reason to think that's the case with MH370, either.
Click to expand...
That's true. When they haven't been available, it's been cases where it wasn't known exactly where the crash happened, and it has taken time to find it. The idea of a floating buoy is something that will separate from the plane upon impact and send a locator signal. Had this plane or Air France 447 had such a device, the crash would have been found quickly, most likely within a day.
 
farmkid said:
Ar-Pharazon said:
Well then have the fuse on the unit, rather than somewhere it could be pulled easily, is what I'm saying.
Click to expand...
Or just not attach it to the plane's power system at all as I suggested. If it's completely self-contained and just bolted on the outside, there is no way for it to be disabled intentionally or by malfunction of the plane during flight. That also makes it easier to retrofit onto existing planes.
Click to expand...

You can't just bolt stuff onto the outside of planes!

Mr Awe
 
Reports from high Malaysian officials are saying that it appears that plane intentionally flew around Indonesia to avoid detection. Assuming this is true, it further increases the odds that this was an intentional act.

The first course/altitude change was definitely human controlled. However, for this set of changes there was small argument that could be made that an accident happened on board. (Still unlikely because an accident that would take out a whole bunch of equipment but yet leave the plane totally flyable is just not likely, particularly with the redundancies for each system. And, particularly when it happened at the best possible moment between air traffic controllers to obscure the event.)

However, we knew that there must've been another course/altitude change after that to get to the Southern Indian ocean. This was also human controlled however was not consistent with an accident.

Now, if you add in the more complex maneuverings specifically around Indonesia, it's clearly human intervention with the intent to hide what happened.

We just don't know who or why.

Mr Awe
 
If they find the wreckage, they might find clues on the plane, both amongst the plane itself and the passengers. But, certainly, it's possible we may never know.

Mr Awe
 
Malaysia Flight 370: Signals 'consistent' with those from data recorders

Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia (CNN) -- After a month of searching, investigators now have their "most promising" lead yet in finding the missing plane.

A pinger locator in the Indian Ocean has detected signals consistent with those emitted by aircraft black boxes, the head of the Joint Agency Coordination Center said Monday.

The sounds were heard at a depth of 4,500 meters (about 14,764 feet), retired Air Chief Marshal Angus Houston said.

But it could take days before officials can confirm whether the signals did indeed come from the plane, which went missing March 8 with 239 people on board.

...
Click to expand...
 
^ If it didn't come from this plane, then what the hell is down there making pings?

And I could see the Chinese getting & losing the signal, with the short-range equipment they were using.
 
PERTH, Australia (AP) — An Australian ship detected two distinct, long-lasting sounds underwater that are consistent with the pings from aircraft black boxes in a major break in the monthlong hunt for the missing Malaysia Airlines jet, the search coordinator said Monday.

Navy specialists were urgently trying to pick up the signal again so they can triangulate its position and go to the next step of sending an unmanned miniature submarine into the depths to try to identify plane wreckage.

Confirmation that the signals picked up by the Australian navy ship Ocean Shield belong to Flight 370's black boxes could take days, but the discovery offers "a most promising lead" yet, said Angus Houston, the head of a joint agency coordinating the multinational search. They were stronger and lasted longer than faint signals a Chinese ship reported hearing farther south in the search zone in the remote Indian Ocean.

"Clearly this is a most promising lead, and probably in the search so far, it's probably the best information that we have had," Houston said at a news conference. "We've got a visual indication on a screen and we've also got an audible signal — and the audible signal sounds to me just like an emergency locator beacon."

...
Click to expand...

http://www.chron.com/news/world/article/2-new-pings-sound-just-like-black-box-beacons-5382017.php
 
Mr Awe said:
farmkid said:
Ar-Pharazon said:
Well then have the fuse on the unit, rather than somewhere it could be pulled easily, is what I'm saying.
Click to expand...
Or just not attach it to the plane's power system at all as I suggested. If it's completely self-contained and just bolted on the outside, there is no way for it to be disabled intentionally or by malfunction of the plane during flight. That also makes it easier to retrofit onto existing planes.
Click to expand...

You can't just bolt stuff onto the outside of planes!

Mr Awe
Click to expand...

Well, obviously you can't just drill some holes and attach anything to the plane, but it's not that uncommon to attach things to the outside of a plane (antennas, winglets, weapons/tanks on military planes, etc.) Clearly the placement and design of such a device would have to be done with aerodynamics in mind.
 
^ When you wrote "just bolted on the outside" really seemed to imply that it was an easy thing. It's not! And, you'd need a unique solution for each type of aircraft.

Not saying that it's not doable, but it's not a quicky and easy way either.

Something does need to be done. Personally, I'd rather spend the money on data streaming to satellites.

Mr Awe
 
We know exactly where most plane crashes occur, and since most planes don't crash, whatever fix they come up with will have to be pretty inexpensive for the airlines to absorb the time and cost of retrofitting fleets of planes. I heard that airlines and the FAA aren't the most cooperative groups when it comes to making changes, so it will probably be years before everyone agrees on how to solve this issue.
 
^ Most crashes lead to some changes. The question is what will be done for this specific case.

Also, as the number of purely accidental crashes declines, the issue of intentional acts becomes relatively more important. At some point, they'll need to address this in terms of preserving flight data.
 
MH370 missing plane: two new signals picked up
Two sets of further pings have been detected in the search for the missing Malaysia Airlines plane, prompting authorities to declare that the aircraft will be found “in the not too distant future”.

Angus Houston, the search coordinator, said the sets of “much weaker” signals – believed to be from the plane’s black box pinger – were detected on Tuesday, with one at 4.27pm, local time, lasting 5 minutes and 32 seconds and another at 10.17pm lasting 7 minutes.

...

“Hopefully in a matter of days we will be able to find something at the bottom that might confirm this is the last resting place of MH370,” he said. “We don’t get certainty until we have a visual sighting.”

...
Click to expand...
 
Two sets of further pings have been detected in the search for the missing Malaysia Airlines plane, prompting authorities to declare that the aircraft will be found “in the not too distant future”.
Click to expand...

So the plane will be found next Sunday, A.D.?
 
Looking at the map, there's 4 locations within 17 miles or so.

How many things from the plane send out signals? Or could a given one seem in different spots?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top