Ce site web utilise des cookies. En utilisant et en naviguant davantage sur ce site, vous acceptez cela.
Rejeter
Saviez-vous que le suivi des vols FlightAware est soutenu par la publicité ?
Vous pouvez nous aider à garder FlightAware gratuit en autorisant les annonces de FlightAware.com. Nous travaillons dur pour que notre publicité reste pertinente et discrète afin de créer une expérience formidable. Il est facile et rapide de mettre les annonces en liste blanche sur FlightAware ou d’examiner nos comptes premium.
Rejeter
Back to Squawk list
  • 11

Shoes, Wallets, Clothes of Crashed Indonesian Jet's Passengers Recovered

Soumis
 
akarta: Chairs, wheels and other parts of a crashed Indonesian Lion Air jet were hauled from the depths Friday, as authorities analysed black box data that may explain why the new plane plummeted into the Java Sea, killing 189 people. Search teams have been scouring the seabed for the fuselage of the Boeing-737 MAX 8, which plunged into the waters off Indonesia's northern coast shortly after takeoff Monday despite only having been in service a few months (www.ndtv.com) Plus d'info...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


allanrbowman
Allan Bowman 2
The "black box" invented in 1953 is still used by airlines. Yes the technology itself is better than in 1953 but so what. The boxes disappear with the downed aircraft. Real time data communications via satellite would obsolete these primitive antique devices and provide instant analysis of who, what, where, why and when incidents occur. But airlines and their regulators don't seem to want modern real time wireless data communications. Why is this allowed to continue?
bbabis
Bill Babis 1
The airplane was in vented in 1903 and is still used by airlines. Yes the technology is better than 1903 and it does make a huge difference. You can't always replace what works with what sounds good. Change takes time and when something new is actually the best way of doing something it will happen that way.
Moviela
Ric Wernicke 1
You make some good points but as someone who has made parts for black boxes (really bright orange) I feel hard wired recordings are superior to RF communications. The data collected by modern recorders is huge. Take a look at the FlightAware world map. See all those planes in the air? There is not enough satellite bandwidth to capture the data from all those flights. There is also the matter of cost. Birds are not free. Ever call a Sat phone? $6 to $9 per minute on Verizon. Parker won't pay for it, Sir Richard won't pay for it, Munoz won't pay for it. Might as well not mention Kelly or O'Leary, you know how the Irish are.
kbeller44
Kyle Beller 1
I was wondering the same thing. Allan Bowman makes a great point but so do you. Im borderline clueless when it comes to big data and all that it entails, but the amount of data every single flight every single day would be tremendous. Then who is responsible for it? NTSB? FAA? the airline? erase it after a week? month? Could it get hacked? lost? deleted?
chalet
chalet 2
Ric my understanding is that commercial aircraft with GE, RR, P&W and perhaps somebody else{s jet engines are presently sending continuous performance data via bandwith while airborne to Maintenance of the respective airlines so that they prepare in advance for an engine exchange or an important repair job or whatever, ditto position reports.
Moviela
Ric Wernicke 2
Yes that is true. It is handy for maintenance to know what needs to be ready before a flight arrives, but the data sent is very limited and sent in bursts. The engine performance data is like a shot glass compared to a whisky barrel of data stored in a FDR.

Flight MH370 had sent this data during its ill fated flight, and we all know how the position data was not helpful in locating the airplane.
kbeller44
Kyle Beller 1
I don't mean to nit-pick... but does 120ft of water really warrant "hauled from the depths"?

Se connecter

Vous n'avez pas de compte? Inscrivez-vous maintenant (gratuitement) pour des fonctionnalités personnalisées, des alertes de vols, et plus encore!