AirAsia flight QZ8501 from Indonesia to Singapore missing

[HeijoshinCool]

Are Asian maintenance standards equivalent to Western benchmarks?

No. In in order to land at first world airports they have to up their game. I apologize that I can't remember, but it hasn't been that long ago that one of the SE Asia airlines was cut off from landing in a EU country and I think it was the UK. I can't remember the details but I know it happened.

That airline had to get its standards up to requirements only for landing in the West to get the ban lifted.

Look at Thailand's helicopters which are past their sell-by date. A couple have crashed. In the last crash a Thai official said that Thailand can use the choppers longer because their maintenance is superior 555. Two of them have failed.

When I fly from the US to Thailand it's on an airline belonging to a Western country. Due to routes flown it's often a US airline but sometimes Canada or The UK.

.

I apologize that I can't remember, but it hasn't been that long ago that one of the SE Asia airlines was cut off from landing in a EU country and I think it was the UK. I can't remember the details but I know it happened.

Er, that would be Air Asia.

EU banned from 2007-2010

Ignorant

Better check your facts before posting

.

Indonesia AirAsia, which operates the missing plane, is a 49%-owned subsidiary of the Malaysia-based parent company, AirAsia Berhad. The company has many other cross-border subsidiaries including AirAsia India, Philippines AirAsia, and Thai AirAsia.

Indonesia AirAsia, along with many other Indonesian airlines, was banned from travel to the EU in 2007 due to inadequate safety provisions, but was removed from the blacklist in 2010. The long-haul Indonesia AirAsia X and Philippines AirAsia are still subject to EU travel bans.

Link for the above here: http://qz.com/318396/an-airasia-flight-has-gone-missing-between-indonesia-and-singapore/

ALSO:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indonesia_AirAsia

http://skift.com/2014/12/28/airasia-had-clean-safety-record-but-indonesia-rife-with-incidents/

ALSO, from this very thread … #180

The aircraft was operated by AirAsia Indonesia, a unit of Malaysian-based AirAsia which dominates Southeast Asia's booming low cost airline market.

There's a lot more, but I'll let you do your own research, Mr. Polite.

[slipperylobster]

AirAsia flight flew through ‘thunderstorm factory’: expert

Somebody "dropped the ball" when making the flight plan for missing AirAsia flight QZ8501, aviation expert Neil Hansford says.

Mr Hansford told the TODAY Show human factors were undoubtedly a factor in the jet's disappearance.

"I've said all along it was never going to be engineering," he said.

Read more at http://www.9news.com.au/national/2014/12/30/08/27/aviation-expert-says-airasia-flight-crashed-due-to-human-factors#IHBZgsFU7hLok266.99

I am not quite convinced that weather, alone could terminate communications so suddenly. Must of been one devastating storm...showing up clearly on the radar. Since it was mentioned several times that these airplanes can take on lightning strikes....I wonder what violent storm power yanked the communications out of the airplane, with not even time to broadcast a vocal alarm on the radio...

The first airplane (Malaysian Airlines) disappeared completely (Sounds like foul play)

The second airplane (Malaysian Airlines) got shot down (Definitely foul play)

The third airplane (Indonesian Air Asia - connection with Malaysia Air Asia), is now in focus. (foul weather?)

Will this one also be a mystery? Will we just chalk it up to Weather? No chance of a rogue pilot, passenger? No chance of a mechanical calamity (explosion).....no collision? Just foul weather???

"Something is rotten in the state of XXXXXXXX (Denmark)"

"....So foul and fair a day, I have not seen."

As William S. might have noticed.

Edited December 30, 2014 by slipperylobster

[EyesWideOpen]

This is what the US state department thinks of Indonesian airlines.....This article was from earlier this year.

http://www.businessinsider.com/lion-air-banned-from-the-european-union-2013-4

"Indonesian air carriers continue to experience air incidents and accidents. U.S. citizens traveling to and from Indonesia are encouraged to fly directly to their destinations on international carriers from countries whose civil aviation authorities meet international aviation safety standards for the oversight of their air carrier operations under the FAA's International Aviation Safety Assessment (IASA) program."

[HeijoshinCool]

This is what the US state department thinks of Indonesian airlines.....This article was from earlier this year.

http://www.businessinsider.com/lion-air-banned-from-the-european-union-2013-4

"Indonesian air carriers continue to experience air incidents and accidents. U.S. citizens traveling to and from Indonesia are encouraged to fly directly to their destinations on international carriers from countries whose civil aviation authorities meet international aviation safety standards for the oversight of their air carrier operations under the FAA's International Aviation Safety Assessment (IASA) program."

.

http://skift.com/2014/12/28/airasia-had-clean-safety-record-but-indonesia-rife-with-incidents/

Read the second one down. Amazing.

[saltandpepper]

Are Asian maintenance standards equivalent to Western benchmarks?

No. In in order to land at first world airports they have to up their game. I apologize that I can't remember, but it hasn't been that long ago that one of the SE Asia airlines was cut off from landing in a EU country and I think it was the UK. I can't remember the details but I know it happened.

That airline had to get its standards up to requirements only for landing in the West to get the ban lifted.

Look at Thailand's helicopters which are past their sell-by date. A couple have crashed. In the last crash a Thai official said that Thailand can use the choppers longer because their maintenance is superior 555. Two of them have failed.

When I fly from the US to Thailand it's on an airline belonging to a Western country. Due to routes flown it's often a US airline but sometimes Canada or The UK.

.

I apologize that I can't remember, but it hasn't been that long ago that one of the SE Asia airlines was cut off from landing in a EU country and I think it was the UK. I can't remember the details but I know it happened.

Er, that would be Air Asia.

EU banned from 2007-2010

Ignorant

Better check your facts before posting

.

Indonesia AirAsia, which operates the missing plane, is a 49%-owned subsidiary of the Malaysia-based parent company, AirAsia Berhad. The company has many other cross-border subsidiaries including AirAsia India, Philippines AirAsia, and Thai AirAsia.

Indonesia AirAsia, along with many other Indonesian airlines, was banned from travel to the EU in 2007 due to inadequate safety provisions, but was removed from the blacklist in 2010. The long-haul Indonesia AirAsia X and Philippines AirAsia are still subject to EU travel bans.

Link for the above here: http://qz.com/318396/an-airasia-flight-has-gone-missing-between-indonesia-and-singapore/

ALSO:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indonesia_AirAsia

http://skift.com/2014/12/28/airasia-had-clean-safety-record-but-indonesia-rife-with-incidents/

ALSO, from this very thread … #180

The aircraft was operated by AirAsia Indonesia, a unit of Malaysian-based AirAsia which dominates Southeast Asia's booming low cost airline market.

There's a lot more, but I'll let you do your own research, Mr. Polite.

Apologies for having overlooked this fact, and for being rude

Will make sure my facts are right next time

[F430murci]

Seeing still no debris found. If they lose this one, one needs to start questioning both the competency of SE Asia pilots and SE ATC.

US commercial pilots I know, including family members, say that the training of SE Asian pilots is not up to snuff and incidents like Flight 214 resulted from chronically, poorly trained pilots that cannot fly with auto pilot disengaged. MH17 flee over a war zone, 8501 may have flown directly into a violent storm . . . and ATC seems to have the same low level of competency as well.

Is this bad equipment or operator issues? Didn't they have similar problems finding that Adam Air flight is same general area a few years back. Did that SE market grow faster than money, equipment and training could keep up?

" Is this bad equipment or operator issues? "

but in the MH370 incident you were not supportive of airlines engaging in expenditure involving real-time satellite coverage in the cockpit.

Do you still hold the same position?

Better pilot and ATC training before the plane hits the surface is more important than tracking it after it plunges into the ocean.

First off, the government would have to allocate bandwidth, most of which is now beiing utilized by or allocated to entertainment, telecommunications and military. Government agencies keep reducing aviation bands to allocate those bands for these uses. Until government teprioritizes bandwidth, there isn't sufficient channels for data telemetry.

Tracking devices are not the cure all here. Finding wreckage in the ocean is painstaking time consuming process. Debris moves with current, sometimes very rapidly. It takes time to get proper assests such as choppers and boats with appropriate equipment to detect functioning beacons just beneath the surface. Second tracking devices would still put searchers at last known coordinates, subject to drift and etc., which should not be much different than properly trained ATC with proper equipment and searches.

The solution is better trained pilots and ATC to prevent the crash, not equipment to locate bodies and scrap after incompetency caused the crash.

But there is no evidence so far of any incompetence on the part of the pilot or the ATC in this incident?

With regards to another painstaking time consuming process that you refer to so far regarding MH370 is close to a quarter of $1 billion.

I have been listening to commentators last night and this morning and the question regarding GPS tracking is being asked much more aggressively by the various interviewers and it's interesting that virtually all the commentators are saying the reason it hasn't been implemented comes down to cost which is scandalous.

Incompetence? Common. Spoke to brother tonight who flew fighters for Air Force and keeps a Duchess at Olive Branch airport in Northern, Mississppi. He told me that SE Asians come over to this small airport, get a basic commercial license, 300 hours, head back to Asia and are flying passengers without an ATP in some countries. US requires 1,500 hours and ATP.

Incompetence? Lost Adam Airr, 370 and now clueless about location of 8501 for 3 days in a small body of water. MH17 flying over a war zone!?? 214 cannot hit runway in broad daylight without glide slope or ILS.

When was last time US lost a dowmed commercial airliner. Unlike MAL, US carriers had a no fly over Ukraine war zone. Didn't the Barzilians find pieces of 447 in the middle of the Atlantic in about a day?

RE: GPS

News talking about GPS costs??? That's what the news is for, to get ignorant all riled up.

Planes now use GPS to track itself. GPS travels straight line sight. A large network of buoys would have to be set up over large bodies of water. GPS, however, is suceptibke to jamming or spoofing if it fails.

The better solution is to put ADS-B receivers on satellites. I believe they are heading toward this and hope to go online in 2018. ADS-B is used with special ground towers in certain locations, but within the next 4 or 5 years satellites will be launched and in place so that flights can be tracked almost anywhere in the world. I think ADS-B will be required by the FAA on all planes by 2020. There, however, is still the problem of satellite bandwidth.

[EyesWideOpen]

In fairness to AirAsia, they actually have an excellent safety record with no fatal accidents. The ban on travel to EU was actually based upon the belief of the EU that Indonesian governmental control of safety standards was poor.

http://skift.com/2014/12/28/airasia-had-clean-safety-record-but-indonesia-rife-with-incidents/

"The EU’s 2008 flight ban followed a string of deadly crashes in Indonesia over the past years, which seriously questioned the government’s ability to provide and monitor adequate safety assurances in the aviation industry,” Adnkronos International reported when the AirAsia ban was rescinded.

Edited December 30, 2014 by EyesWideOpen

[Asiantravel]

" Is this bad equipment or operator issues? "

but in the MH370 incident you were not supportive of airlines engaging in expenditure involving real-time satellite coverage in the cockpit.

Do you still hold the same position?

Better pilot and ATC training before the plane hits the surface is more important than tracking it after it plunges into the ocean.

First off, the government would have to allocate bandwidth, most of which is now beiing utilized by or allocated to entertainment, telecommunications and military. Government agencies keep reducing aviation bands to allocate those bands for these uses. Until government teprioritizes bandwidth, there isn't sufficient channels for data telemetry.

Tracking devices are not the cure all here. Finding wreckage in the ocean is painstaking time consuming process. Debris moves with current, sometimes very rapidly. It takes time to get proper assests such as choppers and boats with appropriate equipment to detect functioning beacons just beneath the surface. Second tracking devices would still put searchers at last known coordinates, subject to drift and etc., which should not be much different than properly trained ATC with proper equipment and searches.

The solution is better trained pilots and ATC to prevent the crash, not equipment to locate bodies and scrap after incompetency caused the crash.

But there is no evidence so far of any incompetence on the part of the pilot or the ATC in this incident?

With regards to another “ painstaking time consuming process “that you refer to so far regarding MH370 is close to a quarter of $1 billion.

I have been listening to commentators last night and this morning and the question regarding GPS tracking is being asked much more aggressively by the various interviewers and it's interesting that virtually all the commentators are saying the reason it hasn't been implemented comes down to cost which is scandalous.

.

Well, that makes no sense, does it?

Cost? Roadway Freight in the US has GPS locators hidden on all their trucks, both to keep on eye on the driver, and to locate the truck if stolen. Lo-Jacks can be bought for personal cars; $800 Apple computers can be tracked.

But we can't use GPS to track commercial aircraft or commercial cargo ships.

Hmmm.

A full-blown top of the line ELT/EPIRB costs …. $1500. Yep, cheap, huh?

if it is not cost then why aren't they doing it?

Do you agree with F430murci that is not being done because" the government would have to allocate bandwidth, most of which is now beiing utilized by or allocated to entertainment, telecommunications and military."?

[cheeryble]

Got to give it to S and P hat's a genuine apology.....

[jpinx]

Are Asian maintenance standards equivalent to Western benchmarks?

No. In in order to land at first world airports they have to up their game. I apologize that I can't remember, but it hasn't been that long ago that one of the SE Asia airlines was cut off from landing in a EU country and I think it was the UK. I can't remember the details but I know it happened.

That airline had to get its standards up to requirements only for landing in the West to get the ban lifted.

Look at Thailand's helicopters which are past their sell-by date. A couple have crashed. In the last crash a Thai official said that Thailand can use the choppers longer because their maintenance is superior 555. Two of them have failed.

When I fly from the US to Thailand it's on an airline belonging to a Western country. Due to routes flown it's often a US airline but sometimes Canada or The UK.

Aircraft are like George Washingtons axe. I used to fly one old helicopter that had absolutely none of the originally manufactured aircraft in it -- everything had been replaced.

Was it maintained by a SE Asian country?

Countries don't maintain aircraft - they license the engineers according to the standards they set. I've hired Indian engineers with UK licences and their work was excellent, and I've fired UK engineers with UK licences for being negligent. The aircraft are maintained to the standards set by the country of registration.

The quality of the engineering and piloting is not only a matter of national standards, but also of "normal practice" when employing and training staff. Only pick good people and pay them well for good work.

BTW -- Manufacturers have a large input on maintenance, regardless of what country registers, or sets standards for maintenance or operation of the aircraft.

[HeijoshinCool]

Are Asian maintenance standards equivalent to Western benchmarks?

No. In in order to land at first world airports they have to up their game. I apologize that I can't remember, but it hasn't been that long ago that one of the SE Asia airlines was cut off from landing in a EU country and I think it was the UK. I can't remember the details but I know it happened.

That airline had to get its standards up to requirements only for landing in the West to get the ban lifted.

Look at Thailand's helicopters which are past their sell-by date. A couple have crashed. In the last crash a Thai official said that Thailand can use the choppers longer because their maintenance is superior 555. Two of them have failed.

When I fly from the US to Thailand it's on an airline belonging to a Western country. Due to routes flown it's often a US airline but sometimes Canada or The UK.

.

I apologize that I can't remember, but it hasn't been that long ago that one of the SE Asia airlines was cut off from landing in a EU country and I think it was the UK. I can't remember the details but I know it happened.

Er, that would be Air Asia.

EU banned from 2007-2010

Ignorant

Better check your facts before posting

.

Indonesia AirAsia, which operates the missing plane, is a 49%-owned subsidiary of the Malaysia-based parent company, AirAsia Berhad. The company has many other cross-border subsidiaries including AirAsia India, Philippines AirAsia, and Thai AirAsia.

Indonesia AirAsia, along with many other Indonesian airlines, was banned from travel to the EU in 2007 due to inadequate safety provisions, but was removed from the blacklist in 2010. The long-haul Indonesia AirAsia X and Philippines AirAsia are still subject to EU travel bans.

Link for the above here: http://qz.com/318396/an-airasia-flight-has-gone-missing-between-indonesia-and-singapore/

ALSO:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indonesia_AirAsia

http://skift.com/2014/12/28/airasia-had-clean-safety-record-but-indonesia-rife-with-incidents/

ALSO, from this very thread … #180

The aircraft was operated by AirAsia Indonesia, a unit of Malaysian-based AirAsia which dominates Southeast Asia's booming low cost airline market.

There's a lot more, but I'll let you do your own research, Mr. Polite.

Apologies for having overlooked this fact, and for being rude

Will make sure my facts are right next time

.

You are a gentleman, sir.

I too, regret going overboard.

[slipperylobster]

A pin in the ocean?

If we can direct a drone to drop a "payload" on an individual that turns his cellphone on..... Just makes you wonder why there is no electronic device on an airplane that could call in a drone to spot it's position in a rapid descent, especially before a scheduled landing time.

[HeijoshinCool]

Better pilot and ATC training before the plane hits the surface is more important than tracking it after it plunges into the ocean.

First off, the government would have to allocate bandwidth, most of which is now beiing utilized by or allocated to entertainment, telecommunications and military. Government agencies keep reducing aviation bands to allocate those bands for these uses. Until government teprioritizes bandwidth, there isn't sufficient channels for data telemetry.

Tracking devices are not the cure all here. Finding wreckage in the ocean is painstaking time consuming process. Debris moves with current, sometimes very rapidly. It takes time to get proper assests such as choppers and boats with appropriate equipment to detect functioning beacons just beneath the surface. Second tracking devices would still put searchers at last known coordinates, subject to drift and etc., which should not be much different than properly trained ATC with proper equipment and searches.

The solution is better trained pilots and ATC to prevent the crash, not equipment to locate bodies and scrap after incompetency caused the crash.

But there is no evidence so far of any incompetence on the part of the pilot or the ATC in this incident?

With regards to another “ painstaking time consuming process “that you refer to so far regarding MH370 is close to a quarter of $1 billion.

I have been listening to commentators last night and this morning and the question regarding GPS tracking is being asked much more aggressively by the various interviewers and it's interesting that virtually all the commentators are saying the reason it hasn't been implemented comes down to cost which is scandalous.

.

Well, that makes no sense, does it?

Cost? Roadway Freight in the US has GPS locators hidden on all their trucks, both to keep on eye on the driver, and to locate the truck if stolen. Lo-Jacks can be bought for personal cars; $800 Apple computers can be tracked.

But we can't use GPS to track commercial aircraft or commercial cargo ships.

Hmmm.

A full-blown top of the line ELT/EPIRB costs …. $1500. Yep, cheap, huh?

if it is not cost then why aren't they doing it?

Do you agree with F430murci that is not being done because" the government would have to allocate bandwidth, most of which is now beiing utilized by or allocated to entertainment, telecommunications and military."?

.

Agree with pretty much everything he has said.

Except that bandwidth, as far as I know, does not affect ELT/EPIRB/PRB devices. Someone correct me if I am wrong. If I'm not, the question remains why aren't there multiple devices on all commercial aircraft?

I do know that the SAR response time from activation of these devices is far less than what the AT controller took to think maybe something was amiss, after losing contact 50 minutes earlier.

My days as an air traffic controller ended in 1982. Center computers then were still using tubes. So I am not as up to date on aviation technology as I once was. But the rules of separation haven't change much at all.

[Asiantravel]

Better pilot and ATC training before the plane hits the surface is more important than tracking it after it plunges into the ocean.

First off, the government would have to allocate bandwidth, most of which is now beiing utilized by or allocated to entertainment, telecommunications and military. Government agencies keep reducing aviation bands to allocate those bands for these uses. Until government teprioritizes bandwidth, there isn't sufficient channels for data telemetry.

Tracking devices are not the cure all here. Finding wreckage in the ocean is painstaking time consuming process. Debris moves with current, sometimes very rapidly. It takes time to get proper assests such as choppers and boats with appropriate equipment to detect functioning beacons just beneath the surface. Second tracking devices would still put searchers at last known coordinates, subject to drift and etc., which should not be much different than properly trained ATC with proper equipment and searches.

The solution is better trained pilots and ATC to prevent the crash, not equipment to locate bodies and scrap after incompetency caused the crash.

But there is no evidence so far of any incompetence on the part of the pilot or the ATC in this incident?

With regards to another painstaking time consuming process that you refer to so far regarding MH370 is close to a quarter of $1 billion.

I have been listening to commentators last night and this morning and the question regarding GPS tracking is being asked much more aggressively by the various interviewers and it's interesting that virtually all the commentators are saying the reason it hasn't been implemented comes down to cost which is scandalous.

Incompetence? Common. Spoke to brother tonight who flew fighters for Air Force and keeps a Duchess at Olive Branch airport in Northern, Mississppi. He told me that SE Asians come over to this small airport, get a basic commercial license, 300 hours, head back to Asia and are flying passengers without an ATP in some countries. US requires 1,500 hours and ATP.

Incompetence? Lost Adam Airr, 370 and now clueless about location of 8501 for 3 days in a small body of water. MH17 flying over a war zone!?? 214 cannot hit runway in broad daylight without glide slope or ILS.

When was last time US lost a dowmed commercial airliner. Unlike MAL, US carriers had a no fly over Ukraine war zone. Didn't the Barzilians find pieces of 447 in the middle of the Atlantic in about a day?

RE: GPS

News talking about GPS costs??? That's what the news is for, to get ignorant all riled up.

Planes now use GPS to track itself. GPS travels straight line sight. A large network of buoys would have to be set up over large bodies of water. GPS, however, is suceptibke to jamming or spoofing if it fails.

The better solution is to put ADS-B receivers on satellites. I believe they are heading toward this and hope to go online in 2018. ADS-B is used with special ground towers in certain locations, but within the next 4 or 5 years satellites will be launched and in place so that flights can be tracked almost anywhere in the world. I think ADS-B will be required by the FAA on all planes by 2020. There, however, is still the problem of satellite bandwidth.

" Incompetence? "

But with relation to this specific incident, the captain had 20,000 hours? How and why would you infer this captain was incompetent when there is no evidence whatsoever to suggest this yet?

" RE: GPS

" News talking about GPS costs??? That's what the news is for, to get ignorant all riled up."

Yes even Reuters would you believe?

Tyler said IATA's recommendations to be put to ICAO in September would focus only on the tracking of planes and not involve the continuous streaming of data, which would be more complicated to implement. "We must find a way of doing it that doesn't add significantly to cost. Margins are very thin in the business," he told Reuters.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/06/02/us-airlines-iata-tracking-idUSKBN0ED1PB20140602

[HeijoshinCool]

Ah, well there's your bandwidth issue, AsianTravel. Continuous streaming would eat it up.

Beacons, however, are short term and only when activated in an emergency.

[F430murci]

Better pilot and ATC training before the plane hits the surface is more important than tracking it after it plunges into the ocean.

First off, the government would have to allocate bandwidth, most of which is now beiing utilized by or allocated to entertainment, telecommunications and military. Government agencies keep reducing aviation bands to allocate those bands for these uses. Until government teprioritizes bandwidth, there isn't sufficient channels for data telemetry.

Tracking devices are not the cure all here. Finding wreckage in the ocean is painstaking time consuming process. Debris moves with current, sometimes very rapidly. It takes time to get proper assests such as choppers and boats with appropriate equipment to detect functioning beacons just beneath the surface. Second tracking devices would still put searchers at last known coordinates, subject to drift and etc., which should not be much different than properly trained ATC with proper equipment and searches.

The solution is better trained pilots and ATC to prevent the crash, not equipment to locate bodies and scrap after incompetency caused the crash.

But there is no evidence so far of any incompetence on the part of the pilot or the ATC in this incident?

With regards to another “ painstaking time consuming process “that you refer to so far regarding MH370 is close to a quarter of $1 billion.

I have been listening to commentators last night and this morning and the question regarding GPS tracking is being asked much more aggressively by the various interviewers and it's interesting that virtually all the commentators are saying the reason it hasn't been implemented comes down to cost which is scandalous.

.

Well, that makes no sense, does it?

Cost? Roadway Freight in the US has GPS locators hidden on all their trucks, both to keep on eye on the driver, and to locate the truck if stolen. Lo-Jacks can be bought for personal cars; $800 Apple computers can be tracked.

But we can't use GPS to track commercial aircraft or commercial cargo ships.

Hmmm.

A full-blown top of the line ELT/EPIRB costs …. $1500. Yep, cheap, huh?

if it is not cost then why aren't they doing it?

Do you agree with F430murci that is not being done because" the government would have to allocate bandwidth, most of which is now beiing utilized by or allocated to entertainment, telecommunications and military."?

Just a part of it, but a very large part of it. Again and as said above, satellites with ADS-B receivers are being launched. This should start going online in 2018 if I recall correctly. Cockpits than have to be fitted with WAAS enabled high integrity GPS source and an ADS-B data link product. I think the FAA is requiring US carriers to have this in place by January 1, 2020. This is for ADS-B data out. ADS-B for data in at 1090 mhz is where things get complicated due to bandwidth. I think their is another option being considered like a Universal Access Transceiver that functions at 978 mhz and can provide both ADS-B in and out. Even with WAAS and UAT, there will still be bandwidth problems for constant streaming for all of the flights in the air. The number of flights in the air at any given time is staggering. Nevertheless, we are heading in this direction to have the equipment in place. It is not a quick process, it is very expensive and no one is sure how to work out the band width issues.

[F430murci]

Ah, well there's your bandwidth issue, AsianTravel. Continuous streaming would eat it up.

Beacons, however, are short term and only when activated in an emergency.

Yes, one solutions kicked around for bandwidth has been switch on only when emergency. That would not have helped in 370 when everything is being switched off. Also, the last thing a pilot may think about or care about is switching on ADS-B data out when trying to save the aircraft.

[Commerce]

A pin in the ocean?

If we can direct a drone to drop a "payload" on an individual that turns his cellphone on..... Just makes you wonder why there is no electronic device on an airplane that could call in a drone to spot it's position in a rapid descent, especially before a scheduled landing time.

Or in fact actually carry its own drone, which is released in emergencies to follow full craft, and remain at the point of grounding sending its own beacon. Cost is minimal compared to insurance payouts for loss of life, and design is simple! However, these design big wigs have no concept of such tech available, as they just like to sit infront of Catia screens looking good.

[Asiantravel]

Ah, well there's your bandwidth issue, AsianTravel. Continuous streaming would eat it up.

Beacons, however, are short term and only when activated in an emergency.

but this article again doesn't express those concerns? yet again thethey talk about costs?There seems to be an awful lot of faffing about regarding this. How many planes have to go down before people start getting serious about it?

Here's Why Airliners Still Don't Have Real-Time Tracking Tech

It's been nine months since Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 vanished into thin air. So why aren't we doing a better job of tracking planes yet?

There's also disagreement on how much it will cost. The upgrades could cost tens of thousands of dollars per aircraft, and many airlines have expressed concern about the high cost given how rare it is for an aircraft to disappear.

Of course, those same arguments were made after Air France 447 crashed into the South Atlantic in 2009, when the industry had an opportunity to make the changes that might have prevented MH370's disappearance.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/aviation/safety/mh370-missing-jets-tracking-technology-17521859

Edited December 30, 2014 by Asiantravel

[F430murci]

Incompetence? Common. Spoke to brother tonight who flew fighters for Air Force and keeps a Duchess at Olive Branch airport in Northern, Mississppi. He told me that SE Asians come over to this small airport, get a basic commercial license, 300 hours, head back to Asia and are flying passengers without an ATP in some countries. US requires 1,500 hours and ATP.

Incompetence? Lost Adam Airr, 370 and now clueless about location of 8501 for 3 days in a small body of water. MH17 flying over a war zone!?? 214 cannot hit runway in broad daylight without glide slope or ILS.

When was last time US lost a dowmed commercial airliner. Unlike MAL, US carriers had a no fly over Ukraine war zone. Didn't the Barzilians find pieces of 447 in the middle of the Atlantic in about a day?

RE: GPS

News talking about GPS costs??? That's what the news is for, to get ignorant all riled up.

Planes now use GPS to track itself. GPS travels straight line sight. A large network of buoys would have to be set up over large bodies of water. GPS, however, is suceptibke to jamming or spoofing if it fails.

The better solution is to put ADS-B receivers on satellites. I believe they are heading toward this and hope to go online in 2018. ADS-B is used with special ground towers in certain locations, but within the next 4 or 5 years satellites will be launched and in place so that flights can be tracked almost anywhere in the world. I think ADS-B will be required by the FAA on all planes by 2020. There, however, is still the problem of satellite bandwidth.

" Incompetence? "

But with relation to this specific incident, the captain had 20,000 hours? How and why would you infer this captain was incompetent when there is no evidence whatsoever to suggest this yet?

" RE: GPS

" News talking about GPS costs??? That's what the news is for, to get ignorant all riled up."

Yes even Reuters would you believe?

Tyler said IATA's recommendations to be put to ICAO in September would focus only on the tracking of planes and not involve the continuous streaming of data, which would be more complicated to implement. "We must find a way of doing it that doesn't add significantly to cost. Margins are very thin in the business," he told Reuters.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/06/02/us-airlines-iata-tracking-idUSKBN0ED1PB20140602

My primary response to competence as to 8501 at this juncture is on ATC. How the heck does ATC in this region basically lose three planes when you include Adam Air. I also commented on competence of pilots in general in this region for reasons stated. We don't know what happened to 8501 but flying into a storm strong enough to bring an A320 down would be a competence/judgment issue also no matter how many hours you have.

Why does your guy on Reuters not address the 2020 FAA mandate. The satellites are not in place yet so snapping your fingers, clicking your heels and adding a high integrity WAAS and ADS-B datalink or a UAT in the cockpit still won't do much in certain areas and over large bodies of water until the satellites are in place.

[krisb]

No way my wife would fly Malaysia Air, and now she won't ever get back on Air Asia.

She could be right, it would be a first if she is.

[Tywais]

if it is not cost then why aren't they doing it?

One thing that is not being taken into account regarding the $1500 for the device is the overhead which can be substantially higher than that base price. Aircraft modification to fit the unit, the engineering time to design the necessary changes, the installation cost, the certification of the device prior to installation and after installation and the downtime of the aircraft for the conversion to be made. Then multiply it by 100s or 1000s of these modifications and we are running into very big numbers. In other words, you don't just go out and buy one and sit it on the cockpit dashboard and plug it into the lighter outlet.

[Asiantravel]

F430murci, you talk about Southeast Asian pilots being incompetent ! ha that's a joke

I think people are finally waking up to the fact the real incompetent people in this equation seem to be the regulators who are sitting on their backsides and passing the buck

Industry running out of excuses for lack of global aircraft tracking

As Indonesia halted its aerial search for Indonesia AirAsia flight QZ8501 for the night, the world asked again – how is it possible that, in 2014, we don’t immediately know the whereabouts of an aircraft that loses contact with air traffic control and whose ADS-B signal ends abruptly, in this case an A320 flying from Indonesia to Singapore with 162 lives on board?

the ATTF’s recommendations to the United Nations’ International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), tabled earlier this month, are lukewarm at best. A jetliner’s Aircraft Condition Monitoring System (ACMS) and Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS) together already support limited real-time flight data monitoring on many – though certainly not all – aircraft today, so the ATTF recommended that airlines in the short-term “make use of what is already available in their fleets and areas of operations” and “look at the business case for upgrading equipment” to meet performance criteria outlined by the ATTF.

http://www.runwaygirlnetwork.com/2014/12/28/industry-running-excuses-lack-global-aircraft-tracking/

Edited December 30, 2014 by Asiantravel

[HeijoshinCool]

if it is not cost then why aren't they doing it?

One thing that is not being taken into account regarding the $1500 for the device is the overhead which can be substantially higher than that base price. Aircraft modification to fit the unit, the engineering time to design the necessary changes, the installation cost, the certification of the device prior to installation and after installation and the downtime of the aircraft for the conversion to be made. Then multiply it by 100s or 1000s of these modifications and we are running into very big numbers. In other words, you don't just go out and buy one and sit it on the cockpit dashboard and plug it into the lighter outlet.

.

In other words, you don't just go out and buy one and sit it on the cockpit dashboard and plug it into the lighter outlet.

I sorta thought the Head Stew could wear it around her neck on a bungi cord….

[Asiantravel]

if it is not cost then why aren't they doing it?

One thing that is not being taken into account regarding the $1500 for the device is the overhead which can be substantially higher than that base price. Aircraft modification to fit the unit, the engineering time to design the necessary changes, the installation cost, the certification of the device prior to installation and after installation and the downtime of the aircraft for the conversion to be made. Then multiply it by 100s or 1000s of these modifications and we are running into very big numbers. In other words, you don't just go out and buy one and sit it on the cockpit dashboard and plug it into the lighter outlet.

yes, but a quarter of $1 billion spent so far on searching for MH370 is also very big number?

And who will pick up those costs in the end-the taxpayers of the various countries?

I think it's fair and correct that the airlines pay for whatever equipment is necessary now to

minimise the need for any more such searches-not the taxpayers.

[F430murci]

if it is not cost then why aren't they doing it?

One thing that is not being taken into account regarding the $1500 for the device is the overhead which can be substantially higher than that base price. Aircraft modification to fit the unit, the engineering time to design the necessary changes, the installation cost, the certification of the device prior to installation and after installation and the downtime of the aircraft for the conversion to be made. Then multiply it by 100s or 1000s of these modifications and we are running into very big numbers. In other words, you don't just go out and buy one and sit it on the cockpit dashboard and plug it into the lighter outlet.

Is there not also a per flight costs? I understand that amount is pretty small, but isn't there something like 30,000 commercial carrier flights per day just in the US.

[NeverSure]

Perhaps if the airlines spent that much money upgrading locators, there wouldn't be anything in it for them. Would it save the loss of the plane? Reduce insurance premiums? Save fuel 555? Reduce the payouts to families?

What would they gain? They are bottom line oriented.

A new law couldn't cover every country, could it?

How do you get it done?

[MaxYakov]

A pin in the ocean?

If we can direct a drone to drop a "payload" on an individual that turns his cellphone on..... Just makes you wonder why there is no electronic device on an airplane that could call in a drone to spot it's position in a rapid descent, especially before a scheduled landing time.

Or in fact actually carry its own drone, which is released in emergencies to follow full craft, and remain at the point of grounding sending its own beacon. Cost is minimal compared to insurance payouts for loss of life, and design is simple! However, these design big wigs have no concept of such tech available, as they just like to sit infront of Catia screens looking good.

Don't stop there! Have the "angel" (its own drone) drop survival equipment on the crash site. Better yet, always send out aircraft in pairs each fully-equipped with survival so that one could assist the other in the case of a downing. We'll overlook the scenario where they both go down. This doesn't even introduce much new tech for the "design big wigs". The cost accountants will have a big problem with this, however.

Sitting in front of a screen ... not looking that good today.

[Guest]

As mentioned before, the uplink to report the data is probably the most difficult part of the continuous tracking.

If the upload of the location data would happen for example every 1 minute, a plane which is flying 900km/h would travel 15km during that 1 minute period. If the data burst from the planes would take for example 10ms, that would allow 6000 planes to be tracked by one satellite, within the same frequency and in case these uploaded messaged does not overlap each others.

How well the uplink works inside a large thunderstorm? When the plane is at higher flight level, there is less air and moisture absorbing the radio signal. But the most important data would be when the plane has descended to lower altitudes. Would the uplink to the satellite work in case there is a large thunderstorm above the plane?

[F430murci]

F430murci, you talk about Southeast Asian pilots being incompetent ! ha that's a joke

I think people are finally waking up to the fact the real incompetent people in this equation seem to be the regulators who are sitting on their backsides and passing the buck

Industry running out of excuses for lack of global aircraft tracking

As Indonesia halted its aerial search for Indonesia AirAsia flight QZ8501 for the night, the world asked again – how is it possible that, in 2014, we don’t immediately know the whereabouts of an aircraft that loses contact with air traffic control and whose ADS-B signal ends abruptly, in this case an A320 flying from Indonesia to Singapore with 162 lives on board?

the ATTF’s recommendations to the United Nations’ International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), tabled earlier this month, are lukewarm at best. A jetliner’s Aircraft Condition Monitoring System (ACMS) and Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS) together already support limited real-time flight data monitoring on many – though certainly not all – aircraft today, so the ATTF recommended that airlines in the short-term “make use of what is already available in their fleets and areas of operations” and “look at the business case for upgrading equipment” to meet performance criteria outlined by the ATTF.

http://www.runwaygirlnetwork.com/2014/12/28/industry-running-excuses-lack-global-aircraft-tracking/

Even your article acknowledges costs and bandwidth, but proposes that it only be switched on in certain conditions.

Once again, this expensive system would have done nothing for MH 370 if everything was apparently being switched off or failing. This system would also have to be something pilots could switch off or on a circuit breaker.