eli5 Why can’t black boxes in Aeroplanes update data to a cloud throughout a flight or after a crash has occured? why do we need to find the physical box?
In: 846
There’s no guarantee that you’ll have a channel to transmit all that information, and even if you did, that it would arrive intact. Hence you store it locally for later retrieval.
Quite simply because, until the recent advent of SpaceX Starlink, no satellite data service existed that would affordably provide the bitrate necessary.
Quite simply because, until the recent advent of SpaceX Starlink, no satellite data service existed that would affordably provide the bitrate necessary.
Black boxes are designed to protect the data of an aircraft in the very worst of conditions and possibilities.
If the data was unable to be transmitted to the cloud for say, atmospheric reasons, then we would not be able to fully understand why the aircraft crashed without the additional technical data and cockpit recordings.
Black boxes are designed to protect the data of an aircraft in the very worst of conditions and possibilities.
If the data was unable to be transmitted to the cloud for say, atmospheric reasons, then we would not be able to fully understand why the aircraft crashed without the additional technical data and cockpit recordings.
Black boxes are designed to protect the data of an aircraft in the very worst of conditions and possibilities.
If the data was unable to be transmitted to the cloud for say, atmospheric reasons, then we would not be able to fully understand why the aircraft crashed without the additional technical data and cockpit recordings.
The plane already broadcasts its flight data if you want it to do it.
The black box purpose is to be a self contained, completely independent recorder, that works no matter what is broken on the plane.
Not even pilots can override it while they can for most the other devices.
It’s simply there and running all the (relevant) time. No other system can do that. Broadcasting can’t be guaranteed, not only at plane level, lack of satellite or ground coverage means you are broadcasting to no one that can listen.
The plane already broadcasts its flight data if you want it to do it.
The black box purpose is to be a self contained, completely independent recorder, that works no matter what is broken on the plane.
Not even pilots can override it while they can for most the other devices.
It’s simply there and running all the (relevant) time. No other system can do that. Broadcasting can’t be guaranteed, not only at plane level, lack of satellite or ground coverage means you are broadcasting to no one that can listen.
The plane already broadcasts its flight data if you want it to do it.
The black box purpose is to be a self contained, completely independent recorder, that works no matter what is broken on the plane.
Not even pilots can override it while they can for most the other devices.
It’s simply there and running all the (relevant) time. No other system can do that. Broadcasting can’t be guaranteed, not only at plane level, lack of satellite or ground coverage means you are broadcasting to no one that can listen.
Cloud technology has advanced very quickly in the past 20 years by using the strategy “move fast and break things”. This is very common in Silicon Valley but it is NOT how the aircraft industry operates. They prefer the strategy “if it works, leave it the fuck alone”.
Changing anything on an airplane requires tons of research, testing, and certification. The manufacturer wants to know that it works. The airline wants to know that it works. The FAA wants 10,000 pages of reports saying that it works.
At first glance all of the rules and check lists for changing systems on airplanes might seem like a barrier to progress, and in many cases it is. But airplanes as they currently operate are ridiculously safe. I don’t want anyone changing anything without a very very good reason and lots of evidence that it’s safer than the current system.
Improving data collection on crashes sounds important, but by the numbers it’s actually hard to make a case that it is. The current rate of deadly crashes on major airlines is about one in 50,000,000 flights. If we had much better information about crashes maybe we could reduce that by 25%. If so, crashes would go down to one in 67,000,000. That sounds great, but if getting better data requires ANY change to the construction, controls, or procedures of an airplane there is some risk that those changes could cause a crash. Therefore to make that change you have to provide lots of lots of evidence that your change is not going to disrupt anything. Even if you can prove that a change that you would like to make has a less than one in 1,000,000 chance of causing a problem, that is NOT good enough for air travel. You need to prove to the manufacturer, the airline, and the FAA that the change you propose has leas than a 1/50,000,000 chance of going wrong.
The testing and verification required for that is very expensive, millions or tens of millions of dollars. Why pay it if you don’t have to? In the last 20 years the only big change in airplanes is that their engines are more fuel efficient. Worldwide airlines spend almost $100 billion per year on fuel. Modern engines have cut that by about 20%. That change is worth spending $10,000,000 on testing and certification. A cloud connected black box? Not so much.
Latest Answers