z*******n
发帖数: 1034 | 1 Inmarsat offers airlines free global tracking to prevent another MH370
BY Daniel Cooper @danielwcooper May 12th 2014, at 4:38:00 am ET 35
After the disappearance of Malaysia Airlines flight MH370, the idea that a
plane could simply vanish in an age of information seemed impossible.
Satellite company Inmarsat is pledging to prevent the situation from
happening again, and will offer tracking services to every passenger airline
, free of charge. In the system, all planes would ping Inmarsat's tracking
stations every 15 minutes, sending precise location, heading and speed and
altitude data to authorities. The proposal will be considered at the
International Civil Aviation Organization's meeting, which begins in
Montreal later today.
Previously, airlines have resisted using detailed location tracking due to
the cost, but as Inmarsat's hardware is already commonplace across the
global fleet, the cost to implement a system would be negligible. The cost
of the service is said to be around $3 million per year, but Inmarsat is
planning to absorb that charge in the hope that airlines would buy premium
services down the road. Given that it was the "handshake" data between the
company's on-board equipment and tracking stations -- used to check if there
was a working satellite connection on MH370 -- that helped narrow-down the
search for the missing Malaysia Airlines plane. There's no word on if other
companies are preparing a similar response, but anything to prevent further
disasters is a win in our book.
35 Comments
Share
Via: BBC News
Source: Inmarsat
Tags: ICAO, Inmarsat, International Civil Aviation Organization, MH370,
Satellite, Tracking
Inmarsat offers airlines free global tracking to prevent another MH370
Next: Google Play Music for iPad found lurking inside iPhone app
35 comments
Livefyre
Sign in
173 people listening
Newest | Oldest | Top Comments
vFunct
vFunct 1 hour ago
15 minutes is too far apart.. a plane could be 150 miles away within 15
minutes, preventing any actual search effort for missing planes.
It needs to be locatable to within a few hundred feet.
FlagShare
LikeReply
derekpurdy
derekpurdy 54 minutes ago
@vFunct I'm sure there is a cost/benefit issue related as to why it's not
real time or close to.
FlagShare
1Tams80LikeReply
SyukriLajin
SyukriLajin 33 minutes ago
@vFunct 15 minutes with *a lot* of data to predict where the aircraft
should be within the 15 minutes, and it's free. so that is MUCH better than
what we have now. and it's not like aircraft goes missing every week.
FlagShare
LikeReply
ffistometer
ffistometer 2 hours ago
As we still don't know what happened on board MH370, I don't think Inmarsat
are going to be able to "prevent" another MH370.
They might be able to help narrow down the search area quicker...
FlagShare
LikeReply
psychodad39
psychodad39 2 hours ago
They said it's going to be "free" but no mention for how long. A year? two
years, 5 years? then what? charging them, nice trick.
The power on/off switch should have not been so easy to operate, pilots
needs permission from the tower control in order to do so.
FlagShare
LikeReply
C38S
C38S 2 hours ago
Most truckies on the road have GPS tracking that can't be turned off. You'd
think that planes would have had it first.
FlagShare
2ArupaeokuadeLikeReply
AbbasKhan
AbbasKhan 2 hours ago
Please please Airlines / Aviation Authorities, consider this ASAP and with
close eyes. Don't delay this due to politics any further. Even if this was
paid, air lines should be able to cough up a small amount for such tracking
(albeit a bit more frequent, like every 5mins) for the safety of the
passengers. MH370 should never happen again!
FlagShare
1JarofchrisLikeReply
Perry
Perry 2 hours ago
Excellent news, but its unfortunate that it had to come from such a tragic
event. The inability to track a plane a real-time is inexcusable in an age
of the internet, satellites, gps and radar. Hopefully the proposal (or an
alternative) will be accepted and implemented in the very near future.
FlagShare
2C38SJarofchrisLikeReply
SimonC
SimonC 3 hours ago
it's time planes were fitted with automatically deployed gps signal bouyes.
FlagShare
1JarofchrisLikeReply
yourameh
yourameh 3 hours ago
$3m/yr for the past 20 years would have been cheaper than the one lost plane
. All that was needed was to strap a cell phone to the plane. My
quadcopter even has GPS and return home functionality.
FlagShare
2diovehtJarofchrisLikeReply
c3pa
c3pa 4 hours ago
Inmarsat sales pitch to airlines:
FOR A LOW COST
(comparatively speaking)
(billed per second)
KEEP TRACK OF ALL THOSE ITEMS THAT JUST KEEP GETTING LOST
(including 350 ton aircraft with 200 people on-board)
FlagShare
1JarofchrisLikeReply
acme64
acme64 3 hours ago
@c3pa BUT WAIT, THERE'S MORE!
FlagShare
LikeReply
HonestJerk
HonestJerk 4 hours ago
The plane had plenty of tracking devices on it...but they were turned off.
This, too would have also been turned off IF it is the case that the devices
were manually turned off...which appears to be the case
FlagShare
4ffistometerBart001nebMichael_DLikeReply
Gasaraki
Gasaraki 3 hours ago
@HonestJerk You can't turn this off. This tracking comes from the engines.
FlagShare
1IanSchwarzeneggerLikeReply
Clemalum07
Clemalum07 2 hours ago
@HonestJerk or you know they could wire this damn thing in a way that it
cant be turned off.
FlagShare
1thereal_entheosLikeReply
thereal_entheos
thereal_entheos 2 hours ago
@Clemalum07 @HonestJerk It should be something like, when you turn the
transponder off, it goes into auto-pilot and lands at the nearest safe
airport.
FlagShare
LikeReply
Digi59404
Digi59404 4 hours ago
So... The people whose satellites and algorithms couldn't find MH370 are
offering free tracking service?
No Thanks.
FlagShare
LikeReply
PeterClark
PeterClark 4 hours ago
@Digi59404 they didn't have this service running on the plane. No location
data was sent. They had to calculate things just from pings alone.
FlagShare
10SyukriLajinTams80CodeeCBdiovehtLikeReply
Clemalum07
Clemalum07 2 hours ago
@Digi59404 Satallites and Algorithms are a crap shoot compared to this tech
which was not on the plane.
FlagShare
LikeReply
Tams80
Tams80 33 minutes ago
The airline didn't pay for a tracking product (that couldn't be turned off).
Inmarsat had no obligation to help, as what their equipment was used for
wasn't meant for location tracking.
FlagShare
LikeReply
SusanPike-Pippy
SusanPike-Pippy 5 hours ago
Over due if you ask me, the main issue here is that the powers to be have to
take the freaking On/Off switch OUT of the Cockpit.
FlagShare
5C38Sdiovehtthereal_entheosREVIGORLikeReply
firefuckert
firefuckert 4 hours ago
@SusanPike-Pippy I always turn off transponder signal after landing. You
know, no need for transponder signal while taxiing. Less cunfusing for ATC.
Also, transponder is important to secretly signal certain problems, like
7500 Hijack, 7600 Communications failure, 7700 emergency or 7777 military
intercept code.
It is VERY important for the pilot to have control over transponder.
FlagShare
3IanSchwarzeneggerJarofchrisGasarakiLikeReply
coolblue2000
coolblue2000 1 hour ago
@firefuckert Do any of those secret signals involve turning off the
transponder? With regard to landing, surely a system could be implemented to
only allow the transponder to turn off when the aircraft is on the ground?
FlagShare
LikeReply
HonestJerk
HonestJerk 4 hours ago
@SusanPike-Pippy Sure, while you're at it, take the take the flight
controls out, too...no need to trust a human at all.
There are hundreds of circuit breakers in a cockpit. They are there, for
instance, to be able to remove power to a device in case of an electrical
fire. These are essentially On/Off switches.
So whether a true On/Off switch, or a CB...there is an On/Off switch.
We can't change the world for every on-off lunatic.
FlagShare
LikeReply
Jarofchris
Jarofchris 6 hours ago
I wonder what's in it for Inmarsat. Sounds like a Google-esque move...I bet
that information is worth something.
FlagShare
LikeReply
Doofernyoyo
Doofernyoyo 5 hours ago
@Jarofchris lolwut .. REALLY?
FlagShare
1fcukappleLikeReply
VernonW.HamptonJr.
VernonW.HamptonJr. 4 hours ago
@Jarofchris ...you just made me lose faith in humanity with a comment that
damn stupid...
FlagShare
1Tams80LikeReply
RohanSekhri
RohanSekhri 6 hours ago
Wasn't the Air France incident enough for them to realize that this was
needed. Who the hell gives the access rights to the pilot as far as
transponders are concerned? I'm amazed no one at Boeing or Airbus even
thought about this earlier.
FlagShare
5diovehtthereal_entheosNekoWorkingAteeqRehLikeReply
HonestJerk
HonestJerk 4 hours ago
@RohanSekhri Obviously you are clueless as to how flying works. The
transponder code is given to the plane prior to takeoff and sometimes
changed multiple times during a flight. Also, it generally isn't turned on
until ready for takeoff, though at some airports it is always on.
The point being, it isn't as simple as remove the On/Off switch.
See my response above on circuit breakers, get a cup of coffee and find
something to gripe about that you actually understand
FlagShare
1Tams80LikeReply
thereal_entheos
thereal_entheos 2 hours ago
@HonestJerk @RohanSekhri It's great that you're telling us how flying works
and we are too stupid to come up with anything useful because we don't fly
planes, but don't you think that flying could work better, like making sure
some sort of transponder, like existing ones or with satellite in the
article, that constantly tells everyone it's location and vector?
The oligopoly that is the airlines fought very hard in the U.S. NOT to
require secure cockpit doors on ALL of their planes in the 1990's, citing
cost because they all have hundreds of planes, and we all know how that
turned out. Stupid congressmen who don't know anything about airplanes.
FlagShare
LikeReply
gmanvbva
gmanvbva 11 minutes ago
@HonestJerk @RohanSekhri Calling someone "clueless" because they are trying
to think of a way to solve a problem is just being a pretentious b!sh that
has a insatiable need to feel important because they really have no
notability in this life .
There are many ways to solve this problem and some very good suggestions
being mentioned. Grow up and become productive and constructive.
FlagShare
LikeReply
worldgoingmad
worldgoingmad 7 hours ago
Commendable, but why does it need a tragedy before a feature like this -
that most people assumed was already in place - is implemented?
FlagShare
13C38Sthereal_entheosIanSchwarzeneggerfcukappleLikeReply
themuffinman75
themuffinman75 4 hours ago
@worldgoingmad I fully agree but its impossible to prevent or even plan for
something that hasn't really happened before. Improved safetly has always
came at the expense of some previous tragic event.
FlagShare
1JarofchrisLikeReply
HonestJerk
HonestJerk 4 hours ago
@worldgoingmad This general tech was in place on the plane....it was turned
off. This could be turned off, too. Sometimes we just don't expect the
worst. You lock your doors now, but there was a time when people didn't
think that was necessary.
FlagShare
2themuffinman75JarofchrisLikeReply
AnhTuNguyenPhuoc
AnhTuNguyenPhuoc 7 hours ago
Wow! I thought we were in 2014 already.... |
|
