Back to Squawk list
  • 14

IATA calls for global tracking of aircraft

Enviado há
 
IATA has called on the aviation industry to “make a safe industry even safer” by developing a better way to track aircraft following the disappearance of Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 March 8. Speaking at the IATA OPS conference in Kuala Lumpur, IATA DG and CEO Tony Tyler said governments and industry should focus on partnerships, data analysis and runway safety. He also committed IATA to formulating a unified industry position on global tracking of aircraft. (atwonline.com) Mais...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
About 24/7 spotting and/or surveillance, I am reminded of the camera traps so frequently being used almost every where in the in the protected forest areas to know the presence and movement of animals in the wild.
These cameras have automatic sensors to record movement. And are switched off during night to prolong battery life.
For an amateur photographer this may be sophisticated hitech camera BUT for a hitech gadget like satellite it will be caveman's kind !
Such cameras can definitely be developed and deployed or built into the 24/7 GPS cameras/sensors !
And I repeat, when these satellites keep track every suspected movement purporting to be unfriendly movements, why not keep track of harmless commercial airline birds ? In the larger public interest !
chalet
chalet 1
There are a number of issues about the vanishing of MH 370 (and the crash of AF 447 too) that have flabbergasted me one of which is that the www.cospas-sarsat.org/ dedicated system of numerous satellites orbiting the earth listening on "4 ears" for any ELT signals on 406 MHz emitted from these doomed flights did not pick up any and thus did not contribute to find them. Are they doing their job, or is it a faulty design of the ELTs or what.
eddyandy
eddyandy 1
If OnStar can unlock your car, why can't we open a cabin door from the outside?
preacher1
preacher1 2
Whether directly or indirectly, you pay for ON STAR. As I said below, the technology is there but the Airlines don't see the need to deploy it right now. Just another cost. If Uncle sugar mandates it after this, they will all deploy it. That way everybody will be equal and they can raise ticket prices to cover it.
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 1
But Malaysian government owns the airline, controls the regulator that oversees civil aviation, controls the military that may or may not have reacted appropriately to a missing passenger airliner, and has jurisdiction over and control of the investigation of this missing plane.

What leverage or authority does the NTSB have in getting the Malaysians to even answer simple questions, like did the airline replace the flight recorder pincers/ batteries when they were due for replacement in 2012.

When the current equipment may not have been kept maintained in working condition, how much more value will be derived from future requirements if they are not followed by some airlines/ regulators?

How can international passengers protect themselves from unequal levels of safety available in different parts of the world (as not all airlines/ regulators have the same commitment to safety)?
preacher1
preacher1 2
ADS-B and NEXTGEN will be deployed in the United States by the end of the decade with some airlines already in partial deployment, and it will be a requirement for all aircraft to be capable by then; that will include foreign carriers flying into this airspace. I figure the Europeans and Canadians will follow suit. Whether any of the others do in their home countries do or not, who knows. Pilots flying into U.S. Airspace will have to be trained and qualified, and those planes will have to be equipped.
PhotoFinish
PhotoFinish 2
Well the Asiana pilots could fly a stick landing, to save their life. They may have lived, but other passengers didn't.

And the transponder (ADS-B) was turned off on the missing Malaysia plane.

So I'm entirely unconvinced that standards can be enforced across borders. Not easily and not without cooperation of the regulator(s) with authority in each respective jurisdiction.

There has to be a way of making regularly audited and reliably accurate safety information available transparently for all airlines across all jurisdictions around the world. Nothing short of complete transparency will bring reliable safety to all.

At least give passengers the information so they can make educated decisions about whom to fly.
preacher1
preacher1 2
Well, part 129, as we all found out after Asiana214, only allows a ramp check type equipment inspection. I don't know if it specifically excludes on site audit or we just don't have the money to send auditors on a regular basis. I personally think that any carrier flying into our airspace ought to be subject to identical rules/regs/121 as U.S carriers. There aren't that many foreign 135 carriers coming in but they should be the same. In other words, all should be equal. Your last line would turn the market loose somewhat and let the pax decide, but, it will be found that Asian and Mideast countries are not near as open as the U.S. and will more likely follow the leadership.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Participation of PAX !
It's there every where and always . And we all all know how and to what extent it happens and to what end result.
Don't we ?
So heavens are not likely to fall if it happens .
US leadership ! It started way back during the WW II and continues . Right ?
MHO !
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
PhotoFinish, as you have clearly indicated , all this will have to be made part of the 'Law ' . And not until then.
And once it becomes law, ways and means will be naturally devised to make them tamper proof on lines similar to ones used for sealing Black Boxes. But as applicable to ADS-B. Needless to remind, that BB's have undergone tremendous changes over time for various reasons and will continue to change. Same can and may happen to such transponders/transducers !
I am sure post MH 370, the time limit of CVRs (last two hours) is bound to be reviewed. No ?
If ANYONE at this august forum disagrees, please do. BUT keep it in limits of logic and decent language . My humble request (MHR).
avihais
Martin Haisman 1
Malaysia and Malaysian airlines are a signatory to ICAO annex 13 and therefor have full responsibility for the accident. They have the authority to request the relevant states/documents being such as from Boeing, any state/country that undertook maintenance, states of fuel supply, engine manufacturers etc. They MAY enlist assistance from the NTSB and other countries CAA or related organisations.

The US must remember they are not the only nation on earth and other countries do have more relevant experience or are more suited to undertaking operations or investigations. It took the UK to investigate and come up with an alternative and the AAIB is currently active in the investigation.

It would be silly not to enlist someone or a team from the NTSB and a FBI rep be called upon and would most likely be requested to do so, especially being a Boeing aircraft and the implications of foul play.

But it the ICAO regulations that govern what the Malaysian government is required to do and the authority invested to request information or assistance.

In such a cosmopolitan world especially international flights you can't tell who's flying the aeroplane. Aside from airline blacklist and searching airline safety records the average Joe has little to go on.

But MH307 is a real cliff-hanger. Malaysian Airlines had until now a safety record of 8 1/2 out of 10 and and a Oneworld alliance.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
Is it not sad that there are so many satellites spying the world, claiming accuracy to locate a moving truck ?
But NONE of them exhibited its boastful calibre to disclose any info about the MH 370 !
Such blatant and ugly display and claims about space technology and progress !

[This poster has been suspended.]

magicelle78
Ella Talbott 3
That's a shitty thing to say when in fact he has a point. All those satellite's out there that can zoom in to reveal my mailbox number and not one of them can swallow their political pride for the sake of finding this aircraft. Instead we get pixelated pictures that quite franckly, my old Atari has better graphics.

And if anyone sounds like a whiny little girl, it's you!!
preacher1
preacher1 6
I really think the political pride is the biggest factor here, coupled with the fact that Malaysia was not anywhere near ready for an openness and transparency that an investigation like this will bring, consequently being protective in the 1st few critical days and probably missing out on important things. All that said. Technology is there now and even in place on some equipment, to provide the tracking. If it was strictly tracking, it would not be that expensive, but government has a tendency to add fat, hence cost, then you come up with the caveat of "who is going to pay for it". If the airlines wanted it, they would already have it.
joelwiley
joel wiley 1
You have a good point about Malaysia's readiness for the scrutiny this incident brought. It does point out the inherent problem with the 'security by obscurity model' in which the entrance door is hidden unlocked. Once it is found out....
preacher1
preacher1 2
Well, one can say what they want, and maybe it is a little bit of Nationalistic pride, but the NTSB has developed a procedure through trial and error over the years in handling of this type situation, and one of the primary things is that speed and openness on the front end is necessary, regardless of who it hurts. The Europeans and Canadians have adopted this approach as well. A good example is that the hull of 214 laid on the ground untouched and runways were closed until they could look over the scene themselves, and during this time, were gathering maintenance and training records immediately. While there was no crash scene and Malaysian police brought in the FBI local office immediately, they DID NOT as far as NTSB, Boeing or any other entity until after a week or better of grumbling, and I am sure that either much evidence was gone, or at the least, a lot of the questions could have been answered much earlier.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 0
India is a backward and dark peninsula for Americans.
Americans deserve the honour to do it ! Using lesser nations .
avihais
Martin Haisman 1
There is no need to spend billions on a satellite for every area of the earth for every minute of the day.

The spying on your letterbox number is not satellites but the 10,000 planned drones in the US that will do it.

Looks like everyone watching CSI thinks its true. IATA has a valid point but we are looking at a unique situation.

It is hard to tell and we don't have the specifics of what happened. On the face of it the aeroplane movements seem to be deliberate according to media reports and therefore a criminal act???

I would agree to a system that gives a more accurate continued broadcast of a flights whereabouts.The logistics of doing so might prove more challenging then the average Joe thinks or watches on made for TV programmes.

I sincerely hope they can locate the FDR and especially the CVR and it was not disabled..
magicelle78
Ella Talbott 1
Can't the CVR be disabled by the pilot by pulling the circuit breaker?? Like in the Silk Air crash?? Just curious because if MH370 was an intentional act, even if they find the CVR, it may be useless.
avihais
Martin Haisman 1
Yes unfortunately it can hence I hope when they locate the black box (CVR) it was active.
magicelle78
Ella Talbott 1
Well unfortunately, if this is a deliberate act and the transponder was switched off then sadly, I'm afraid, it's highly likely the CVR was pulled too :(
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
As I read in a report and quoted in one of the posts, the CVR records ONLY the last TWO hours, unlike the FDR which records the full flight.
Thus, chances are that even if the CVR is recovered it may not be known what prompted the diversion in the first place which happened perhaps 3 to 5 hours before the actual reported crash !
Yes ofcourse, unless the last two hours of CVR give indication in the verbal expressions about the desperation and the inevitable crash !
Like the PIC/FO saying to some one , 'I told you when you forced me to divert from South China Sea ....... '
Etc., etc. etc.
May sound like a fiction. But remember,
' Truth is stranger than fiction ' - Lord Byron, in Don Juan

[This poster has been suspended.]

akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
We all know that post 9/11 concept and system of security underwent a heavy overhaul. The grammar of Security was and is being rewritten every now and then.

A very recent happening in India about letting non pilots into the cockpit has resulted into the suspension of the concerned pilots

" Pilots let kids into cockpit, lose licences "

http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Default/Scripting/ArticleWin.asp?From=Archive&Source=Page&Skin=TOINEW&BaseHref=CAP/2014/04/04&PageLabel=13&EntityId=Ar01205&ViewMode=HTML

Authorities being over zealous ?
You tell me !
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 1
A very interesting and useful comment appearing about the article under reference
" TechGuru on Apr 2, 2014
ICAO is moving in the right direction, even though it is after a tragic disappearance of a jet. There are a few other related matters where ICAO or FAA must call for changes, especially after recent pilot suicide (LAM) and a pilot hi-jack (ET).
1. After 9/11, cockpit has a bullet proof door, which cannot be opened from the cabin side. This was to prevent any forcible entry, but this has given a pilot or a terrorist a secure place to commit a crime. Under such extreme circumstance, the door lock should be open-able from out side by means of a secret one time key number send from ground or entered on the external key pad.
2. All communication equipment are located inside the cockpit. So when a cockpit is taken over, the other pilot and crew are left in the passenger cabin just screaming and kicking the cockpit door. This happened very recently in the Ethiopian hi-jack and LAM air pilot hi-jack and crash in Mozambic. The persons outside the cockpit knew something terrible was going to happen, but had no means of telling the world about it. The cabin side should have access to a SAT phone or at least a VHF control panel. This should be used only for such emergencies. Communication is vital, and we all know how a Congress women on one of the aircraft was able to alert Washington over her cell phone during 9/11.
If above two facilities were available, I doubt if MH370 incident could have taken place. "
mrusa4440
d. thomas 1
I have to ask, Where the heck was the USAF AWACS that are always on station watching everything airborne off the coast of Asia? Nothing moves in that area without being seen. An aircraft deviating off the filed flight plan would have gotten some attention form for sure. I think there's a whole lot more going on here that we aren't being told.
avihais
Martin Haisman 3
As I understand US and other nations AWACS types of systems are only deployed to monitor critical security operations and not fly around an area not under threat to the US.
preacher1
preacher1 3
I think you are correct. They were always airborne back during the days of "LOOKING GLASS" but now just operate on an as needed basis. The only steady deployment right now is in the mid-East, I think.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 0
I belong to a minuscule minority of this forum who follow 'They also serve who only stand(or watch) and wait' - John Milton,(in 1673).
For their benefit here is a quick ref. about

' Automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast ' (ADS-B)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_dependent_surveillance-broadcast

And interesting reading appears under heading/s
Description
Benefits
ADS-B in the United States
System design considerations of ADS-B
ADS-B technical and regulatory documents

Enjoy the new found info ! If you like.
avihais
Martin Haisman 1
As Malaysia is one of the 191 member states of the ICAO they are a party to recommendations (directions) set out by the ICAO. One document of many is:


http://www.icao.int/APAC/Documents/edocs/cns/ADSB_AIGD6.pdf

Have a good sleep.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 0
This is precisely what I had stated soon after the happening. And was criticised, left right and centre by the self proclaimed experts.
Clearly, necessity always dictates to define the goals for the inventors and the explorers !
To search and venture beyond known horizon and dig and search into depths of darkness of the unknown !

Entrar

Não tem uma conta? Registre-se agora (gratuito) para funcionalidades personalizáveis, alertas de vôo e mais!
Esse site utiliza cookies. Ao usá-lo e continuar a navegar, você concorda com isso.
Ignorar
Você sabia que o rastreamento de voos da FlightAware é patrocinado por anúncios?
Você pode nos ajudar a manter o FlightAware gratuito, permitindo anúncios de FlightAware.com. Trabalhamos muito para manter nossa publicidade relevante e discreta para criar uma ótima experiência. É rápido e fácil permitir anúncios no FlightAware ou, caso prefira, considere nossas contas premium.
Ignorar