Why plane black box doesn't upload it's data to satellite?

[Seret]

You seem to have a strange perception of what ATCs and pilots do that is incongruent with reality. Pilot's job is keeping a plane in the air. Their knowledge of avionics and aerodynamics is limited to what it do, not how it does it.

Indeed. Aircrew don't have a technical background. Most pilots I've met wouldn't know one end of a screwdriver from the other. They don't need to.

I did read a book from a commercial airline pilot a while back that at one point decried the loss of the flight engineer from the flight deck, as it meant there was no longer anybody on board who knew how it all worked.

As for in-flight telemetry, I'm sure it'll happen. Its usefulness as a remote diagnostic tool is too great. I work for a rail company and we've recently retrofitted several hundred of our passenger trains with a telemetry system that is coupled to the train's "black box" and squirts all the data over the GSM network. It's unbelievably useful for my job. As I sit here one of my screens is showing me bucketloads of data coming off our fleet. As soon as the airlines sort out continuous and reliable connectivity I'm sure they'll do it.

However, it should be noted that this data is unlikely to be allowable in a court of law. There are chain of custody issues once you start transmitting data over the internet. The physical data recorder on the aircraft (or in our case the train) will remain the official record.

Edited November 19, 2013 by Seret

[PakledHostage]

As for in-flight telemetry, I'm sure it'll happen. Its usefulness as a remote diagnostic tool is too great.

It already exists. Please see upthread. Newer aircraft already transmit status messages to the operating airline's network via the ACARS system. An example of an accident investigation where this information was used was the investigation into the loss of Air France flight 447 in 2009.

[Seret]

It already exists. Please see upthread. Newer aircraft already transmit status messages to the operating airline's network via the ACARS system. An example of an accident investigation where this information was used was the investigation into the loss of Air France flight 447 in 2009.

I did read that, but you gave the impression that it wasn't as complete as the actual FDR data. Our older system that we have on some of our stock give status messages (basically it would transmit the log items recorded in the train's management system), but what we have on the new system is proper telemetry. From my desk I can monitor individual signals (both digital and analogue) on a wire in real time (well, in six second chunks). Essentially we get everything that goes into the OTMR.

[PakledHostage]

I did read that, but you gave the impression that it wasn't as complete as the actual FDR data.

Sorry, I misunderstood. I thought you meant "any telemetry". The status messages that are sent over ACARS are pretty much just codes. Each code must be cross referenced against the aircraft's maintenance and operating documents to determine what they mean. They are far from being as complete as the FDR data. Even so, they are invaluable in troubleshooting maintenance problems. They can even help the airline save money by avoiding unnecessary in-flight diversions, because maintenance staff can work together with the flight crew to determine if a problem requires immediate attention or if it can be dealt with at the destination.

[Lexif]

There are newish systems like ADS-B that transmit position reports and data like speed, altitude and maybe autopilot settings and other stuff in the public. They work over VHF and you can get a receiver and see what's flying around you. Sites like Flightradar24.com use them. The goal is to give new tools to ATC in the future, and to allow the planes to coordinate better among themselve, as I understood it. For example, if the plane transmits the altitude set on the autopilot, ATC might get a warning if the plane has set it wrong and is about to bust through its assigned altitude. In the future, there might be a level of remote control where the clearance gets set to the autopilot automatically.

I don't know the transmission interval, but six seconds might be similar.

[Seret]

Even so, they are invaluable in troubleshooting maintenance problems.

Absolutely. Give me the option of talking direct to the machine, and trying to do it over voice with the crew (who probably don't have access to low-level maintenance data anyway) and I know which one I'll take.

[lajoswinkler]

You seem to have a strange perception of what ATCs and pilots do that is incongruent with reality. Pilot's job is keeping a plane in the air. Their knowledge of avionics and aerodynamics is limited to what it do, not how it does it. They have mechanics and engineers to worry about the later. Same deal with ATCs. They can know a lot about regulations and equipment, but specifics of operation isn't part of it. My university has a good aeronautics program, teaching pilots, ATCs, and engineers. I've taken some classes from them back when I could do it for free as an undergrad. Trust me, a typical pilot and ATC know absolutely nothing about underlying tech.

You're having a too narrow minded look on this issue. Experienced jet plane pilots know a lot more than fresh pilots who (should) know what university offers. That's a life fact. As you get older, you know more stuff.

The answer we're trying to pin down should be nothing for them, and even if they don't know it, they always know who to ask.

Chances are that a real life commercial jet planet pilot will know these kinds of things.

I remember talking with one. He was a treasure chest of useful avionics information and always knew who to ask in case he didn't know something. Too bad I'm unable to contact him anymore.

[Seret]

Chances are that a real life commercial jet planet pilot will know these kinds of things.

Having worked with pilots on a daily basis I'd have to say that very few of them knew any more than they needed to fly the aircraft. Their understanding of how it worked under the hood was pretty limited. It's just not where their expertise lies.

I can understand why you might think pilots would know this kind of thing though. Most people have no real perception of who works in aviation besides pilots.

Edited November 19, 2013 by Seret

[lajoswinkler]

Having worked with pilots on a daily basis I'd have to say that very few of them knew any more than they needed to fly the aircraft. Their understanding of how it worked under the hood was pretty limited. It's just not where their expertise lies.

I can understand why you might think pilots would know this kind of thing though. Most people have no real perception of who works in aviation besides pilots.

I guess my view is biased by this fellow who knew a ton of things. I had no idea the majority was so uninformed.