Today's Airbus Crash or Keep Your Computer Out of My Car

[Travis In Austin]

It seems like we had a flight a year or two ago where the pilot went crazy or suicidal?

That might be Egypt Air (990?), in which one pilot who was alone in the cockpit began Islamist chanting and dove the plane into the Atlantic, in a horrifying similarity to German Wings.

I was thinking of LAM Flight 470 in 2013 which crashed in Namibia. That investigagation determined it to be intentional. I don't know if they ever were able to determine the motive as to why.

Travis

[Mallette]

No one (including you big Dave) will ever convince me that something will ever be created that's 100% hack proof.

 

As I said, if DOD can't create unbreakable codes we are all dead.

 

Dave

[Travis In Austin]

All the big planes nowadays are controlled by wire. There are no mechanical devices that go from the cockpit to the rudder or engines or whatever. That being said, it's pretty dumb that we can't control them remotely. You can even hack some cars and control them remotely at least to whatever extent the computer allows. And we can't do that with a fully computerized airplane? The technology is there. No reason why we can't utilize it. It would have been TONS more effective than door locks and banning shampoo bottles after 9/11. No response from the pilot and/or you know it is hijacked and/or doing a dangerous maneuver? Fine, take the plane over remotely. You could probably land one knowing nothing but gps coordinates and an altitude.

Remote piloting has significant lag times that make it unsuitable for commercial passenger flight. The main problem is that you still have the problem of the remote pilot having a meltdown, or being coerced into a terrible act. A three person flight crew with a mandatory two people present at all times would avoid some of this.

In the Egypt Air crash, the captain was able to return to the cockpit and his seat but the copilot kept pushing down on the yoke as the captain tried to pull up which resulted in a split elevator, one side trying to dive, the other the opposite.

I think the captain didn't even consider that his copilot was trying to kill everyone. He kept asking questions about power, etc. all the way down. There are protocols to avoid this, you simply say "my aircraft" and if he won't let go you smash his head in with a flashlight.

[Paducah Home Theater]

 

Remote piloting has significant lag times that make it unsuitable for commercial passenger flight. 

 

We can control and land drones halfway around the world in almost real time.  I don't believe this for a second, especially when the alternative isn't even to try at all while 150 people plunge to their deaths for 8 minutes straight while everybody just sit there and watches.  Give the keys to the remote control to the same people who already have the ability to blow us out of the sky at any given time anyway.  

[oldtimer]

But it will be hackable.  You want to give the keys to hackers.

[Paducah Home Theater]

But it will be hackable.  You want to give the keys to hackers.

 

Everything is hackable.  China could attack our power grid right now and probably blow us back to the 17th century.  Besides, there are already weaponized drones in the sky all over the world and we don't care about that.  

Edited March 27, 2015 by MetropolisLakeOutfitters

[oldtimer]

Sure we do.  They are mostly ours.

[USNRET]

We can control and land drones halfway around the world in almost real time

Control in flight? Yes, with sluggish response via satellite. Control on take-off and landing? No; line of sight communications are a must for fast, accurate control response.

[oldtimer]

On that note I could attack our power grid and blow us back into whatever century people fantasize about.  Anyone can.  But when people are just riding in a plane they are far more immediately vulnerable. It's all about fear.

[Travis In Austin]

Rae piloting has significant lag times that make it unsuitable for commercial passenger flight.

We can control and land drones halfway around the world in almost real time. I don't believe this for a second, especially when the alternative isn't even to try at all while 150 people plunge to their deaths for 8 minutes straight while everybody just sit there and watches. Give the keys to the remote control to the same people who already have the ability to blow us out of the sky at any given time anyway.

Well that is the problem, our drones are not operated halfway around the world for take off and landing. They take off and land with line of sight C band data link, they are controled locally for 20 minutes after takeoff before they are handed off to Creach, and then they are handed back to local control 20 minutes before landing. A 2 second lag time is too long for them to land them without crashing them.

One armed one wouldn't respond to satellite comm over Afghanistan, they had to scramble an F-15 to shoot it down. 8 have reportedly crashed on take off or landing, and at least 38 have crashed total.

Even assuming it was reliable enough to use to land an airliner with 100 to 500 passengers, there are too many ways to disable and crash a commercial airliner independent of a remote controlled autopilot capable of locking out manual control.

Then there is the cost issue, who is going to pay for the satellites, control stations, retrofitting the planes, and having a remote control pilot ready in place 24/7/365 for every airliner?

Or is Boeing going to do it, Airbus, FAA? Then you have air traffic control you have to update so that it can respond when it sees a loss of altitude with sufficient time to be able to notify the airline to take over.

The retrofitting of the planes would cost a significant amount. Boeings do not have landing gear capable of being remotely extended, and I doubt Airbus does either.

The only way to prevent the crash of an aircraft by a pilot hell bent on suicide is to have another pilot in the cockpit to prevent it from happening.

I wish there was better news about something being able to come to the rescue for such a senseless act, but aircraft pretty much have to be one way or the other, manned or unmanned. Our drones, Viper and Predator, are relatively simple machines. The technology is in the Hellfire missiles and other guided weaponry they carry. The Predator uses the exact same engine as I have in my twin. Very simple, very reliable, but remote controlled flight is a long way off from being able to fly passengers.

[USNRET]

The Predator uses the exact same engine as I have in my twin.

Hope you have dual alternators!

 

Edit: You have a twin so you have another.

Edited March 27, 2015 by USNRET

[pite]

Very interesting discussions which changed the tune from "Autopilot" to "Remote Pilot" as the new details came out. I love controls !!! There might have been a chance if a crew member was in the cockpit.

 

Probably, there is a very easy way to remote pilot just with escorting the plane. We do escort the plane in all/most emergency situation - this is just another case, which needs additional mode to take over in case of one pilot or all pilots not responding for xyz reasons. Ofcourse, there are so many ways to cause troubles, so it's going to be endless chain of controls, by-pass, over-rides, auto-xyz, etc..

 

Quite disturbing taking the lives of on-board people !! May God help all these families to deal with this difficult time.

[LarryC]

I wonder if some will take a little extra look at the pilots on their next flight?

[Travis In Austin]

The Predator uses the exact same engine as I have in my twin.

Hope you have dual alternators!

 

Edit: You have a twin so you have another.

Why? Are they having troubles with the ones they are using on the -10 engines on the Predator drone?

Ours are technically starter generators which are 24 volt, and 300 amps I believe which we upgraded to along with glass cockpit upgrade and power inverter system. I can't remember if they are Bendix or APC. I remember they were about 6,500 each so I don't look forward to them having any problems anytime soon.

Travis

[Paducah Home Theater]

Well that is the problem, our drones are not operated halfway around the world for take off and landing. They take off and land with line of sight C band data link, they are controled locally for 20 minutes after takeoff before they are handed off to Creach, and then they are handed back to local control 20 minutes before landing. A 2 second lag time is too long for them to land them without crashing them.

C-band can still travel 120 miles. Also, typically this stuff comes up well in advance of the landing. All you'd have to do is remote pilot the thing with the 2 second delay until you can get a local controller ready at an airport, or even halfway remotely close to one.

Think about flight 93 on 9/11. Even with it being rushed we still had time to try to scramble jets to it and it was still full of fuel. All you'd have to do is hit a button and we instantly have control. Set up a local pilot at an airport and let him take over when you get close.

With this latest example, they dove for 8 minutes straight. Just take control then set up a local pilot for landing. I don't see what the big deal is. It's not like they were running on fumes. They had plenty of time to set up a local link for landing.

a remote control pilot ready in place 24/7/365 for every airliner?

I don't see why that would be necessary.

Edited March 27, 2015 by MetropolisLakeOutfitters

[Travis In Austin]

Well that is the problem, our drones are not operated halfway around the world for take off and landing. They take off and land with line of sight C band data link, they are controled locally for 20 minutes after takeoff before they are handed off to Creach, and then they are handed back to local control 20 minutes before landing. A 2 second lag time is too long for them to land them without crashing them.

C-band can still travel 120 miles. Also, typically this stuff comes up well in advance of the landing. All you'd have to do is remote pilot the thing with the 2 second delay until you can get a local controller ready at an airport, or even halfway remotely close to one.

Think about flight 93 on 9/11. Even with it being rushed we still had time to try to scramble jets to it and it was still full of fuel. All you'd have to do is hit a button and we instantly have control. Set up a local pilot at an airport and let him take over when you get close.

With this latest example, they dove for 8 minutes straight. Just take control then set up a local pilot for landing. I don't see what the big deal is. It's not like they were running on fumes. They had plenty of time to set up a local link for landing.

a remote control pilot ready in place 24/7/365 for every airliner?

I don't see why that would be necessary.

Well you don't adress any of the real world problems of remote control overide of an airliner.

Just two quick comments: First, as I said, currently there is no airliner capable of remote control flight. Who is going to pay for the cost of new airliners to be equipped for remote contro? It isn't financially feasible. To retrofit would be even more cost prohibitive. An airliner, even a 737, is about 100x more complex than the most advanced drone. This is because drones are unmanned and airliners are not and their design and systems reflect that. Your plan, apparently, is for an ATC to take over the flight. Our ATC system has no capability to remotely control an aircraft.

So aside from no system to control the plane, and no planes that are capable of being remotely flown I suppose it is feasible, in about 20 years after a congressional mandate. (We cannot even get collision avoidance systems on passenger trains done on time).

Flight 93, hmmmm. Two F 16s were in fact scrambled, but they never made contact with flight 93. Why? NORAD wasn't notified of flight 93 until after it crashed. Newark to Cleveland, turns around and gets all the way to PA and passengers have to take matters in their own hands.

While it might seem simple to do, it isn't because of the simple fact that airliners are not designed or built to fly remotely. Just because the military has designed and built aircraft to fly remotely doesn't change that simple fact.

I think your idea will become a reality if, and when, we see commercial flight go from a piloted to an automated model, and to my knowledge, that isn't even on the radar screen.

[Travis In Austin]

We are a way off from remote control passenger flights, but getting your Domino's pizza delivered by drone may be just around the corner.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/google-reveals-delivery-drone-project-1409274480

On C-span today Google was testifying before Congress, complaining that the approval process for commercial drones is too slow, apparently the waiver they finally obtained is for a drone that is already obsolete because of their new and improved drone.

[cradeldorf]

I'll just stay on the ground, I'm okay with that.