 h a l f b a k e r y Where life imitates science.
idea:
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, best, random
meta:
news, help, about, links, report a problem
account:
Browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
or Create a new account.
|
|
|
The first part of this solution involves a "persistent" wireless
network that keeps all planes in the air in constant contact
with a centralized, international "ground station" that
monitors all of the "vital signs" of an aircraft. There is no
longer the need for a "black box" because the same
data is
being transmitted via satellite or wireless connection to the
ground station, where the data is constantly being
monitored,
recorded, and archived.
When something goes awry, either an engine failure, fire, or
deviation from the planned flight route, the ground station
alerts all relevant parties, who can then access the planes
data and voice.
All planes are required to have microphones and small video
cameras embedded throughout the aircraft, not only the
cockpit, but in the passenger area, bathrooms, even the
cargo
area, and the outside of the plane, so the whole condition
of
the aircraft can be inspected - if a fin isn't responding
properly they can see it on a monitor.
Cameras and microphones in the cockpit can NEVER be
turned
off. They are not optional - they are ALWAYS ON and
accessible. The cameras and microphones can be hidden in
several places, behind instruments in the panels, in the air
conditioning, etc...
Larger aircraft (or perhaps ALL aircraft) are equipped with a
re-designed cockpit which looks and operates as cockpits
do
today, but are retro-fitted in such a way that every knob,
dial,
lever, etc... is not "hard-wired" directly to the planes
controls but
rather is routed to a "central control unit" elsewhere in the
aircraft. Under normal conditions, the CCU simply relays the
cockpit controls to the various aircraft systems.
In situations where the crew becomes unable to control
the
aircraft, either because of a fire, a heart attack, or a
hijacking, the central ground station is alerted where pilots
trained in emergency manouvers are on standby - and have
access to one of many "cockpit simulators".
These simulators can be set to take over complete control
of
the aircraft. In order to work effectively, there must be a
extremely reliable wireless network made up of satellite and
ground transponders that are capable of relaying vast
amounts
of data in real-time between the central ground station and
the aircraft. High-definition 3-D video cameras at the front
of
the
aircraft capture a panoramic, three-dimensional view that is
as good as or
better
than the view from the cockpit.
The pilot at the ground station must see exactly what the
pilot of the aircraft would see. All the knobs, dials guages,
and levers on the ground station cocpit must be motorized
to
match exactly what is in the aircraft. Signals sent from the
ground station cocpit controls are relayed directly to the
CCU
on the aircraft, overriding the aircraft's cockpit. The
pilot at gound station can then operate as though they
were
in the aircraft itself and guide it to safety.
A security team at ground control can monitor the
conditions
in the remainder of the aircraft and take control of
situations
they may put peoples lives in danger. In a hijacking
situation,
since they can no longer control the aircraft they can
threaten the lives of the passengers with weapons or
bombs.
The simplest solution may be for ground control to trigger a
switch which releases a sedative gas into the aircraft that
simply puts everyone to sleep, or safely immobilizes them
long
enough to get the plane returned to a safe place.
There would inevitably be a 2 or 3 second time lag
between the ground control and the aircraft, and the
pilot on thr ground would have to be specially trained to
accomodate this time lag. Improved wireltss networking
technology and digital signal processing might help to
reduce this delay, and if there were enough "central
controls" around the world we could overcome the
sluggish speed of light as well. [link]
|
| |
I see parts of this idea were already suggested in the
"Virtual Black Box", "Aeroplane Hijack button", "Aircraft
NOS Button". |
|
| |
- A potential security risk is there if a terrorist
somehow
managed to hack into this network and seize control of a
plane - which underlines the need for a very secure
network when we're talking about operating a 767 by
remote control. |
|
| |
Why get rid of the black box? I think the black box
should be better and include its own transponder that
can not be turned off... so air traffic controllers always
know where the plane is, and so they can find the black
box after a crash more quickly. |
|
| |
I heard an eyewitness account from a passenger on a flight from Los Angeles to the East Coast (U.S.) this past weekend. The entire flight was silent, and anyone rising to visit the restroom was watched closely. When a man with Middle Eastern features got up to answer nature's call, reportedly every healthy adult male stood up. |
|
| |
I think this already exists and is called "Home Run" courtesy of DARPA.
http://www.geocities.com/mknemesis/homerun.html |
|
| |
[admin] or [Dr_whatever]: The link in that annotation is screwing the page up. It should get moved to 'link.' Poster: you should be able to do this your self by clicking on 'edit' under your anno. |
|
| |
doctor - use the link button under the idea. |
|
| |
As for the idea, the parts that havent been baked or halfbaked. Cameras everywhere are a good idea, apart from the bathroom. Remote control would be difficult to the point of infeasibility, though useful in the event of cabin crew being unable to control the plane. So overall I'm going to say (+). |
|
| |
//A potential security risk is there if a terrorist somehow managed to hack into this network and seize control of a plane// |
|
| |
Or _all_ the planes. There'd be no way to turn the system off until every plane had diverted and landed safely. If the terrorists hacked the network, they'd have a weapons system to make 9-11 look like ... like what 9-11 made of the first WTC bombing. |
|
| |
I'm not in favor of remote control, nor am I in favor of reinforced cockpit doors. A terrorist-recruited pilot could just wait till the co-pilot was taking a leak and lock the door. |
|
| |
I'm also not in favor of armed aircrews for the same reason that correctional institutions and police interrogation rooms don't allow guns. |
|
| |
If anything, they could increase the number of air marshals (preferably unarmed) and bring back the third seat which would be randomly staffed. |
|
| |
But software bugs are so rare. |
|
| |