system

Another reason to avoid ADS-B.

1 reply

system

I don’t think Boeing’s customers have the option to avoid ADS-B airspace, and I doubt they would try.

system

If Aerion has the ability to monitor such data for Boeing, why not transmit the “black box” data to the cloud to assist in faster accident analysis when a plane crashes? No more frantic searches for the boxes that delays the process.

1 reply

system

The problem is data rates. Black boxes monitor a lot more than ADS-B does.

But I agree that it would be smart to head in that direction. Most commercial flights have in flight wifi, so there is data capacity there.

3 replies

system

Mumbo jumbo - what is Boeing actually trying to say?

system

Technically SATCOM for ‘space based’, not WiFi which is very short range used only for distribution within cabin.

Regular ADS-B is in between for range.

system

Depends on what data is a priority.

Location data does not take much bandwidth, in 1994 767 engine monitoring data was transmitted from mid-Atlantic deep into the US via 1200bps HFDL.

(Beware that not all SATCOM covers all of the earth. Iridium claims to but pass period seems long to me (it has had some satellite-to-satellite passover but that may have changed with new sats). Geostationary SATCOM is usually in ‘spot beams’ aimed at areas of high demand, so does not cover polar areas. The US government contracted for half of Iridium’s capacity for such reasons (for other than Secret information).

system

@Terry C. I agree that the total data from a flight recorder is much larger than ADS-B, but there are ways to make it possible. For instance, burst packets of data when any monitored parameter changes significantly, otherwise just retain it in the FDR. Accident investigators are usually only interested in the data leading up to the crash anyway. The data packet could contain just those parameters that had changed, reducing the need for bandwidth.