Why is data in the flight recorder not available in real time when it could prevent 70% of fatal air crashes?

Question

911 and its relationship to the golfer Payne Stewart and 2005 (100+ fatality) Helios decompression crashes
Submitted by sy levine on Sun, 2007-02-25 09:04. aviation and aerospace
At first look it isn't obvious that the Payne Stewart(golfer)/ Helios(2005 - 100+fatality) decompression crashes and 911 are related but from a aviation safety and security system view they are:

When a plane substantially deviates from its approved flight plan it is presently possible to have a remote pilot located in a secure simulator fly the plane to a safe landing at a remotely populated airfield. Over 70% of all fatal air crashes occurrences are readily preventable if handled correctly.

Unfortunately, the data needed to accomplish this is locked up in the flight recorder and is utilized predominately in an autopsy mode. If the data is so important that it is necessary to discover the cause of a fatal crash it is much more important to prevent a fatal crash. Yet because of the aviation industry's partnership with the FAA and NTSB none of the flight data coming out of the recorders is available in real-time to proactively prevent fatal crashes. The inability to use the flight data in real time has jeopardized the safety and security of the traveling public and the nation. The astronauts were guided back from the moon because the data was telemetered to the ground in real-time. Once it got to the ground it was analyzed, and then via a concerted effort by experts, using simulations the proper and safe way to handle life threatening situation was accomplished. Yet this proven technique isn't utilized by the industrial/government partnership to keep our nation and air-passengers safe and secure.

One year prior to 911, I was the guest speaker at the International Aviation Safety Association meeting in NY where I spoke on how terrorists and decompression fatal crashes are preventable via remote control of a deviating aircraft using ciphered technology developed for our ballistic missiles. This technology can prevent most aviation crashes (approximately 70%) even those from mechanical problems and errors of commission and omission. At present a pilot has displayed only a fraction of the information necessary to make the right decision to prevent a crash. The pilot in many instances is seeing a problem for the first time. The aircraft data and air traffic control data isn't shared extensively so experts on handling the aircraft's problem aren’t consulted nor can the problem be simulated to aid in crash prevention. This data vacuum is responsible for most fatal crashes. For example, the Swiss Air and Alaskan Air fatal crashes could have been prevented if handled correctly.

In addition it is not only terrorists that sabotage aircraft. Commercial and Military pilots have also done it. When a pilot deviates substantially from the approved flight plan the aircraft should be safely remote piloted to a landing at a sparsely populated airport. Several years ago a rogue military pilot substantially deviated from his approved Continental United States (CONUS) flight plan and flew an A-10 aircraft loaded with bombs clandestinely across multiple states. It took two weeks to find the plane which had crashed into a Colorado mountain. The plane was eventually found but the bombs are still missing. Exhaustive searches were made but no one has a clew as to what happened to the bombs. Must we wait for a bigger disaster than 911 before any action takes place?

Everyone knowledgeable about the holes in our aviation system, brought about by the industrial government partnership, knew that a 911 could occur and the government allowed it to occur. Even though we knew about Payne Stewart nothing was done and so we got Helios' 100 + deaths. Presently we are just as vulnerable to a 911 disaster, decompression disaster, ... etc. as we were in 2001. The public needs to know the system is fixable for the good of our nation. Even though 3000 people died needlessly on 911 the system doesn't fix the data vacuum mode of operation. It works around the system with attempted patches that are costly and ineffective fixes simply to protect the industry from liability suits. The necessary data is only available in the tombstone/autopsy mode. With all of the deaths that were preventable not a single FAA or NTSB person was even laid-off. Thus, the industry won out and the public and nation suffered. It is quite possible that we went into an unnecessary and horrible war just because we protected the special interest of the aviation industry. The cost of those disasters alone would have been a small fraction of the cost necessary to fix the system and we would now have a safer and securer nation. Instead, things are the same and we are vulnerable.

If you should need more info on this please don't hesitate to contact me (you can see some of my work by going to Google and doing a search on "aviation security, safety and sy levine" or go to my web site www.safelander.com. My work was also featured on the BBC show called "The Black Box". There is simply no reason, technical, cost or data privacy wise" for not using the Black Box Data in real-time, in addition to its autopsy mode, to make our nation safer and securer. The fear of liability, via law suits, should not stand in the way of the airline passenger safety, the safety of people on the ground, or our national security. It is imperative that the traveling public write to the President, their Congressional Representatives, the DOT, FAA and NTSB and demand that the Black Box data be available and utilized in real-time for the security of our nation and to substantially reduce fatal crashes.

Sincerely,
Sy Levine
[e-mail]

Answer 1

The only thing the flying public cares about is low fares and decent service, if they can get it. That's why Southwest is so successful.

How much will it cost to monitor a gajillion flights 24 hours a day? Who's going to pay? The passengers? No. The airlines? The government? The taxpayers? Donations? NO!

The planes are so advanced now that if something goes wrong, the plane will try to fix itself, often without the flight crews knowledge. When the crew is alerted of a fault, they are trained to handle it, if the need help, there's a manual on board that tells them exactly what to do. If they need more help, they can call their company, where there is someone on watch for this specific reason. They are not in a vacuum.

Flight crews are highly trained but sometime arrogance, personal problems or whatever get in the way of making the right decision.

The Helios crash was the result of a mechanic who put the outflow valve switch in the wrong position, the flight crew didn't check it, had problems comunicating with each other and misinterped the warning signal as a takeoff config warning.

Alaska crash was the result of a bad decision to continue after the problem was discovered.

The Swiss air crash was the result of a fire caused by the in flight entertainment system, so now the IFE can be turned off and there is a smoke evacuation handle in the cockpit.

Info is available through the CMC an can be sent by the flight crew but it's only a "snapshot" not realtime.

I agree with you on the many holes in the commercial avation industry and security, I see it every day. I would like to see something done about it but at what cost? Armed air marshals standing gaurd outside the cockpit door? "Mission control" for each flight? Banks of remote cockpits?

Most of the crashes could have been avoided by making a more cautious decision instead of trying to make an ontime departure or arrival.

How about something easier, like At least one flightcrew member in the cockpit has to wear an o2 mask at all times? Any anomoly has to be reported to their company's maintanence watch as soon as it happens, even though it is easily and quickly resolved.

The aviation industry is very slow to adapt new ideas and nothing will change until something catastrophic happens. It's all very sad.

Answer 2

Where in heck do you get your statistics?
Some say that 73.65% of all statistics are made up on the spot.
The Black Box is a data RECORDER. By definition, using it could not possibly be in real time, since you are referencing something that has already happened.
What would all this cost the taxpayers anyway? Maybe you can write another article on that.

By the way is this the International Aviation Safety Association, you speak of?
http://www.iasa.com.au/folders/menu/intro-1.htm
It looks like a memorial to a passenger who died in a plane crash - unfortunate, but this is hardly a major industry organization.

Answer 3

While the taking control from the ground is fraut with danger due to hacking and the like.

However, I don't understand why in this day and age that aircraft don't relay their telemetry to the ground via satellite or radio? It would seem that in the event of a crash and the loss of the recorders, that there would still be a record of what happened.

Also, the recorders on board only record the last 30 minutes. A ground based system could record the whole flight.

Answer 4

The purpose of the Flight Recorder is to ensure that, in the event of an accident the investigators are able to find out what was happening at the time of the accident.

The word recorder means exactly that. A Record.

I take it there is a purpose to your question other than to promote your own particular agenda.

Answer 5

Telemetry just tells you what is happening in real time. It doesn't let you do anything about it.

The moon mission analogy is flawed. They had plenty of time. Aircraft going down don't. They can't wait for data to be analysed and recommendations sent back (like "pull up", maybe?).

Answer 6

The Payne Stuart crash might have been a CO problem from dry ice in the cabin, not depressurization.

Answer 7

FDR data wouldnt prevent anything...I'm not even going to bother reading your entire question, but if it would make that kind of a difference we'd do it.

Answer 8

Take your meds and get back in bed. Your mom needs the computer Skippy.

Answer 9

why dont u write a book...oh u did...