| Author |
Message |
JJ
Guest
|
 Posted:
Thu Sep 15, 2005 8:02 am Post subject:
Re: Taking back control of the flight computer ? |
|
|
Del Cecchi wrote:
| Quote: | Robert Myers wrote:
Skybuck Flying wrote:
Let's stop the bullshit and get serious.
What can seriously done to get control back of the plane ?
If the answer is: we dont know, then all planes on this planet are in
serious trouble !
Time for a wake up call.
Okay. Here's a serious answer. If the DoD/NASA/FAA/DHS haven't
convened classified panels to look at this issue, I'd be amazed.
If I had a good idea, believe me, I wouldn't be blathering it around
here.
If someone is in a position to know what's been done, they're not in a
position to talk about it.
Now, the amazing thing is that no one had thought the scenario through
before 9/11, but they hadn't. If the government hasn't thought it
through by now and taken steps to address the issue, we're in deep
trouble.
If you think you've got a great idea, maybe you can get someone at
DARPA or DHS to give you a hearing.
RM
The next time someone tries it they will be beaten to death by the
passengers. The cockpit doors are reinforced and the passengers will
never again sit dociley by, believing promises of no harm if they
co-operate and allow negotiations. See flight 93. Likewise, the pilots
will not co-operate and will land at the first opportunity.
del cecchi
|
Yeh I hope that happens too, but what if Fred (1,2..) is a converted
anglo like the jerk just shown on TV?, gives them another edge.
Myself, I'd basically start checking out all the Freds that visit
certain countries and attended certain "schools of lower education" who
are supposed to be getting kicked out by end of this year.
JJ
| Quote: | --
Del Cecchi
"This post is my own and doesn't necessarily represent IBM's positions,
strategies or opinions." |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Pooh Bear
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Sep 15, 2005 8:07 am Post subject:
Re: Taking back control of the flight computer ? |
|
|
Ken Smith wrote:
| Quote: | In article <1126724092.026776.151640@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
Robert Myers <rbmyersusa@gmail.com> wrote:
[...]
Now, the amazing thing is that no one had thought the scenario through
before 9/11, but they hadn't.
At least one person had thought it through.
|
Are you thinking of the security guy at Morgan Stanley ?
Graham |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pooh Bear
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Sep 15, 2005 8:12 am Post subject:
Re: Taking back control of the flight computer ? |
|
|
Skybuck Flying wrote:
| Quote: | Well I think the following could be done:
The airplane contains emergency buttons everywhere.
As soon as these buttons are pressed the nearest air traffic control center
is notified.
The airplane immediatly enters into auto pilot and sets heading for the
nearest airfield etc and simply lands there.
|
You clearly don't understand much about how aircraft systems work. Such an idea
can only even remotely be contemplated on an all fly-by-wire aircraft. That
means most Airbus models and the 777 IIRC. Even then it's a huge task with many
practical pitfalls.
So - potential terrorists simply have to hijack an airliner that's not fbw.
Simpler to keep hijackers out of the cockpit really. Low tech ( a strong door )
wins .
Graham |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Michael A. Terrell
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Sep 15, 2005 8:15 am Post subject:
Re: Taking back control of the flight computer ? |
|
|
Ken Smith wrote:
| Quote: |
The FFA may be the right people to
address the issue but they make continental drift look fast.
|
The "Future Farmers of America"?
--
?
Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Michael A. Terrell
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Sep 15, 2005 8:15 am Post subject:
Re: Taking back control of the flight computer ? |
|
|
Pooh Bear wrote:
| Quote: |
You clearly don't understand much about how aircraft systems work. Such an idea
can only even remotely be contemplated on an all fly-by-wire aircraft. That
means most Airbus models and the 777 IIRC. Even then it's a huge task with many
practical pitfalls.
So - potential terrorists simply have to hijack an airliner that's not fbw.
Simpler to keep hijackers out of the cockpit really. Low tech ( a strong door )
wins .
Graham
|
A trap door would be even better. Let one of the pilots push the
button to blow them out the bottom of the plane, and to their deaths.
Then close the trap door. ;-)
--
?
Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pooh Bear
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Sep 15, 2005 8:15 am Post subject:
Re: Taking back control of the flight computer ? |
|
|
JJ wrote:
| Quote: | Del Cecchi wrote:
The next time someone tries it they will be beaten to death by the
passengers. The cockpit doors are reinforced and the passengers will
never again sit dociley by, believing promises of no harm if they
co-operate and allow negotiations. See flight 93. Likewise, the pilots
will not co-operate and will land at the first opportunity.
del cecchi
Yeh I hope that happens too, but what if Fred (1,2..) is a converted
anglo like the jerk just shown on TV?, gives them another edge.
|
Who's Fred ?
| Quote: | Myself, I'd basically start checking out all the Freds that visit
certain countries and attended certain "schools of lower education" who
are supposed to be getting kicked out by end of this year.
|
What is 'checking them out' supposed to achieve ?
Graham |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pooh Bear
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Sep 15, 2005 8:15 am Post subject:
Re: Taking back control of the flight computer ? |
|
|
Ken Smith wrote:
| Quote: | In article <1126731334.818926.221680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
Sean Kelly <sean@f4.ca> wrote:
[...]
This sounds like a complex answer to a simple problem. Plus, it
presents the opportunity for hackers to take control of airplanes from
a secure location. Gives a whole new meaning to the term "fly by wire"
The system can be all contained on the aircraft. It only needs GPS or the
like to know where it is. The software contains a map of the world. If
there isn't an airport marked at this location, you can't go below 3000
feet.
|
Or whatever the local mountain range reaches up to.
That kind of simple assertion illustrates nicely why such a system is in fact
very very complicated yet with no realistic likelihood of ever being required
!
In other words - no-one's going to do it.
Graham |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Terje Mathisen
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Sep 15, 2005 8:15 am Post subject:
Re: Taking back control of the flight computer ? |
|
|
Ken Smith wrote:
| Quote: | In article <1126731334.818926.221680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
Sean Kelly <sean@f4.ca> wrote:
[...]
This sounds like a complex answer to a simple problem. Plus, it
presents the opportunity for hackers to take control of airplanes from
a secure location. Gives a whole new meaning to the term "fly by wire"
The system can be all contained on the aircraft. It only needs GPS or the
like to know where it is. The software contains a map of the world. If
there isn't an airport marked at this location, you can't go below 3000
feet.
|
Welcome to news:comp.risks
Let's assume we have a critical situation, the pilots are foced to
attempt a (dead-stick?) landing in the nearest flat piece of land, and
the hw takes over and foils them during their only possible attempt.
Or, what about skyscrapers in Denver, Mexico City or some other
high-altitude location.
The proper response to 9/11 style hijackings were discovered within an
hour: It is better for both crew and passenger to die trying to
kill/subdue the hijackers than to die flying into a target.
Terje
--
- <Terje.Mathisen@hda.hydro.com>
"almost all programming can be viewed as an exercise in caching" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ken Smith
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Sep 15, 2005 2:07 pm Post subject:
Re: Taking back control of the flight computer ? |
|
|
In article <4328E895.F1981895@hotmail.com>,
Pooh Bear <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
Ken Smith wrote:
In article <1126731334.818926.221680@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
Sean Kelly <sean@f4.ca> wrote:
[...]
This sounds like a complex answer to a simple problem. Plus, it
presents the opportunity for hackers to take control of airplanes from
a secure location. Gives a whole new meaning to the term "fly by wire"
The system can be all contained on the aircraft. It only needs GPS or the
like to know where it is. The software contains a map of the world. If
there isn't an airport marked at this location, you can't go below 3000
feet.
Or whatever the local mountain range reaches up to.
|
You are assuming absolute altitude. You don't have to include that to
keep most of the large buildings in the world safe. This was the goal.
If the aircraft has a radar altimeter, the 3000 feet could be the height
above the surface thus keeping all buildings currently in existance safe.
| Quote: | That kind of simple assertion illustrates nicely why such a system is in fact
very very complicated yet with no realistic likelihood of ever being required
|
A map of the surface of the earth with fairly low resolution does not take
very much memory. It is not as you say "very very complicated" even if
the map has to be used for the altitude information, which chances are it
would not.
--
--
kensmith@rahul.net forging knowledge |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ken Smith
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Sep 15, 2005 2:13 pm Post subject:
Re: Taking back control of the flight computer ? |
|
|
In article <dgb474$es4$1@osl016lin.hda.hydro.com>,
Terje Mathisen <terje.mathisen@hda.hydro.com> wrote:
[...]
| Quote: | Welcome to news:comp.risks
Let's assume we have a critical situation, the pilots are foced to
attempt a (dead-stick?) landing in the nearest flat piece of land, and
the hw takes over and foils them during their only possible attempt.
|
If that happens everybody dies. No-one has ever landed an airliner in "a
flat piece of land" and it is very-very unlikely in future.
Airbus already includes systems on the aircraft that override the pilots
inputs in some situations. These systems are judged to save more lives
than they kill and thus are an improvement in safety.
| Quote: | Or, what about skyscrapers in Denver, Mexico City or some other
high-altitude location.
|
Ever hear of a radar altimeter?
| Quote: | The proper response to 9/11 style hijackings were discovered within an
hour: It is better for both crew and passenger to die trying to
kill/subdue the hijackers than to die flying into a target.
|
No, it is better to not let the hijacking happen in the first place.
--
--
kensmith@rahul.net forging knowledge |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ken Smith
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Sep 15, 2005 2:13 pm Post subject:
Re: Taking back control of the flight computer ? |
|
|
In article <4328E558.28F6C2DD@hotmail.com>,
Pooh Bear <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
Ken Smith wrote:
In article <1126724092.026776.151640@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
Robert Myers <rbmyersusa@gmail.com> wrote:
[...]
Now, the amazing thing is that no one had thought the scenario through
before 9/11, but they hadn't.
At least one person had thought it through.
Are you thinking of the security guy at Morgan Stanley ?
|
That makes it at least two.
--
--
kensmith@rahul.net forging knowledge |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ken Smith
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Sep 15, 2005 2:16 pm Post subject:
Re: Taking back control of the flight computer ? |
|
|
In article <432904E3.3E7B2F4B@earthlink.net>,
Michael A. Terrell <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote:
| Quote: | Ken Smith wrote:
The FFA may be the right people to
address the issue but they make continental drift look fast.
The "Future Farmers of America"?
|
Hummm yes maybe I typed the right answer by mistake. I meant the FAA but
perhaps placing a trained pig at the front of the aircraft would help a
lot.
--
--
kensmith@rahul.net forging knowledge |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bernd Paysan
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Sep 15, 2005 2:31 pm Post subject:
Re: Taking back control of the flight computer ? |
|
|
Robert Myers wrote:
| Quote: | Now, the amazing thing is that no one had thought the scenario through
before 9/11, but they hadn't.
|
I don't believe that. Actually, there was even an X-file sequel around that
was talking about some black helicopter types taking planes to hit the WTC
towers. Agend Mulder prevented this beforehand, but it's quite obvious that
people did think about that scenario. At least people in Hollywood.
Also remember that Spiderman used a giant spider net on WTC to catch a
helicopter which was trying to fly into the towers. This szene was removed
from the Spiderman movie (made in 2001). The Spiderman comics were 1970s or
1980s stuff.
--
Bernd Paysan
"If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself"
http://www.jwdt.com/~paysan/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bernd Paysan
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Sep 15, 2005 2:35 pm Post subject:
Re: Taking back control of the flight computer ? |
|
|
Pooh Bear wrote:
| Quote: | Simpler to keep hijackers out of the cockpit really. Low tech ( a strong
door ) wins .
|
We already have more than 100 people killed by this strong door. A few
weeks, a machine from Helios crashedn near Athens, because the pilots lost
conciousness (low pressure), and it took too long to enter the cockpit to
land the plane.
--
Bernd Paysan
"If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself"
http://www.jwdt.com/~paysan/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Casper H.S. Dik
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Sep 15, 2005 3:11 pm Post subject:
Re: Taking back control of the flight computer ? |
|
|
Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> writes:
| Quote: | Robert Myers wrote:
Now, the amazing thing is that no one had thought the scenario through
before 9/11, but they hadn't.
I don't believe that. Actually, there was even an X-file sequel around that
was talking about some black helicopter types taking planes to hit the WTC
towers. Agend Mulder prevented this beforehand, but it's quite obvious that
people did think about that scenario. At least people in Hollywood.
Also remember that Spiderman used a giant spider net on WTC to catch a
helicopter which was trying to fly into the towers. This szene was removed
from the Spiderman movie (made in 2001). The Spiderman comics were 1970s or
1980s stuff.
|
Qoute:
"Tom Clancy wrote two bestselling thrillers about a pilot deliberately
flying a fuel-laden jet into the Capitol building and killing the
President and top leadership (Debt of Honor , 1994; Executive Orders,
1996)."
from
http://www.public-action.com/911/clancy.html
(For the rest it looks a conspiracy website, but I have no doubts about the
accuracy of the references to Tom Clancy's books)
The risk of remotely controlled airplanes is great; even with extremely good
security, only one inside person could possibly crash dozens of planes whereas
an insider pilot can only crash one. (cf. Egypt Air) Presumably, the aircraft
remote control center would require only a few staff idling most of the time,
giving rise to boredom and lack of concentration, opening ample opportunity for
infiltration. Not allowing planes to go to certain locations or below certain
altitudes would seem to be both risky and not possible: it's not impossible
to make an airplane disintegrate from the flightdeck (fully extending the
tailrudder at speed, at altitude, will likely cause the tail to come of;
starting a steep dive which cannot be recovered is another possibility)
I'd agree with the assesment that not losing the flightdeck is the most
important new safety measure; and 9/11 has changed the passenger dynamics
sufficiently to make this a one-off.
Casper
--
Expressed in this posting are my opinions. They are in no way related
to opinions held by my employer, Sun Microsystems.
Statements on Sun products included here are not gospel and may
be fiction rather than truth. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in