And in 1990, my AOL Internet browsing bill was $75 one month, at 1200 baud. Think how expensive it would be to download one HD porn video at those prices. Therefore, online porn doesn’t exist.
Who said anything about online porn? But in 1990, you weren’t downloading porn via Inmarsat. Probably still aren’t. I’d hate to see that bill.
Updating a terrestrial wired phone line to follow technology advances and market demand is vastly simpler and cheaper than updating satellite-based communications. When your local phone company rolled out DSL service some 20 years ago, it primarily involved bolting something called a DSLAM into the rack at the switching office and mailing you a DSL modem.
Want to update satellite service? Start building a satellite and find someone to lob it up into space. Cross your fingers the launch doesn’t explode as they do every so often, and that the satellite safely gets to its proper orbit. Assuming a ten year useful life before you need to upgrade, it’s around $32 million per year per satelliteto build, launch, operate, and insure one. This works out to $60 per hour, so you’d best get cracking to sell the service.
I think you meant about $3,600 per hour per satellite if I read that correctly. $60 an hour wouldn’t be that bad.
I always thought it was a reference to a “Black Box” in the engineering sense, which refers to a device that you do not know the inner workings of. You put flower, eggs, and yeast in and bread comes out. What happens in between? Dunno.
Similarly, the Black Box on an airplane is inaccessible to the crew (so they can’t tamper with it), so the specific inner workings would similarly be a mystery.
No argument from me there. I was just using the 1200-baud-in-1990 vs. today example to show how, if you say speeds are too slow and costs too prohibitive, it only proves you aren’t looking forward to the obvious.
IIRC, US Navy SSBNs do indeed carry this type of “We’re doomed” buoys.
How about a “Smart” mount for the recorders?
A water sensor on the mount could detect that it was submerged - require a minimum water pressure equivalent to 500’ below surface to activated. This wold avoid jettisoning the boxes because of a snow bank or rain.
If the “We’re under some serious water” switch is tripped, the now-buoyant boxes are jettisoned by small pyro devices.
The boxes are also tethered to a spool of fishing line which plays out only under certain strain - the recorder heading for the surface will play it out, but surface tides would not be powerful enough to pull it out.
Yes, if there is a storm, the line might well be played out.
But make the line strong enough that the box remains connected to the wreckage under 90% of the cases.
The other 10%, it id better to have the boxes than the wreckage. And tidal analysis could maybe walk back even those 10% to the point of origin.
Another 10 years, and there will be satellite imaging of everything.
I suspect that certain high-resolution spy satellites can already provide such info, but the owners do not care to admit to having that level of observation.
Wouldn’t be the first time a government allowed a “Bad Thing” ™ to happen rather than acknowledge their intel assets.
Sounds fantastic. How much money ya got?
That’s one theory, but like many things, the actual origin of the term isn’t known for certain. Here’s wikipedia’s take on it:
[QUOTE=wikipedia]
The origin of the term “black box” is uncertain. In a systems engineering context (since the 1960s when the term was spreading), the meaning is that the aircraft is modeled as a black box, and its behaviour can be understood from its recorded inputs, such as pilot instructions, and outputs, such as flight level data.[citation needed]
The term “black box” is almost never used within the flight safety industry or aviation, which prefers the term “flight recorder”.[citation needed] The recorders are not permitted to be black in color, and must be bright orange, as they are intended to be spotted and recovered after incidents.[14] The term black box has been popularised by the media in general.[citation needed]
One explanation for popularization of the term “black box” comes from the early film-based design of flight data recorders, which required the inside of the recorder to be perfectly dark to prevent light leaks from corrupting the record, as in a photographer’s darkroom.[15][16]
Another explanation of the “black box” term popularization came from a meeting about Warren’s “Red Egg”, when afterwards a journalist told Warren: “This is a wonderful black box.”[citation needed] The unit itself was based on an EMI Minifon wire recorder (originally a 1950s espionage gadget from the West-German manufacturer Protona Monske) fitted into a perspex box firmly screwed together.[citation needed]
Another possible origin of the term is World War II RAF jargon. Prior to the end of the war in 1945, new electronic innovations, such as Oboe, GEE and H2S, were added to bombers on a regular basis. The prototypes were roughly covered in hand-made metal boxes, painted black to prevent reflections. After a time any piece of “new” electronics was referred to as the “box-of-tricks” (as illusionist box) or the “black box”.[17]
The first recorded use of the term “black box” in reference to flight data recorders and cockpit voice recorders was by Mr E. Newton of the AAIB at a meeting of the Aeronautical Research Council in August 1958.[18]
[/QUOTE]
IMHO a small fairing (or extension) at the tip of the vertical stabilizer would make an ideal location for a detachable FDR, compared to retrofitting ejection thingamabobs into the fuselage of existing airframes it would be a much simpler solution.
Wouldn’t even have to be detachable, on most crashes the vertical stabilizer breaks off without suffering too much damage, at least relative to other parts of the airframe anyway, for example on Air France’s flight 447 the stabilizer was found floating practically intact and IIRC was the only large part of the aircraft recovered.
Wouldn’t a small floating object be harder to find? The waves are going to carry it long distances.
Seems like an object on the bottom would stay in the vicinity of the crash
What about carrying 2 FDRs and 2 CVRs?
One FDR+CVR combination would float. The other would be designed to sink with the aircraft.
The floating ones would be more survivable, but the sinking ones would be with the airplane wreckage and so wouldn’t be taken by fishermen or wouldn’t float hundreds of miles away from the search area.