Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Malaysia Air Is First Airline to Track Fleet With Satellites (bloomberg.com)

Posted by msmash on from the new-feats dept.

From a report: Malaysia Air, which lost a wide-body jet with 239 people aboard three years ago in one of history's most enduring aviation mysteries, has become the first airline to sign an agreement for space-based flight tracking of its aircraft. The subsidiary of Malaysian Airline System Bhd reached a deal with Aireon LLC, SITAONAIR and FlightAware LLC to enable it to monitor the flight paths of its aircraft anywhere in the world including over the polar regions and the most remote oceans, according to an emailed press release from Aireon. Aireon is launching a new satellite network with Iridium Communications Inc. that will allow it to monitor air traffic around the globe. It's projected to be completed in 2018. Most international flights are already transmitting their position with technology known as ADS-B and the signals can be tracked from the ground or space. The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration has already installed a ground-based tracking system for ADS-B. "Real-time global aircraft tracking has long been a goal of the aviation community," Malaysia Chief Operating Officer Izham Ismail said in the release. "We are proud to be the first airline to adopt this solution."

70 comments

  1. What good is satellite tracking... by DatbeDank · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    If the CIA can down an aircraft like MH370?

    1. Re: What good is satellite tracking... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least you can find it. That's worth something.

    2. Re:What good is satellite tracking... by DickBreath · · Score: 2

      What good? To have some idea of where it actually went down. Or at the very least, to know when and where it was last heard from. Then the pieces can be found. It may be possible to determine why it went down.

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    3. Re:What good is satellite tracking... by fisted · · Score: 1

      I didn't RTFA, but TFS sure sounds as if the aircraft is transmitting its position to satellites instead of to ground receivers.

      I.e. it's something that can be turned off.

      "Tracking" my ass.

      --
      CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
    4. Re: What good is satellite tracking... by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Not if the crew can still pull the circuit breaker for the transponder.

      --
      http://michaelsmith.id.au
    5. Re:What good is satellite tracking... by Wootery · · Score: 1

      Huh. Surprised to see you didn't post as AC. Nonsense that stupid is rarely something anyone wants to own.

    6. Re:What good is satellite tracking... by DickBreath · · Score: 1

      Yes, Iridium would mean satellites. So position can be tracked globally, even in the middle of the ocean as long as (1) aircraft can still transmit, and (2) aircraft still knows its position by either GPS or other means.

      If position transmission can be turned off, you at least know when and where it was turned off. Knowing how much fuel was aboard at that point, gives you a radius of where the aircraft could be -- which might not be that helpful.

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
  2. Surprised that this wasn't already being done by spiritplumber · · Score: 1

    Surprised that this wasn't already being done given that a basic sat tracker costs $100 or so.

    --
    Liberty - Security - Laziness - Pick any two.
    1. Re:Surprised that this wasn't already being done by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The plane knows where it is. Isn't the problem sending that info back to home base?

    2. Re:Surprised that this wasn't already being done by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Love it when someone compares unreliable low end consumer tech (that doesn't even fully provide the functions needed for an application) with something that has to be bullet proof and work reliably 100% of the time at a professional level.

    3. Re:Surprised that this wasn't already being done by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

      "Low end"? Any port in a storm ... bitch. Go blojob another byteboi and shaddup!

    4. Re:Surprised that this wasn't already being done by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's an App for that: Find My iPlane.

    5. Re:Surprised that this wasn't already being done by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      The plane knows where it is.

      And so does the MH17 missile!

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    6. Re: Surprised that this wasn't already being done by guruevi · · Score: 2

      That is indeed the problem. In itself not a huge problem except for the continuous cost.

      You need a reasonable uplink to a satellite or barring that a huge radio transmitter and global network of receivers. 100Kbps may not seem like a lot but having hundreds of planes across the world sending it to space, aggregating the streams across several continents and saving the telemetry is not simple. In emergency situations you maybe want the system to send significantly more data.

      And even then, the benefit will be minimal. We may end up knowing where the plane went down but that doesn't bring it back or makes it easy to find and recover from the bottom of the Mariana Trench. It takes days for boats to get out to some locations of the world.

      There are many things in an airplane that are done for cost mitigation. There is no room for oxygen tanks in planes, any high-altitude issue allows only a few minutes of oxygen nor will you have sufficient food and water for a mid-ocean crash.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    7. Re:Surprised that this wasn't already being done by spiritplumber · · Score: 1

      I meant something like the FindMeSpot, which has global coverage, updates every 5 minutes or so, and costs $100 a year.

      --
      Liberty - Security - Laziness - Pick any two.
    8. Re: Surprised that this wasn't already being done by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      What would you need 100 Kb/s for? Unless it's total traffic of all the data.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    9. Re:Surprised that this wasn't already being done by houghi · · Score: 1

      I am sure that those cheap ones did better than what they had before.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    10. Re:Surprised that this wasn't already being done by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      which has global coverage

      It relies on GPS and therefore does not have global coverage. In much of the coverage zone it doesn't update remotely near every 5 minutes, hell they don't even guarantee that on land masses.

      It also doesn't change the fact that comparing an unreliable piece of consumer tech to avionic equipment is simply stupid.

    11. Re: Surprised that this wasn't already being done by RespekMyAthorati · · Score: 1

      And even then, the benefit will be minimal. We may end up knowing where the plane went down but that doesn't bring it back or makes it easy to find

      But not knowing where it went down makes it impossible to find!

    12. Re:Surprised that this wasn't already being done by RespekMyAthorati · · Score: 1

      It also doesn't change the fact that comparing an unreliable piece of consumer tech to avionic equipment is simply stupid.

      "Unreliable" consumer tracking tech is one fuck of a lot better than no tracking tech, which is what MH370 had.

      Airline shills always make up ridiculous arguments to resist spending another $1000 on a 70 million dollar plane.

    13. Re:Surprised that this wasn't already being done by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      lot better than no tracking tech, which is what MH370 had.

      You ignorance is a thing of wonders.

      Airline shills always make up ridiculous arguments to resist spending another $1000 on a 70 million dollar plane.

      Air travel didn't get to being the safest form of travel through idiots botching together off the shelf garbage and calling it a day. If you think this system will cost $1000 ... well see the sentence above.

    14. Re: Surprised that this wasn't already being done by guruevi · · Score: 1

      Put yourself in the mind of an airline executive: What exactly are you hoping to find when a plane crashes or disappears? Survivors? Blame? If the plane has crashed in the ocean and it takes you 5-10 days to even get to the general area with any sizable equipment, there won't be much of a chance to find anything or anyone. So why spend millions on a system that maybe one day will let you know where an unrecoverable wreck without any survivors may be located?

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    15. Re: Surprised that this wasn't already being done by guruevi · · Score: 1

      You want probably the speed, bearing, current location, altitude, fuel levels, perhaps even radio status and signal strengths, autopilot status, flap and rudder positions and a number of core temperatures and pressures as far as telemetry data. 100 Kb is a package of ~10KB with a bit of error correction. It's not incredibly much. During emergencies you might want to beam back the last 5-10 minutes of audio/images from cockpits and passenger areas.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    16. Re: Surprised that this wasn't already being done by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      That's if you want total information from the airplane. I was under the impression that this was about data from fully independent beacons, which usually provide only positions. After all, total integration into jetliner's systems would only hamper mass production because that would make them too jetliner-specific (or too expensive it that functionality were to remain unused on non-jetliners). For all the other data, you have the black box. This just guides you to it.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
  3. This will only work ... by PPH · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ... if the flight crew can't turn off their transponders.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:This will only work ... by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

      a fire can takeout all coms.

    2. Re:This will only work ... by PPH · · Score: 2

      True. But a fire with a flight crew interested in survival will try to land the plane and contact help ASAP. Even if they don't make it, it shouldn't be too difficult to search for a downed plane from the point of last contact. If the flight crew is up to no good, they could fly for hours after turning comms off. And avoid air traffic control/military radar. And make some evasive course changes.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    3. Re:This will only work ... by radarskiy · · Score: 1

      With this method there will be no locations where it will be expected that the transponder cannot be picked up, therefore loss of transponder signal will be identified as a problem very quickly very quickly. That in turn means the plane will not get very far from the last known location, narrowing down the active search range.

    4. Re:This will only work ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then put one in the tip of the tail, totally disconnected from the planes systems so it can't be tampered with (except for those damn gremlins).

    5. Re:This will only work ... by oobayly · · Score: 1

      What happens when there's an electrical fire and you can't isolate the power supply? I might be wrong, but as far as I'm aware the flight crew have the ability to disable every piece of equipment on the aircraft.

    6. Re:This will only work ... by houghi · · Score: 1

      I would assume they will have two of them. If both fail at the same time, it will already be a very clear indication of where to look. You could even include something so you see the difference between a manual shutdown or a complete failure.
      And the moment one turns off, you will have a high alert situation. If both turn off, you have a all hand on deck situation right away. And the people getting that alert are not on that plane.

      From there on it would not be too hard to have procedures in place to take the best action.
      Both at the same time: Most likely a crash
      Both disabled manually: Highjacking situation ...

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    7. Re:This will only work ... by Wootery · · Score: 1

      But you'll still know where and when the signal stopped.

    8. Re:This will only work ... by PPH · · Score: 1

      But if you get that alert a few hours flight from land, it will take time for the searchers to reach that location. And if the flight crew is up to no good, a few evasive maneuvers will create a search area the size of an ocean. We all know how that turned out.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    9. Re:This will only work ... by PPH · · Score: 1

      What happens when there's an electrical fire and you can't isolate the power supply?

      This is what happens.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    10. Re:This will only work ... by oobayly · · Score: 1

      Tis but a scratch

    11. Re:This will only work ... by RespekMyAthorati · · Score: 1

      they could fly for hours after turning comms off.

      Make it impossible to turn off.
      What possible reason would the crew have to turn off tracking, other than they were under duress?

    12. Re:This will only work ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or if the airline doesn't decide to fly over a war zone to save a few bucks.

  4. Jihad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    The pilot was a Muslim so is prone to jihad and homicide.

    1. Re:Jihad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The pilot was a Muslim so is prone to jihad and homicide.

      satellite ackbar!!! its a trap!!!!

  5. Agent Orange is sending an aircraft carrier... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    Don't worry - Vladamir Putin's Pee-Puppet is sending an aircraft carrier to North Korea.

    Kim Jong Trump has instructed his propaganda machine to crank the distraction up to Maximum Impotent Power!

    Surely in this battle of tyrants, out tyrant can not lose face! It's Kim Jong Un vs Kim Jong Trump!

    So naturally Kim Jong Trump has raised a mighty impotent rage against North Korea claiming to send aircraft carriers while sending the carriers away from North Korea at full speed!

    All praise the impotent rage of our ignorant puppet!

    1. Re:Agent Orange is sending an aircraft carrier... by DickBreath · · Score: 1

      Don't you think it a bit unfair to call our dear leader "impotent" or "ignorant"?

      Being illiterate, unable to speak in complete sentences, and ignoring facts doesn't mean he is ignorant any more so than having tiny hands might mean he is impotent. Being orange doesn't make him a clown any more than it makes him an oompa loompa. it's because as everyone knows, oranges have thick skin. Oh, wait. He doesn't have very thick skin. Oh, well. At least the other crazy dear leader doesn't appear to use Twitter. Or we would be in real trouble.

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    2. Re: Agent Orange is sending an aircraft carrier... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was my statue of impotent rage!

  6. It's not "Malaysia Air." by NG+Resonance · · Score: 2

    The company is known as Malaysia Airlines, or MAS for short.

    1. Re:It's not "Malaysia Air." by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 0

      Or "MASH" when Malaysia Airlines flies an airliner into the ocean at high speeds, causing the contents to mash together before scattering in the waves.

    2. Re:It's not "Malaysia Air." by dinfinity · · Score: 0

      That joke certainly crashed. Let's all hope it is never found again.

    3. Re:It's not "Malaysia Air." by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 1

      It's MH (as in MH370) so maybe it's Malaysia Hair?

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
  7. And the purpose is? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    IIRC MH370 had all this stuff already, and it was knocked out by power failures. Malaysian would be better off IMO by getting a really good backup power system so the existing systems survive a future MH370-esque event.

    1. Re:And the purpose is? by godel_56 · · Score: 1

      IIRC MH370 had all this stuff already, and it was knocked out by power failures. Malaysian would be better off IMO by getting a really good backup power system so the existing systems survive a future MH370-esque event.

      The most likely scenario is that the murderous, suicidal pilot shut the tracking off deliberately so that the plane could not be found. The authorities found practice runs of his flight path on his flight simulator at home.

    2. Re:And the purpose is? by radarskiy · · Score: 0

      "IIRC MH370 had all this stuff already"

      No, it did not have satellite transponders. Any transponder system with ground based stations has limited range and it is expected that there is no reception once the aircraft moves over the ocean. Given that the aircraft is expected to be out of transponder range, it takes much longer to determine that the transponder was turned off.

  8. How hard is this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The functionality is an InReach and a little duct tape.

  9. Good but how about Backup by nospam007 · · Score: 1

    Just give the passenger free WIFI already.

    Then you'll have 300 gizmos inside the cabin, tracking themselves via satellite and sharing that info with god knows how many people, which all will be able to show the last known position of the passengers.

    1. Re:Good but how about Backup by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just give the passenger free WIFI already.

      Then you'll have 300 gizmos inside the cabin, tracking themselves via satellite and sharing that info with god knows how many people, which all will be able to show the last known position of the passengers.

      OMG, UFO got us in they beam! #MA360 #FindUsInLessThan3

    2. Re: Good but how about Backup by Type44Q · · Score: 2

      OMG, UFO got us in they beam!

      All your base are belong to us?

  10. You can do better by s.petry · · Score: 3, Funny

    How about: "This was all a false flag to get airline companies to use Satellite tracking systems, brought on by big-tech"? What ever happened to creative conspiracy?

    *sigh*

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    1. Re: You can do better by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Ehh, yeah Big Satellite. Always up to nefarious shit.

  11. We already have this.... by bobbied · · Score: 1

    This isn't new...Maybe it's a new way, but it's not a new capability.. Such data services already exist and are in use.

    I was SURE I saw a number of news stories about how the airlines already had the capacity to track their aircraft for maintenance reasons and that it worked within most latitudes using geosynchronous satellites already in place. The issue was Malaysia Air hadn't paid the fees for the service so no data was transferred though the equipment did "ping" the satellite on a regular basis during the flight that went missing. I don't think this works around the poles, but I'm sure it would cover more than 95% of aircraft which where outside of ADS ground based coverage.

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    1. Re:We already have this.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Airlines already use INMARSAT, Iridium, and/or HF for BLOS ACARS connectivity via ARINC or SITA, including sending ADS-C position reports to ATC. This service incorporates ADS-B receivers into the Iridium network to build a global air picture that companies can subscribe to. I don't see how the airline factors into this beyond having ADS-B-equipped aircraft (which is the way all airlines are going, whether they like it or not), paying FlightAware, and putting out a press release. In other words, it's a publicity stunt.

    2. Re:We already have this.... by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 1

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analysis_of_Malaysia_Airlines_Flight_370_satellite_communications

  12. Hope they think of security and obfuscation by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1
    Think like a criminal. Given the network latencies it is not going to be precise enough to guide a missile to an airliner. Still it is a good idea to obfuscate and add time delays if they even make this data public. Hindukush and Himalayan ranges have peaks over FL200 even FL250. Everest is peaking at FL280. A small party of terrorists could lug short range heat seeking missiles (10000 feet vertical, and 5 mile horizontal range) and wait to ambush in the mountains.

    This data need not be public. Flight aware shows the squawks from all plane transponders on your cell phone. Not sure how real time that data is.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    1. Re:Hope they think of security and obfuscation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can see airplanes in the sky in real time, so most people don't consider transmitting their positions an additional risk. Lots of planes already have ADS-B and you can track it yourself in real time with a cheap SDR.

    2. Re:Hope they think of security and obfuscation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This data need not be public.

      Um, the only reason they're able to do this is because the data is public before it even gets to them. They're building a network to receive public broadcasts (In Space!) and then they'll send the processed results to their subscribers, just like they already do with their terrestrial network. And just like thousands of hobbyists have been doing for years.

    3. Re:Hope they think of security and obfuscation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or the terrorists could go to so much less effort and just put their missile launcher near an airport.

    4. Re:Hope they think of security and obfuscation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Terrorists are going to lug missiles up Everest and shoot planes out of the sky???

      Take the crack pipe out of your mouth and back away from the keyboard...

  13. ADS-B ground station vs satellite by captainspudly · · Score: 1

    I think it's pretty cool and way overdue for the satellite tracking to finally happen. I have my own ADS-B ground station running PiAware. I'd be interested to see what planes are tracked only via satellite when out of ground station range. http://flightaware.com/adsb/pi...

  14. Horse has bolted. by hashish · · Score: 1

    Horse Bolted. Check
    Closed gate. Check

    Maybe they plan on losing another.

  15. Not lost. by MoaDweeb · · Score: 1

    It crashed into the bloody sea: gravity is your co-pilot.

    --
    New Zealanders are well balanced with a chip on each shoulder. One represents Australia, the other the rest of the world
    1. Re:Not lost. by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 1

      Some say it's been helped by a missile above the ocean

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
    2. Re:Not lost. by MoaDweeb · · Score: 1

      Some say we are descended from llamas.

      --
      New Zealanders are well balanced with a chip on each shoulder. One represents Australia, the other the rest of the world
  16. Think through that a litle more by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1

    So, what you really want is a high power electronic device (space is a long way away) that gets shaken, pressure cycled and thermally cycled aggressively, and you want to make sure that I can't turn it off when it catches on fire. Brilliant. Color me unimpressed with you idiocy.

    And yes, I'm a commercial pilot. I've had 5 electrical fires in the last 20 years. Fortunately, given that real engineers are a lot more thoughtful than you, every one has been very safely dealt with by turning off the affected box.

    1. Re:Think through that a litle more by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've had 5 electrical fires in the last 20 years. Fortunately, given that real engineers are a lot more thoughtful than you, every one has been very safely dealt with by turning off the affected box.

      So if I understand well, turning off an electronic device stops a fire?