Timeline for When are black boxes used?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
26 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 10, 2019 at 8:53 | comment | added | mins | @JonathanReez: The problem is behavior faults that can be tracked easily can also be irrelevant regarding overall safety. If cars were monitored for speed permanently, and the authorities cancelled licenses after a very generous 50 speed limit excesses, how long would it take for the mean respectful driver to be punished? A month? Or if not punished, what would be the response of victims associations? If we open this door, it's likely we hugely increase stress and the number of accidents. This is a real question as technology now allows for such tracking to be done. | |
| Apr 10, 2019 at 1:24 | comment | added | Zach Lipton | @JonathanReez There are understandably reasons why any employee would not want to work in an environment where their every action on the job is automatically monitored, checked against standards, and can be used for employee discipline, especially if the data may be inaccurate. At the same time, there are strong safety reasons to collect and analyze flight data. Pilots unions naturally seek to represent their members to balance that. | |
| Apr 9, 2019 at 23:03 | comment | added | JonathanReez | @mins I agree with the right to privacy, but the following paragraph seems weird: "This is a way to enforce SOPs, and detect deviations from SOPs, hence crews may be reluctant to see this becoming mandatory." Enforcing SOPs doesn't seem to be related to "privacy". | |
| Apr 9, 2019 at 23:03 | comment | added | mins | @JonathanReez: "they're just employees of the airlines", they are employees but also citizen. While an employment contract rules the employee, civil law rules the citizen, in many countries civil law includes the right to privacy as long as it doesn't cause harm to others (this is indeed a matter of balancing individual and common interests). I don't see any problem in this. | |
| Apr 9, 2019 at 19:56 | comment | added | JonathanReez | I wonder why the crews opinion matters so much. After all, they're just employees of the airlines and have to follow the instructions, no matter what they think of them... | |
| Feb 7, 2019 at 19:17 | comment | added | mins | @Hobbes: That's one of the usual explanations, but in engineering lingo, a black box is not so reductive. I believe we don't use 'recorder' to name a recorder as safety agencies do, mostly because they have been presented to the public as 'black boxes' by media since the beginning, media love the mystery in the phrase, "the black boxes have talked!" | |
| Feb 7, 2019 at 18:46 | comment | added | Hobbes | "there is no need for journalists to continue to call them 'black boxes' " Black is not a reference to their color. The name is used because they are write-only storage, only accessible to investigators. I.e. the user has no idea what goes on inside them. | |
| Feb 7, 2019 at 12:11 | history | edited | mins | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Added images, removed some privacy-related details.
|
| S Jun 21, 2016 at 16:33 | history | suggested | KRyan | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
formatting quotes as quoteboxes
|
| Jun 21, 2016 at 15:34 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Jun 21, 2016 at 16:33 | |||||
| Jun 21, 2016 at 11:58 | comment | added | FreeMan | @Aron - just because something doesn't have a USB port doesn't mean data can't be extracted from it on a somewhat regular basis. I asked mins to clarify his statement that the data cannot be used except in an incident investigation, and he did so quite admirably. A USB port, or lack thereof, has nothing to do with the regulations around when data can be used from a data collection device. | |
| Jun 21, 2016 at 9:29 | comment | added | RedGrittyBrick | I believe aircraft operators are required to regularly read FDR data as part of the operational checks mandated by the regulatory authorities to ensure the FDR is functioning. They have to use this to check that recorded sensor values are correct. This suggests they have the technical means to read FDR data for other purposes. | |
| Jun 21, 2016 at 6:48 | comment | added | mins | @Aron: The use of FDR is not clear. This Airbus document seems to say that FDR cannot be used outside investigations, but this IATA one is less clear. There are FDR data extractors. | |
| Jun 21, 2016 at 4:14 | comment | added | Aron | @FreeMan Simply from an Engineering perspective its obvious. When designing a box which can survive 3400g and deep sea immersion, adding a USB port will add considerable cost to each unit. Assuming of course the device is even accessible. Not to mention it would undoubtedly reduce the robustness of the device. | |
| Jun 20, 2016 at 14:53 | comment | added | FreeMan | excellent! I'd give you another +1 for the update, if I could. | |
| Jun 20, 2016 at 14:47 | history | edited | mins | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 4417 characters in body
|
| Jun 20, 2016 at 12:59 | comment | added | FreeMan | You indicate that the CVR & FDR data cannot be used except in an accident/incident investigation. Is that specific to certain country's regulations, or is that an ICAO standard that all countries have accepted? | |
| Jun 20, 2016 at 11:30 | history | edited | mins | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 504 characters in body
|
| S Jun 20, 2016 at 10:03 | history | suggested | psmears | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Improve grammar and wording
|
| Jun 20, 2016 at 10:02 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Jun 20, 2016 at 10:03 | |||||
| Jun 20, 2016 at 9:50 | history | edited | mins | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 18 characters in body
|
| Jun 20, 2016 at 9:35 | history | edited | mins | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 18 characters in body
|
| Jun 20, 2016 at 9:20 | history | edited | mins | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 29 characters in body
|
| Jun 20, 2016 at 9:16 | vote | accept | Antzi | ||
| Jun 20, 2016 at 9:13 | history | edited | mins | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 29 characters in body
|
| Jun 20, 2016 at 9:00 | history | answered | mins | CC BY-SA 3.0 |