0
$\begingroup$

This question already has an answer here:

Wouldn't it be cheaper to replace black boxes by telemetry?

Seems that the costs of a single search mission for an underwater black box exceeds the cost of installing and maintaining telemetry sytem in an entire fleet of aircraft plus ground stations.

By telemetry I mean a system that broadcasts all the information instead of recording it in the black box. In case of a crash the data would be immediately available.

Wouldn't such a method have shed light on such misteries as the missing Singapur Airlines flight?

Of course, in very extreme cases where the telemetry system fails before the crash the black box would still be available as a backup.

$\endgroup$

marked as duplicate by Federico, Simon, vasin1987, SMS von der Tann, Pondlife Jun 25 '16 at 11:23

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ It is mainly the amount of data that you want to have and that you do not want to rely on failing wireless communication lines. In addition you have the shear amount of data generated during flight. A single 787 generates half a terabyte of data in just a single flight: computerworlduk.com/news/data/… You will have to transfer this via very expensive satellite connections to a ground station. $\endgroup$ – Brilsmurfffje Jun 25 '16 at 9:35
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ In addition and the most relevant argument against ommiting the black box is that it is very unlikely that a plane will crash but every plane in the air has to upload all of it's data for the very rare case that it crashes. It is simply cheaper to search for those very few black boxes that end up on the ocean floor. Most crashes happen during landing anyway so they can be easily recovered. $\endgroup$ – Brilsmurfffje Jun 25 '16 at 9:37
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ "Seems that the costs of a single search mission for an underwater black box exceeds the cost of installing and maintaining telemetry system in an entire fleet of aircraft plus ground stations." Nope. $\endgroup$ – Simon Jun 25 '16 at 10:11
  • $\begingroup$ @Brilsmurfffje: "It is simply cheaper to search for those very few black boxes that end up on the ocean floor". I'd be interested in the figures you use. The localization of AF447 and MH370 recorders are not expensive, the cost is actually huge. The next generation of ATC will include the use of ADS-B satellites to prevent that, and allow other savings and improvements. $\endgroup$ – mins Jun 25 '16 at 10:30
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ To add to what others have said, your question assumes that if we know all the details on why a plane crashed we wouldn't spend any money on finding the wreckage. Yet the wreckage can yield valuable information on how, when, and why a plane broke up. $\endgroup$ – Cody P Jun 25 '16 at 18:59