Air France Tragedy - Josh Gate's Statement on the tragedy. Your thoughts?

[Mr Slugger]

The linky to the statement is Josh's Statement

Basically in case it gets taken down it's pretty much about how he's amazed that we're still relying on radar to track planes when nowadays we can find a lost $200 iphone with GPS.

Honestly there's two issues. Do you think the timing is bad? Or is it a perfect time to bring it up?

Then secondly what do you think about the statement in general.

Personal while I think it's bad timing in reality it's the best time to bring something like that up because it will be fresh in someone's mind, and something might actually get done about it.

As far as the statement itself. I totally agree. I mean I understand the use of radar, because there's always the possibility of things flying without GPS. I do think that if GPS can get me within 50 feet of my destination, track UPS trucks, lost iphone's, etc. They should be installed into planes. And if it's something to do with the GPS affecting equipment in the plane then spend the $$$ to figure out how to make it work.

[Cats]

While a GPS would certainly prove useful here, compared to how many planes actually fly each day, plane crashes aren't very frequent. You have a greater chance of getting run over in your driveway than you do of dying in a plane crash. Of course human life is important, as is trying to prevent these plane tragedies, but one has to consider if the cost to install better tracking devices is actually going to HELP.

Cellphones are small and can get lost frequently. An airplane, on the other hand, not only gets lost much less often but is also a bit harder to lose as well.

Now, admitedly, I have no idea how the whole "black box" thingie works. But one thing that one has to taken into consideration with installing a GPS is how well it's going to serve its purpose if its at the bottom of the ocean? Water + massive pressure are not good things for electionic devices. A GPS that fails to function is about as useful as a $3 bill. Even IF this thing had a better tracking device, given where the plane probably is now, would it actually help in finding it?

[Android Kaeli]

A person is more likely to get into a car accident then they are to get in some sort of plane accident. While it doesn't necessarily happen as much as other types of accidents, plane accidents do happen and when it happens over open water, who knows what may happen.

I wouldn't exactly put GPS in every plane that goes around, maybe as a test run on some planes and durable enough to survive, like black box standards.

[Slytovhand]

Nope, I've got to agree with Slugger... if they can put the money into a black box, then they can put the money into a GPS system.. after all, how much do they cost? Going by the price of one in your car, only a couple of hundred!

What use is it right now (if it is at the bottom of the ocean)? Well - HEAPS!!!! At least they'll have the previous flight record! (presuming, of course, that with the installation of the GPS system, it sends a signal every - oh, 5 mins or so...).

What? Too difficult, you say? Too costly??

How much is spent by the various governments in tracking each and every phone call, sms, email and forum thread by the security agencies around the world, just for a couple of words??? Tracking a few hundred or thousand planes over the globe... easy!

How many planes crash in a year? Actually, quite a few... you probably just don't hear about them too much... big ones, small ones... you name it!

[Pedersen]

Actually, the cost is much higher than anybody gives credit for.

First off, the devices are called GPS Receivers for a reason. They do not transmit, at all. To add in something that can transmit adds to the cost. Now, make it something that can transmit over sufficiently long distances, and the cost goes even higher. Now, make it so that it will be difficult (better: impossible) for someone on the ground to interfere with those transmissions, thereby destroying their accuracy, and the cost goes even higher still. Finally, construct the system with sufficient shielding such that it will not be capable of interfering with existing avionics, and the cost goes higher still.

The GPS device is fantastic for navigation, but not so much for telling other people where you are.

Next, add in the little detail that every plane already has an emergency transponder which can be used to locate said plane, and the benefit of having a GPS transmitter goes down significantly.

And now I hear people saying "But wait Ped! If the transponder is so effective, why couldn't the plane be found for over a day? Ha!" The answer is pretty simple. There's this little thing I like to call "the ocean" which is absolutely terrible at transmitting signals. It blocks out so much of the EM spectrum that most such equipment becomes useless at depths of a mere 100 feet/~30 meters. Since the plane sank in deeper water than that, the transponder wasn't terribly useful.

And now some bright soul will point out the case of Steven Fossett, a man who had disappeared in a plane crash. His transponder was destroyed on impact, rendering it quite useless.

I'm sure people will point out others. But the transponders work, and work well. Replacing them with a GPS Transmitter/Receiver is not worth it. And where the transponders fail, the GPS Rx/Tx device would also fail.

Added cost, added complexity, questionable (at best) improvements in reliability, benefit approaching zero. Why would we even consider doing this, with all of that in mind?

[Mr Slugger]

I dunno here For like $250 I can track a vehicle in real time, for about $500 I can track something worldwide in real time, and I don't think we're looking for even that. I think even if they had a locator that just transmitted the location every couple of minutes didn't even need to go to a satelitte. I mean they've got WiFi and cell service on planes nowadays I think there's enough other ways a plane could make that communication if that's the expensive part.

And I understand that water sucks for communication so after the crash it might be useless, and maybe transponders work, but if they get busted in a plane crash they're useless as well. But I think if there was something that said we're at this exact spot right before the crash then that would be very helpful in finding the plane.

[Boozy]

On one hand, airplanes are so bloody expensive to begin with that I can't help but think they should add the GPS transmitters, even if they are pricier than the current transponders. I didn't quibble much about the cost of the floor mats when I bought my new car, for example.

On the other hand, the airlines have seen fit to take seemingly tiny cost cutting measures, such as making their bags of peanuts smaller. If they're pinching pennies that tight, they probably can't afford to retrofit their fleets with GPS transmitters.

And really...how many planes just disappear in any given year? I'll bet if you ask someone in the industry, they'll have better suggestions for spending that money, some that may prevent plane crashes to begin with.