xrobwx71 Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 That conception always bugged me. Safest, compared to what? Isn't that just a matter of proportion? I mean, there are clearly fewer planes than automobiles, right? So the chance of an accident is obviously smaller than a car crash. I agree, if there were as many planes as vehicles then this would be mute. http://wardsauto.com/ar/world_vehicle_population_110815 --------------vehichles http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/584144.html ------------aviation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Draconian Guppy Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 +1 I don't get how this technology isn't widely available for mass transit of people via airplanes: les Gerety, an attorney in Connecticut, said calls for more data streaming from aircraft have been heard since at least 1998, when a Swissair flight crashed on its way to Geneva from New York and some data was lost from the Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webeagle12 Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 We have these: https://www.apple.com/icloud/find-my-iphone.html https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.fsp.android.phonetracker&hl=en https://preyproject.com/ Why do planes not have this? #1 because including something like this is not mandated by FAA #2 Since airlines are cost oriented companies they will not put something that will cost them money and not required by FAA #3 (this not really addressed to you) Sometimes it takes a while to find a debris in ocean. It is like looking for needle in haystack. It take sometimes days to find something like this. People start jumping into MH370 story barely house after crash, not sure why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astra.Xtreme Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 That conception always bugged me. Safest, compared to what? Isn't that just a matter of proportion? I mean, there are clearly fewer planes than automobiles, right? So the chance of an accident is obviously smaller than a car crash. It's measured per capita. Same sort of concept as comparing things between different countries where population is different. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/12/business/2012-was-the-safest-year-for-airlines-globally-since-1945.html?_r=0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperJediMedia Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 Did anyone hear about a Chinese forum that someone claimed to KNOW this will happen, 2 weeks ago? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ctebah Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 Did anyone hear about a Chinese forum that someone claimed to KNOW this will happen, 2 weeks ago? http://www.prisonplanet.com/did-mysterious-chinese-blogger-predict-disappearance-of-airasia-flight.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian M. Veteran Posted December 30, 2014 Veteran Share Posted December 30, 2014 That conception always bugged me. Safest, compared to what? Isn't that just a matter of proportion? I mean, there are clearly fewer planes than automobiles, right? So the chance of an accident is obviously smaller than a car crash. The figures are normally based on "per x journeys", and it's probably true. If you take 1000 flights and make 1000 car journeys, statistically speaking you're more likely to be in a car accident than an air accident. By a considerable margin I would imagine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperJediMedia Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 http://www.prisonplanet.com/did-mysterious-chinese-blogger-predict-disappearance-of-airasia-flight.html It is very weird. I don't know what forums have to gain by changing the date, so I am assuming the date is truth! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TDT Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 The figures are normally based on "per x journeys", and it's probably true. If you take 1000 flights and make 1000 car journeys, statistically speaking you're more likely to be in a car accident than an air accident. By a considerable margin I would imagine. Well that's just it. There are far more cars on the road than planes that can crash into each other on the open sky, so clearly the chances to have a car accident are higher. To me, that statement is marketing. Cars would be much safer than planes if we had, let's say, 10 cars/city, right? So it's just a matter of perspective, it depends on how you look at it. And they look at it from a marketing point of view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xrobwx71 Posted December 30, 2014 Share Posted December 30, 2014 #1 because including something like this is not mandated by FAA Which in itself is asinine. #2 Since airlines are cost oriented companies they will not put something that will cost them money and not required by FAA Cost? Most of the apps are free. #3 (this not really addressed to you) Sometimes it takes a while to find a debris in ocean. It is like looking for needle in haystack. It take sometimes days to find something like this. People start jumping into MH370 story barely house after crash, not sure why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawkMan Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 I find it hard to believe a plane can go missing. With all the international tension and monitoring going on, how can any part of of the world's airspace go unwatched. A very small percentage of airspace is covered by active radar.covering all land and sea in radar would require a ridiculous amount of very powerful radar, and energy usage. Never mind you would need a fleet of thousands of AWACS planes or floating platforms to cover the sea. Never mind the high amount of microwave radiation around every one of these radar stations. in fact most civilian "radar" systems are passive systems that merely receives the signal from transponders on the planes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torolol Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Search continues for elusive Flight QZ8501 black boxes continues By Greg Botelho and Kocha Olarn, CNN (CNN) The tail section of AirAsia Flight QZ8501 was lifted from the Java Sea on Saturday, but the plane's cockpit voice and flight recorders, or "black boxes," were not found. Indonesian officials said the devices were not with the recovered section. The plane's black boxes will likely be found in "a few days," the crash's chief investigator said, after searchers were able to hear more pings, even if they haven't yet pinpointed where they came from. The investigator, Mardjono Siswosuwarno, told CNN that smaller boats picked up several pings emanating from roughly 500 meters from where the commercial jet's tail was found. "I think we will be able to find the black boxes in a few days, because the location where pings were detected is not very far from the tail," Siswosuwarno said. This wouldn't be a major surprise, since the flight data recorder and cockpit voice recorder were housed in the Airbus A320-200's tail. Unlike Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 -- which went missing last March and still hasn't been located -- remnants of Flight QZ8501 were spotted within days. More recently, a search vessel detected pings like those that might come from the black boxes, Indonesian armed forces head Gen. Moeldoko said. Batteries that send out the pings last 30 days. It has been 13 days since the AirAsia plane fell into the sea. Source: http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/10/asia/airasia-disaster/index.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arachno 1D Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 Unless its another submarine sending out the pings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torolol Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Unless its another submarine sending out the pings Apparently its not a sub, the box has been located, but not yet retrieved. AirAsia Flight QZ8501: Indonesian divers find black box INDONESIAN divers have found the crucial black box flight recorders of the AirAsia plane that crashed in the Java Sea a fortnight ago with 162 people aboard, the transport ministry said. But they failed to retrieve it immediately from the seabed because it was stuck under debris from the main body of the plane, the ministry added. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nashy Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Apparently its not a sub, the box has been located, but not yet retrieved. source: http://www.news.com.au /travel/travel-updates/airasia-flight-qz8501-indonesian-divers-find-black-box/ story-fnizu68q-1227181628534 is .au use 'Metre' instead of "Meter"? They used a depth meter to determine that they are about 30 metres under water. In a sentence for you. HTH :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
conna Posted February 13, 2015 Share Posted February 13, 2015 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JzmK3-tIvQ Interesting. Can someone dispute proof? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biohead Posted February 13, 2015 Share Posted February 13, 2015 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JzmK3-tIvQ Interesting. Can someone dispute proof? Won't get much of a dispute in this thread - that's a completely different incident! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mudslag Posted February 13, 2015 Share Posted February 13, 2015 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JzmK3-tIvQ Interesting. Can someone dispute proof? You put it in the wrong section This thread is about a different plane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts