![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Peter Clark" wrote in message
... On Mon, 8 Sep 2008 13:08:56 +0000 (UTC), David Lesher wrote: Michael Henry writes: MAK adds that the quality of the flight-data recorder information is "unsatisfactory" because of partial thermal damage to its magnetic tape, caused by the intense fire which followed the crash. Which made me think: magnetic tape?! Surely we've come far enough that we can be using solid-state storage in flight data recorders? Does anyone know why FDRs would still be using what, to me, is archaic technology? Co$t is why. And while flash-based systems may offer more survivable recording; consider the recent Qantas incident, where the depressurization itself was overwritten by subsequent flight. They could put in a bigger chip for longer recording. I thought most DRs were only about 1/2 hr looping? The original CVRs were 1/2 hour looping, carying three channels (or tracks) of audio, and would erase the tape when the parking brake was applied at the destination gate. Part of that was due to a combination of technical necessity and convenience, and part was the dfproduct of negotiation between the interested parties. The reusult was robust, in the sense that the recovery of data did not depent upon any part of the equipment remaining operable I am not familiar with the newer equipment; but would expect that it would have been made functionally similar--with the possible addition of more channels of audio. The original FDRs contained a single use role of stainless steel foil, which was marked by stylii. The result was *extremely* robust, but even the second generation of such recorders had a very limited number of data channels and required frequent depot level maintenance to replace the foil rolls. Solid state memory simply does not have similar survivability and there is virtually no change that it will within the next 25 years. Therefore, solid state memory, in the event that it is actually in use, is simply a way to obtain more channels of data at less monetary cost in those cases where the data can still be recovered. So long as the purpose of the data is to detect failures which can then be resonably predicted, then it is probably a good trade. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Why so expensive (flight recorders) | Jim Beckman | Soaring | 64 | March 4th 08 02:18 PM |
Standalone Flight Recorders for Club Use | ContestID67 | Soaring | 8 | April 24th 07 01:27 AM |
Flight Data recorders on a 757 - What data? | Al Dykes | General Aviation | 0 | January 1st 07 05:09 PM |
Commercial - Mounts for GPS Flight Recorders | Paul Remde | Soaring | 0 | March 13th 04 02:03 PM |
Approved IGC Flight recorders | mat Redsell | Soaring | 2 | March 5th 04 03:35 PM |