Mark Breen
marklbreen at gmail.com
Tue Jan 6 11:00:23 CST 2015
Hi Arthur, the answer for this is simple. Airlines use technology that we might sometimes this is archaic. They have no sata 3, no DDR4 Ram, no USB3.0. No overclocked PC's like I love to build. In fact, their technology is 80's and 90's, thank god. They use stuff that has such a proven track record that it is safe to put people up in the sky with it. After saying all of that, I had that conversation with my son only two days ago about the Blackbox. The guys back in 70's - 90's never imagined that a plain would be so far off course that it could not be localised even after 30 days. I expect that the next version of a black box will have 1) 365 days of battery power and b) triangulation that even the pilot cannot interfere with and c) as you suggest, satalite, gps and whatever else technology can be used to guarantee they track the last known position for the plane. Mark On 5 January 2015 at 13:58, Arthur Fuller <fuller.artful at gmail.com> wrote: > Can someone explain why airlines keep relying on archaic black-box > technology when vastly superior GPS-based tracking solutions are already on > the market? No matter how much these new solutions cost, surely they are > less expensive than the price of an airliner + its passengers. This makes > no sense to me. > > -- > Arthur > _______________________________________________ > dba-Tech mailing list > dba-Tech at databaseadvisors.com > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-tech > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com >