By Khairul Khalid
The AirAsia QZ8501 crash has intensified the ongoing debate about tracking a plane faster after it has crashed.
The need for improved communications systems in commercial planes has been a perennial debate within the industry, and year after year the debate usually just fizzles out. But this has been an extraordinary year for aviation, sadly for the wrong reasons.
The great mystery of the missing Malaysian Airline System (MAS) MH370 sparked renewed calls from all corners of the industry for urgent action and reform within the commercial aviation sector.
And now, the AirAsia’s QZ8501 crash has forced the industry into the spotlight again.
“Aviation experts need to come up with the most effective way of ensuring that we don’t just lose planes,” said Tony Abbott, the Australian prime minister after the disappearance of QZ8501.
One of the key proposals being hotly debated is a real-time satellite tracking system for all airplanes. Basically, this would allow commercial planes that have disappeared from visual and verbal ground contact to be found quicker for search and rescue teams to be dispatched.
Our Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak had also voiced the same concerns post-MH370.
“One of the most astonishing things about this tragedy is the revelation that an airliner the size of a Boeing 777 can vanish, almost without a trace. In an age of smartphones and mobile internet, real-time tracking of commercial airplanes is long overdue,” said Najib.
It is becoming an all too familiar cry.
Critics are dumbfounded that an industry that pours billions into research and development (R&D) for the manufacturing of expensive and complex aircrafts could not, in this day and age of high-tech gadgetry, implement something similar to a simple GPS (global positioning system) that is getting more ubiquitous in everyday life and could assist a great deal in situations similar to a MH370 or QZ8501.
Tony Tyler
“In a world where our every move seems to be tracked, we cannot let another aircraft simply disappear,” said Tony Tyler, the chief executive of the International Air Transport Association (IATA).
Of course, tracking a plane through different continents, oceans, terrain, weather and airspace (especially if it crashes into the unknown) is not quite as simplistic as tracking a stolen smartphone or a car. Regardless, that doesn’t mean the industry should not innovate in an area that it has clearly been found lacking.
And it is not as if current airplanes lack sophisticated communications systems.
There are miscellaneous transponders, Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting Systems (ACARS), black boxes, real-time diagnostics, emergency location transmitters and various other devices that function as critical identifiers and data recorders.
But in cases such as MH370 where there are still so many unanswered questions (mechanical malfunction? human error? deliberate sabotage? all of the above?), a real-time tracking system could make a world of difference, at least in spotting the plane immediately in the aftermath of an accident.
So what is stopping the implementation of such a tracking technology in planes? It would seem that the major barrier is not technical, but sheer economics.
The latest generation Boeing 787 Dreamliner can periodically report its position, speed and altitude through satellite uplink. ACARS (which MH370 was equipped with but was believed to have been disabled) transmits position, speed and altitude data every 10 minutes through an automated reporting system.
“Technology is available that can significantly enhance the ability to locate a missing aircraft, and this technology must become the standard across the industry,” urged the International Federation of Air Line Pilots’ Associations.
But implementing these standards and making it mandatory to all airlines and airport operators will obviously cost money. Installing and monitoring real-time tracking may cost up to several hundred thousand dollars per aircraft.
Regulators and carriers are at odds over who should bear the extra costs. Should the airlines pass the additional costs to customers? Or should governments and other industry stakeholders shoulder some of the financial burdens of implementing such a system?
It remains to be seen whether the airline industry will proceed with plans to initiate enhanced tracking systems in light of the tragedies of the past year, or if they will just fade away as time passes.
Some detractors of real-time tracking systems for airplanes say that they will not solve any problems and will only distract from other safety issues. True, any new technology is not likely to prevent air crashes from happening again but it is still imperative that the industry work towards a speedier aircraft recovery system, whether it is real-time tracking or any other viable options.
Time saved could be precious in rescuing potential survivors, or in a worst case scenario, salvaging evidence that could shed important light on an air disaster.
An aviation industry that is worth an estimated US$606 billion (RM2.1 trillion) in GDP (gross domestic product) and carries over three billion passengers a year should put this as a top priority and put its house in order.
It has often been said that, statistically, flying is still one of the safest modes of transportation but implementing new and improved standards of plane tracking, especially in moments of distress, would at least assuage some of travellers’ fears post MH370.
The grim lessons of 2014 should be learned, fast. Hope against hope, we should never have to face the anguish of another MH370 and lose a plane, permanently, again.
GRRRRR!!!
You must be logged in to post a comment.