• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

PAP Govt's SQ006 stands BUSTED. Radar sucks. GPS better

csjcsjcsj

Alfrescian
Loyal
PAP cried that the lack of ground radar at CKS Taipei airport led to the Mistaken Runway by the pilot and co-pilot of SQ-006 did not get Corrected by control tower.

The fact stands as it is. There is GPS in that brand new 747-400 which is capable of telling where it was - THE WRONG RUNWAY!

The argument now with the aviation traffic control is to use GPS instead of Radar to guide and navigate, as well as to tell the location of a lost flight for search & rescue.

Because radar is very limited in capability and expensive. A common GPS is only less than $200.



http://tech.yahoo.com/news/ap/20090604/ap_on_hi_te/us_tracking_planes

Common GPS could help better track airline flights

* By MICHAEL TARM, Associated Press Writer - Thu Jun 4, 2009 3:26AM EDT

CHICAGO -

Get lost in the woods and a cell phone in your pocket can help camping buddies find you. Drive into a ditch and GPS in your car lets emergency crews pinpoint the crash site. But when a transcontinental flight is above the middle of the ocean, no one on the ground can see exactly where it is — in the air, or worse, in the water.

The disappearance of Air France Flight 477 and its 228 passengers over the Atlantic Ocean this week has critics of radar-based air traffic control calling on the U.S. and other countries to hasten the move to GPS-based networks that promise to precisely track all planes. Current radars are obsolete more than 200 miles from land.

"The technology's there — we've had this stuff for 15 years and little's happened," said Michael Boyd, a Colorado-based airline analyst. "My BlackBerry can be used to track me, so why can't we do it with planes?"

U.S. officials have discussed setting up such a network since the 1990s and the technology is being tested in parts of the country, including Alaska and off the Gulf Coast. A few carriers, like Southwest, already use GPS to help planes make quicker landings that burn less fuel.

But full implementation, estimated at a cost of $35 billion, has languished amid funding delays and disputes over technical complexities. Although Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood has said the project will be among the Federal Aviation Administration's top priorities in the Obama administration, the existing radar system is likely to remain for at least another decade.

"It's a crude system they're using now," said Robert Poole, an aviation expert with the free market-oriented Reason Foundation. "For 100 dollars, you can run down and buy a GPS system, put it in your car and know exactly where you are. But planes don't have it."

Some European and Asian countries are moving more quickly toward establishing pricey satellite systems. But many other countries lag behind, including Brazil, where the ill-fated Air France took off Sunday.

Current air traffic systems do not allow controllers to see a transoceanic plane on radar until it is within about 200 miles of land. Instead, controllers often estimate a plane's location based on flight plans and departure times. Such imprecision leaves planes vulnerable in emergencies, such as water landings, Boyd said.

"If a plane ditches and there are survivors, you may not be able to get to it fast enough," he said. "And if an airplane was hijacked in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean, we wouldn't know until it pops up somewhere else."

A reported electrical system failure aboard Flight 477 likely would have knocked out any GPS devices even if the flight had been equipped with that technology. But under a satellite system, rescuers would have known the aircraft's precise location when the failure occurred, presumably making the search area much smaller and helping authorities locate the wreckage faster. That timeliness that can also be crucial in determining a cause of a crash.

Radar quality varies from country to country. For example, many U.S. control centers at least enable planes to send more frequent updates about their location, even when beyond radar's reach.

But over oceans, including vast blind spots in the middle of the Atlantic on U.S.-European routes, pilots usually have to resort to calling controllers with estimated positions every hour or so. The call-ins can frustrate pilots, especially in and around South America, where radio and radar coverage can be patchy, said retired airline pilot Vaughn Cordle, who lives in the Washington area.

"There's nothing worse than going through the painful exercise of trying to talk to someone and letting them know where you are," Cordle said. "The South American region can be more dangerous because pilots are sometimes on their own."

A plane failing to check in after more than two or three hours can be an air traffic controller's worst fear, said New York-based controller Pat McDonough.

"It's very disturbing to the controller to lose an aircraft — you feel responsible," he said. "I sympathize with those guys watching the Air France flight."

GPS proponents say satellite-based air traffic systems provide another benefit that could have directly affected Flight 477, which disappeared into a band of towering thunderstorms. Such systems would collect information from around the globe and allow for real-time weather maps to appear on cockpit displays, giving pilots a tool to better determine how to navigate oncoming weather.

"The point is if we have GPS to monitor airplanes, could it save lives?" Boyd said. "The answer is clearly yes."
 

Papsmearer

Alfrescian (InfP) - Comp
Generous Asset
U obviously do not know how GPS works, and how it cannot apply to the Taipei accident. Best that u keep quiet.
 

singveld

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
yeah malaysian FT was to blame for using the wrong runway.

It is not taiwan fault. It was singapore fault to hire FT.

Just pay the taiwan compensation and be done with it. except the errors.
 

TeeKee

Alfrescian
Loyal
how could so many people in the cockpit mistook the instructions to turn to the correct runway?

were they high on drugs or alcohol?
 

TeeKee

Alfrescian
Loyal
["It's a crude system they're using now," said Robert Poole, an aviation expert with the free market-oriented Reason Foundation. "For 100 dollars, you can run down and buy a GPS system, put it in your car and know exactly where you are. But planes don't have it."]

yeah it costs 100 bucks to know where you are...

it'll cost more than 10 times as much to let others knows where you are...
 

prince123456

Alfrescian
Loyal
bro teckee.. u sounded like someone say .. its cost 100 time to install solar panels on all hdb roof.. to get energy ..

after all its free energy
 

TeeKee

Alfrescian
Loyal
bro teckee.. u sounded like someone say .. its cost 100 time to install solar panels on all hdb roof.. to get energy ..

after all its free energy

not at all, i am pro environment, i prefer govt. throw our taxpayers billions in renewal energies than into failing banks or financial institutions.
 

csjcsjcsj

Alfrescian
Loyal
U obviously do not know how GPS works, and how it cannot apply to the Taipei accident. Best that u keep quiet.

I know GPS and satellite better than you and I am very confident. :biggrin:

You better keep quiet.

I let you know that without Differential GPS and even without the P signal the accuracy on ground is better than 30m, with the P(y) code it is better than 2m. With Differential (DGPS) it is better than 1m. For the purpose of SQ006 to detect that it was on the WRONG RUNWAY it is FAR MORE THAN SUFFICIENT as the 2 runways are more than 220m apart. Google Earth can prove that.

A $500 common GPS is sufficient to tell the driver that he is on the wrong street.

The GPS in the cockpit of 747-400 cost way way more than $500.

But the COCK SIA pilot and co-pilots are both fucking blind. Their management and the fucking PAP govt are even MORE BLIND. All of them blindly tried to shift blame to Taipei CKS airport for the lack of ground radar - which is NEVER an issue.

With GPS, a pilot can take off alone in rural and remote wild places without any air traffic controller or control tower at all, and still not be so fucked up until trying on the wrong runway.

GPS can tell the taxi driver which street he/she is on.

Radar will be totally helpless to detect cars in the city, because the high-rise buildings blocked the radar. GPS signal can be blocked, but there are complementary & alternative systems to compensate that, which are very well developed. Gyro is one of them.

Stop trying to pull craps here. These knowledge on GPS can be easily found on the web. PAP govt can not hoodwink people any longer. So stop trying!
:biggrin:
 

motormafia

Alfrescian
Loyal
Radar are very outdated technology invented from the ages of pre-World-War-One era.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_radar
History of radar
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

The history of radar began in the 1900s when engineers invented simple uni-directional ranging devices. The technique developed through the 1920s and 1930s, leading to the introduction of the first early warning radar networks just before the opening of World War II. Progress during the war was rapid; by the end the United States widely deployed radars that fit in a single semi-trailer.

The place of radar in the larger story of science and technology is argued differently by different authors. Radar, far more than the atomic bomb, contributed to Allied victory in World War II.[1] Robert Buderi[2] states that it was also the precursor of much modern technology. From a review of his book[3]:

<hr>

GPS is a much newer technology, which is about 1 century later than Radar. Started around 1995, popular after 2000 when the doubt of Y2K Bug became over.

GPS is already on handheld and inside GSM handphone. GPS is much more versatile & economical than any other electronic navigational means, with digital maps incorporated, they beat anything. They can couple with Google Earth or Yahoo Maps, making consumers as capable as the military or professionals.
 

motormafia

Alfrescian
Loyal
["It's a crude system they're using now," said Robert Poole, an aviation expert with the free market-oriented Reason Foundation. "For 100 dollars, you can run down and buy a GPS system, put it in your car and know exactly where you are. But planes don't have it."]

yeah it costs 100 bucks to know where you are...

it'll cost more than 10 times as much to let others knows where you are...

Don't have to be that much.

Today even SBS & SMRT knows where are each of their buses, by one SMS you will know when is the next bus coming. Taxi companies knows where are their cabs, and when you booked via handphone, they send you the nearer cabs. UPS & Fed-Ex also know where are their delivery vans and what time you will get your courier boxes etc.

What is the BIG DEAL to have planes covered that way?

It is a joke not to.

It was KNN many days before we had a clue that Silk-Air MI185 went inside muddy river, it was also days before we know where the fuck went the Air France plane. WHY? :eek::rolleyes: WAF? :confused:



The airlines are supposed to immediately know, where are their planes (& passengers) weather they are arriving early or late, or doomed somewhere.

When the passengers in flight can call (few dollars per min) and fax and surf Internet, the connections are definitely there. It is just absolutely DUMB, that the airline had not wired the info of accurate location; speed; course; direction; altitude etc of a plane to their company computers.

When I fly most cheapo airline, I could even see my own flight path on a digital map with all these basic flight data on my LCD TV screen. WAF why is this not connected to airport terminal or airline office? WHY?
 

davetan3

Alfrescian
Loyal
GPS works only if you have a map of the area, telling you which runway is the correct one and what's their lat long.
 

csjcsjcsj

Alfrescian
Loyal
GPS works only if you have a map of the area, telling you which runway is the correct one and what's their lat long.

That is EXACTLY THE SAME with RADAR.

Radar basically only find a areal target and measures planes' position by distance elevation and azimuth (bearing / angle). On the screen, it is superimposed with a digital map to tell geographical features such as land, sea, lake, road, bridge, mountain, and runways. These are all given by MAP.

Airfields are basically huge flat fields, without MAP added by software on radar screen, there is no better way to have traffic controllers know weather aircrafts are on runway or on aprons. Airfield ground radars are not high resolution radar like those used for recognizing plane for purpose of shooting them down with missiles. The Airfield ground radars won't make any much difference if the plane was flipped upside down like SQ006. When SQ006 crashed into few pieces, the ground radar is very likely to see it as few smaller planes. :p:rolleyes:
 

csjcsjcsj

Alfrescian
Loyal
Basically I was comparing 2 kinds of radars, mm-wave for missiles to be guided to hit an aircraft target vs the lower frequency ones for just watching movement of planes on the airfield.

http://www.quinstar.com/an05_millimeter_wave_radar_subsystems.html

AN5: Millimeter-Wave Radar Subsystems


Applications:

Millimeter wave radars are employed in a wide range of commercial, military and scientific applications for remote sensing, safety, and measurements. Millimeter wave sensors are superior to microwave and infrared-based sensors in most applications. Millimeter wave radars offer better range resolution than lower frequency microwave radars, and can penetrate fog, smoke and other obscurants much better than infrared sensors. Some of the most commonly employed millimeter wave radar subsystems are:

* Automobile Collision Warning sensor
* Autonomous Cruise Control
* Robotic vision
* Surveillance - Air Defense, Sniper/Artillery location-tracking
* Altimeters and Height/depth measurement
* Missile guidance and tracking
* Speed and range measurement for industrial uses
* Industrial depth measurement in hostile environment
* Severe weather studies and measurement
* Clear Air Turbulence/Wind Field measurements
* Wide area traffic monitoring and control
* Intrusion detection
* Aircraft collision warning/obstacle detection system for helicopters, Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV), Unmanned Surface Vehicle (USV)
* Harbor monitoring/Navigation guidance
* Imaging
* Vision/sensing in adverse weather/environment
* Presence/motion Sensors for automated systems
* Safety and security devices


an05_millimeter_wave_radar_subsystems_5.jpg


<hr>

VS

<hr>

http://www.hcaa-eleng.gr/en/systems/astre2000_en.html

in Greek
Airfield Surface Detection Equipment (A.S.D.E.)
Surface Movement Radar (S.M.R.)
of New Athens International Airport, E.Venizelos



by George Hatzipanagos


Air Traffic Safety Electronic Engineers of Hellenic Civil Aviation Authority provide maintenance, repairing and upgrading of the Surface Movement Radar, ASTRE2000 of THALES Company, which has already installed in the Tower Control and Communicaton building of Athens International Airport. This Radar in combining with A-S.M.G.C.S. (Advanced Surface Movement Guidance Control System ) of Navia(Park Air Systems) Company allow the Air Traffic Controller to 'see' in real time the Aircrafts and Vehicles movements into the airport control area. The above Radar installed to coverage the operating requirements of the Athens International Airport, Eleftherios Venizelos.

S.M.R. of Athens International Airport Specifications
Installation Site
Athens International Airport Tower Control
Radar Type
P.S.R.
Site Geographical Coordinates
37 56 096 N
23 56 39,48 E
Operation Frequencies
15,9 GHz & 16,4 GHz
Power Transmission
22-24,9 KW
Antenna gain
>41 db
Antenna Beamwidth
0,33"
Antenna Rotation Rate
60 rpm
Polarization type
CP
Horizontal layer altitude
147 M AMSL
Side lobes hight
-25 db
RF Bandwidth
-
IF Bandwidth
30 MHz
MDS-SENSITIVITY
- 90 dbm
DYNAMIC RANGE
30 db
Special Devices
Bandpass filters


transmitter_smr.jpg"
smr_random.jpg
 

Papsmearer

Alfrescian (InfP) - Comp
Generous Asset
I know GPS and satellite better than you and I am very confident. :biggrin:

You better keep quiet.

I let you know that without Differential GPS and even without the P signal the accuracy on ground is better than 30m, with the P(y) code it is better than 2m. With Differential (DGPS) it is better than 1m. For the purpose of SQ006 to detect that it was on the WRONG RUNWAY it is FAR MORE THAN SUFFICIENT as the 2 runways are more than 220m apart. Google Earth can prove that.

A $500 common GPS is sufficient to tell the driver that he is on the wrong street.

The GPS in the cockpit of 747-400 cost way way more than $500.

But the COCK SIA pilot and co-pilots are both fucking blind. Their management and the fucking PAP govt are even MORE BLIND. All of them blindly tried to shift blame to Taipei CKS airport for the lack of ground radar - which is NEVER an issue.

With GPS, a pilot can take off alone in rural and remote wild places without any air traffic controller or control tower at all, and still not be so fucked up until trying on the wrong runway.

GPS can tell the taxi driver which street he/she is on.

Radar will be totally helpless to detect cars in the city, because the high-rise buildings blocked the radar. GPS signal can be blocked, but there are complementary & alternative systems to compensate that, which are very well developed. Gyro is one of them.

Stop trying to pull craps here. These knowledge on GPS can be easily found on the web. PAP govt can not hoodwink people any longer. So stop trying!
:biggrin:

Well, now I know u confirmed know shit fuck all about GPS. SQ006 happened in 2000. DGPS was in its infancy having been approved only that year for civilian users. U telling me that aviation DGPS companies already have models ready to go to be installed in 747s, flight tested them, and that SIA did not buy them, and install them, all before the accident happened? U are a fucking moron. Not possible ok?

By the way, you have to know the co-ordinates of the runway u are to take off from, specifically, where u are supposed to start your take off roll from. Otherwise, its useless to you. When u talk about GPS and taxi drivers, I know u are full of shit. Its not the same thing. In 2000, there is no such availability on the ground at CKS airport. U think the pilot is like a taxi driver, can punch in which runway he wants to go to, and than program the GPS for direction to taxi there? 9 years ago, in 2000? In Taipei? in your dreams.

for your info, pilots have been safely taking safely from remote and rural airports for decades, long before GPS was even invented. And in rural and remote airports, there is usually only 1 runway. Pretty hard to fuck it hard, so GPS has nothing to do with it. Don't waste your time cutting and pasting GPS articles, like u know something about it.
 

csjcsjcsj

Alfrescian
Loyal
Well, now I know u confirmed know shit fuck all about GPS. SQ006 happened in 2000. DGPS was in its infancy having been approved only that year for civilian users. U telling me that aviation DGPS companies already have models ready to go to be installed in 747s, flight tested them, and that SIA did not buy them, and install them, all before the accident happened? U are a fucking moron. Not possible ok?

By the way, you have to know the co-ordinates of the runway u are to take off from, specifically, where u are supposed to start your take off roll from. Otherwise, its useless to you. When u talk about GPS and taxi drivers, I know u are full of shit. Its not the same thing. In 2000, there is no such availability on the ground at CKS airport. U think the pilot is like a taxi driver, can punch in which runway he wants to go to, and than program the GPS for direction to taxi there? 9 years ago, in 2000? In Taipei? in your dreams.

for your info, pilots have been safely taking safely from remote and rural airports for decades, long before GPS was even invented. And in rural and remote airports, there is usually only 1 runway. Pretty hard to fuck it hard, so GPS has nothing to do with it. Don't waste your time cutting and pasting GPS articles, like u know something about it.

The KEY thing ISN'T weather there is DGPS or not.

The KEY thing is JUST ANY GPS will be sufficient to tell which runway the SQ006 pilot & copilot had FUCKED UP.


Even then DGPS had been around and had been used by land survey, oil exploration, harbor navigation etc fields VERY EXTENSIVELY already. Even then BEFORE SQ006 crashed, DGPS commercial units I had seen them for sale at many international exhibitions and trade shows.

That is why I dare to tell you that I know these things and I am confident.

You don't need DGPS's accuracy to tell a runway from another, because they are few hundred meters apart. And even the C/A code's worse case 30meter accuracy is 10X over sufficient to tell the SQ006 pilots that they had FUCKED UP seriously.

The coordinates info is optional to the users, a DIGITAL MAP just like those in the common commercial GPS is sufficient.

Even before SQ006 crashed. I had seen SO MANY SO MANY GPS in shops and trade shows and on Internet websites for sale that has digital maps. In the USA you can buy AAA or Rand McNally GPS or stupid Microsoft GPS with their maps bundled with GPS + digital maps + printed maps for US$69.99!

In Akihabara Tokyo you can literally see whole street full of shops selling digital map + GPS since 1997. In Taipei Guang Hua Market, also plenty. In Sim Lim Square also got, Funan Center also got.

If you buy Stupid Microsoft Flight Simulator, the entire 3D visual realistic model not just digital maps of major commercial airports are already inside, and it is just for children to play pilots.

Are you trying to tell me that inside SQ006 a brand new 7474-400 there was NO GPS with digital map?

I can tell you that only the pilots were BLIND that's all.

And the PAP Govt used CHILDISH EXCUSES to shift blames that's all.

I can know for sure, because on SIA as well as other planes, even the PASSENGERS' TV LCD got the same GPS info complete with digital maps and the basic flight info, such as altitude, direction, speed, estimated time of arrival etc. When I flied I always read info from those LCD screens.


So you need not try to cook BULL SHIT to smoke people here. :biggrin:

I can tell you that is for sure. PAP Govt are lame coward liars and cheapo bastards, getting from bad to worst, only got lame excuses to shift blames, and can not get anything right.
:wink::mad:
 

KKC007

Alfrescian
Loyal
["It's a crude system they're using now," said Robert Poole, an aviation expert with the free market-oriented Reason Foundation. "For 100 dollars, you can run down and buy a GPS system, put it in your car and know exactly where you are. But planes don't have it."]

yeah it costs 100 bucks to know where you are...

it'll cost more than 10 times as much to let others knows where you are...

More than 10 times? Let's say 100 times, making it $10,000. That is nothing considering the plane costs more than $150 million.
 
Top