| Re: Flight Data Recorders |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Group: aus.aviation · Group Profile
Author: DCDC Date: Sep 11, 2008 07:16
Peter Dohm said the following on 7/09/2008 11:55 PM:
> This occasionally happens, even though the FDR and CVR have considerable
> thermal inertia and are located in a part of the plane that is least
> frequently affected by both fire and mechanical damage. Also, the prose
> above suggests that there was some data recovered from the cocpit voice
> recorder and "some data" is probably more than they would have gotten from
> solid state memory.
>
> All the same, there has been a move from magnetic tape and metal foil to
> solid state memory in the 20+ years that I have been out of that industry.
> However, IMHO, that has been a case of obtaining more detailed data and
> information (most of the time) and greatly reduced maintenance cost (the
> frequent replacement of tapes and foils was shop maintenance) and accepting
> far less robust media in order to accomplish those goals.
>
> Personally, I can see more than one side of the arguments leading to these
> changes and I have mixed feelings regarding the wisdom of same.
There's no reason, except cost, why both can't be fitted. Solid state
can potentially record most of a flight and, if it survives provide a
considerable amount of data over an extended timeline. If the solid
state doesn't survive then there's still the legacy FDR and CDR.
A damaged hard disk might offer higher rates of recovery than a damaged
solid state drive. However, I'm not sure how well a hard disk would
tolerate mid air turbulence. Anyway, I think their ability to survive a
fire might be a lot less than that of the older devices.
|