Aircraft Electronic Flight Management System - Case Study Example

Aircraft Electronic Flight Management System Student’s Name University Affiliation Aircraft Electronic Flight Management System Description of the System Including Schematic and Functional Diagrams The modern Boeing ‘Uninterruptible’ Autopilot technology was initiated after the ostensible ‘disappearance’ of Malaysian Airline MH370 aircraft. The event made many researchers and investigators to start querying the possibility of such a happening in the present high-tech universe (Helton, 2014). The extraordinary vanishing of MH370 followed by drowning of MH17 raised serious questions concerning the background of the remote autopiloting system mounted in Boeing civil aircrafts. The issue brings the 9/11 memories. The Boeing ‘Uninterruptible’ Autopilot technology enables Boeing 777 and other Boeing models to be flown remotely via an independent satellite communication and integrated software (Ken Doc Investigates 9/11, 2011). When the system is at work, it can prohibit potential control of the aircraft from a hijacker or pilot because the rooted system optimizes digital signals, which connect with satellite links, regulators of air traffic including other government bodies for the remaining part of the journey. The system’s theory as proposed by McConnell Field-a retired US military and military pilot came following much speculation about terrorists aboard a plane, suicidal pilots, and untrustworthy crews. The system is grounded on the possibility that the Boeing’s Uninterruptible Autopilot Model installed in any B777 model to enable external control of a plane’s route, and thus autopilot it anywhere without the real pilot’s control (Pilots for 9/11 Forum, 2014). Image 1: interior view of new Boeing Aircraft Flight System 777-200 electronic cockpit (Croft, 2006) In the MH370 case, the ‘Rolls-Royce Trent Engines’ of the airplane released automatic “pings” autonomous of the aircraft’s transponder to a Britain-based Inmarsat cable for some time after eventually dropping communication with regulators of air traffic (Croft, 2006). The automatic communication delivered an updated analysis of the engines, which were operational and demonstrated no indications of electrical damage according to the data received. On December 4 2006, an announcement was made that Boeing had earned an uninterruptible autopilot patent for application in public aircraft. The announcement comprised the original public approval by the airline regarding the autopilot system’s presence (Helton, 2014). System’s Description, Design and its Advantage over Other System The new aircraft flight system has advantages over that of the flight system of the Malaysia’s MH370, which veered off course whilst flying over the sea of South China before returning over the Malaysian peninsula. The previous system made it hard to control the plane back to its origin. Despite a huge mounted multinational effort to search and rescue, no a trace of debris has been found from the aircraft. Moreover, the origin of the airplane’s erratic trajectory change and vanishing act has never been established (Danger, 2014). The case of MH370 remains a mystery as one of the most baffling occurrences in commercial flight history. According to the designers of the new electronic flight system, as documented by John Croft for Aeronautical Global and other British publications revealed that the “dedicated electrical circuits” in the new system of flight could control an aircraft without the pilot’s requirement. Thus, the developed avionics would fly the plane remotely without the effort of the pilots. The old system such as that of the missing Malaysian plane lost control because its pilots tried as much as they could but experienced electronic systems failure, which caused the plane to lose control and lose communication. This type of letdown can be caused by a breakdown of the system of electric wiring or by micro-EMP pulse deliberately triggered by remote or timer control. After the plane’s communication and manual control were disabled, the passengers and staff were trapped on the aircraft flying to its re-programmed alleged crash terminus in either Australia or a secret military site. The modern Boeing ‘Uninterruptible’ Autopilot system has an advantage because the activation of the “uninterruptible” autopilot either by sensors onboard, pilots, or remotely through satellite links or radio by governmental organizations, if bombers try to assume controlling a flight deck. Thus, the uninterruptible electronic pilot system is advantageous because of its increased security features in case of an emergency such as a hijacking scenario. Boeing explains the attribute as a preventive approach that keeps unsanctioned individuals outside the cockpit, setting the platform for a safety protocol for the industry. The system will enable the industry to develop a measure that decisively averts unauthorized individuals for accessing the control of the plane and therefore threatening the onboard passenger’s safety or other persons in the vehicle’s path thereby minimizing the level of damage to individuals onboard the flight would cause (Learmount, 2010). Moreover, the system accords Boeing planes with patents and an anti-terrorist automatic-landing model for kidnapped airliners. Thus, the government that gains a clandestine oversight with reference to the uninterruptible auto-pilot control can optimize the system’s auto-landing function. The technology contains its power source self-reliant of any electronic elements on the aircraft. To ensure its full independence, the model contains its power supply autonomous of the system’s circuit breakers. The plane remains in the automated mode till it lands whereby governmental security workers or mechanics come on to disengage it (Boeing, 2015). System’s Interface with Other Sensors/Equipment On board the Airplane and the Relevant Inputs/Outputs to Every Interfaced Unit The pilots, sensors onboard or government agencies (through satellite links or radio) can activate the uninterruptible autopilot system. The U.S. Patent stipulates that current defensive approaches are less than immune – flyers can choose to open the bulletproof, lockable cockpit doors (Learmount, 2010). The system contains an onboard supercomputer, which once switched on prohibits inputs from pilots, and averts any efforts by persons on board from interjecting an sudden landing strategy, which could be radioed or predefined by government regulators and airline staff and conducted by the guidance and control system of the airplane. To ensure its full independence, the system has its reserved supply of power, independent of the circuit breakers of the aircraft. The aircraft maintains its automatic mode until upon landing, when government security operators or mechanics are called in to disengage it. The system’s interface is such that different sensors and equipment onboard the aircraft can be used to activate it. Boeing envisions different approaches to system activation. Alternatives comprise physical buttons for aviators to smash, or likely initiate sensors on the entrance of the cockpit, which initiate the anti-terrorist style where a certain amount of minimum force is crossed for example, if an individual attempts to break into the entrance. An alternative is a faraway link where the government or airline staff on the ground would observe the aircraft and instruct the automated control mode after the determination that the airplane’s security is in danger (Memory Hole, 2014). Radio contacts could be optimized to connect with ground amenities and neighboring airplanes that an airplane on automatic flight mode. Nonetheless, it is not clear if Boeing work relates with the $1.8 million issuance to the U.S. FAA agreement for an ARES model. The system is expected to carry out risk assessment on aviation pathways to assist strategizers establish the appropriate ways for airplane optimize in case of mishaps (Boeing, 2015). Far from safety and security elements of putting in place the uninterrupted flight system, Boeing considers it as a preventative approach. Upon the initiation of the automated system of control lent by the current innovation, nobody within the airplane can control the air vehicle. Thus, it is unnecessary for anybody to intimidate in a bid to gain control of the airplane. Pictorial Representation of Boeings Uninterrupted System during Actual Functioning The Boeing’s ‘Uninterruptible Autopilot System is grounded on avionics architecture which suggests that the B777 runs through a digitally integrated and complex system of flight management (Air Insight, 2015). There are numerous contributors to the system’s avionics. Rockwell Collins made and programed the autopilot system. However, the system is enslaved by more control systems. The Boeing Uninterruptable system is grounded in a software coding, which controls the management of the flight system during flight. To comprehend how the uninterruptible system works during a flight suggest understanding the way the software developed for the system eliminates other slave systems to separate the autopilot system from on-board Pilot Authority without making the aircraft susceptible to failures in the system via loss of redundancy meaning loss of secured autopilot regulation and navigation (Air Insight, 2015). Despite the admission by Boeing in 2007 about their intention to connect the Boeing Uninterruptable Autopilot model on all civil airplanes by 2010, the technology has been in existence to protect aircrafts from possible hijacks. Image 2: The U.S. patent for the Boeing Uninterruptible Autopilot model for controlling travel path of a plane during an emergency The Boeing patent (US7142971B2) method and system for controlling a travel path for an aircraft comprises the method and system for controlling a trajectory of travel of a plane automatically including an automatic system control when the on-board controls security is jeopardized during a flight (Croft, 2006). Engagement can be undertaken manually or automatic from inside the plane or remotely through a communication link. Any attempt or capability on-board to supersede the automatic system control may then be disabled through disconnecting the on-board controls and providing uninterruptible power to the automated control system through a path, which does not encompass the on-board open power control elements as demonstrated in image 2 above. The operation of the airplane is then controlled through the processing component of the system of automatic (Croft, 2006). The commands to control may be obtained from a remote site or from predetermined control instructions, which are stored on-board the airplane. The system has an apparatus and method for preventing an illegal flight of an airplane, which is described as an FBW (fly by wire) system (Croft, 2006). The system works alongside the controls initiated in the cockpit of an air vehicle for controlling it as well as an automated system of flight control. These are coupled to the FBW system for ensuring the aircraft remains in a stable flight. An unsanctioned flight detector is coupled to the AFCS system and coupled to the FBW system and is configured to conduct a shift of control of the FBW model from the cockpit AFCS controls in reaction to a predetermined occurrence. The autopilot system’s operation mode is not the first to exist but it is designed to counter terrorism in the first place. The mode of operation is such that it is not merely “uninterruptible” –thus, even a pilot being tortured cannot turn it off. However, it can be remotely activated through satellite or radio by government agencies. The system encompasses sensors in its operation to ensure the cockpit door remains active and activates the autopilot of a certain degree depending on the force used against it. It is significant to re-iterate that BHUAP has two constituents i.e. software and hardware. These components lie within each patent’s scope (Memory Hole, 2014). Redundancy of the system and implications on flight in case of failure The BHUAP system is software dependent. There have been instances documented about possible software challenges used on commercial planes. For instance, a glitch could shut down a plane in flight rendering the electrical system, which controls the airplane useless as witnessed on a Boeing 787 flight. Hackers running a computer safety service may initiate a plane to change direction after controlling the plane through the Wi-Fi system in the airplane. Keeping aircraft systems from hackers, viruses and other problems is a new challenge for the technology. The technology still presents new challenges such as remotely controlling to correct an issue such as speeding around a curve beyond a given speed limit. The new system has possible challenges in its mechanical attributes. Moreover, the mistakes in software can be similar to those resulting from a mechanical failure. Boeing is currently experiencing issues in software quality control. The system can shut down if left for 285 days. The program seems to be allocating some level of memory. Over dependence on software can easily backfire. Thus, there is a need to create a strong hack-proof software in a language that easily automates the computer elements and enables engineers to know the aircraft’s design to state the parameters of operation they design. The software should be machine dependent and highly productive. In future, the software should be adaptable to all languages by translating commanding names into a universal language of programming. Most importantly, the software should be easy to use. To summarize, the modern Boeing ‘Uninterruptible’ Autopilot technology was started after the ‘disappearance’ of Malaysian Airline MH370 aircraft. The technology enables Boeing models to be flown remotely via an independent satellite communication and integrated software. The new aircraft flight system has advantages over that of the previous flight system because the activation function of the “uninterruptible” autopilot either by onboard sensors, pilots, or remotely via satellite links or radio by government organizations, if terrorists try to assume control of a flight deck. Moreover, the system accords Boeing planes with patents and an anti-terrorism auto-land model for hijacked airliners. The system’s interface is such that different sensors and equipment onboard the aircraft can be used to activate it and is grounded on avionics architecture, which suggests that the B777 runs through a digitally integrated and complex system of flight management. However, the BHUAP system is software dependent and thus, there are possibilities of possible software challenges. Moreover, the mistakes in software can be similar to those resulting from a mechanical failure. References Air Insight, (2015). Is software now the Achilles’ heel of aircraft design. Retrieved from: < http://airinsight.com/2015/07/16/is-software-now-the-achilles-heel-of-aircraft-design/ > Boeing, (2015). Innovative 787 Flight deck designed for efficiency, comfort and commonality. Retrieved from: < http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagazine/articles/2012_q1/3/ > Croft, J., (2006). Diagrams: Boeing patents anti-terrorism auto-land system for hijacked airliners. Retrieved from: < https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/diagrams-boeing-patents-anti-terrorism-auto-land-system-for-hijacked-210869/ > Danger, A., (2014). Exclusive: MH370 flight to be simulated. Retrieved from: < http://www.abeldanger.net/2014/04/abel-danger-says-show-must-go-on.html> Helton, S., (2014). Flight control: Boeing’s ‘uninterruptible autopilot system’, drones & remote hijacking. Retrieved from: http://21stcenturywire.com/2014/08/07/flight-control-boeings-uninterruptible-autopilot-system-drones-remote-hijacking/ Ken Doc Investigates 9/11, (2011). Remote control technology. Retrieved from: < https://kendoc911.wordpress.com/norad/remote-control-technology/ Learmount, D., (2010). Airbus and Boeing approaches to electronic flight bags. Retrieved from: < https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/airbus-and-boeing-approaches-to-electronic-flight-ba-348459/ > Memory Hole, (2014). Understanding the tyranny of terrorism. Retrieved from: < https://memoryholeblog.com/2014/06/18/understanding-the-tyranny-of-terrorism-2/comment-page-1/> Pilots for 9/11 Forum, (2014). Boeing uninterruptible autopilot Buap. Retrieved from: < http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=22683 Read More

Moreover, the origin of the airplane’s erratic trajectory change and vanishing act has never been established (Danger, 2014). The case of MH370 remains a mystery as one of the most baffling occurrences in commercial flight history. According to the designers of the new electronic flight system, as documented by John Croft for Aeronautical Global and other British publications revealed that the “dedicated electrical circuits” in the new system of flight could control an aircraft without the pilot’s requirement.

Thus, the developed avionics would fly the plane remotely without the effort of the pilots. The old system such as that of the missing Malaysian plane lost control because its pilots tried as much as they could but experienced electronic systems failure, which caused the plane to lose control and lose communication. This type of letdown can be caused by a breakdown of the system of electric wiring or by micro-EMP pulse deliberately triggered by remote or timer control. After the plane’s communication and manual control were disabled, the passengers and staff were trapped on the aircraft flying to its re-programmed alleged crash terminus in either Australia or a secret military site.

The modern Boeing ‘Uninterruptible’ Autopilot system has an advantage because the activation of the “uninterruptible” autopilot either by sensors onboard, pilots, or remotely through satellite links or radio by governmental organizations, if bombers try to assume controlling a flight deck. Thus, the uninterruptible electronic pilot system is advantageous because of its increased security features in case of an emergency such as a hijacking scenario. Boeing explains the attribute as a preventive approach that keeps unsanctioned individuals outside the cockpit, setting the platform for a safety protocol for the industry.

The system will enable the industry to develop a measure that decisively averts unauthorized individuals for accessing the control of the plane and therefore threatening the onboard passenger’s safety or other persons in the vehicle’s path thereby minimizing the level of damage to individuals onboard the flight would cause (Learmount, 2010). Moreover, the system accords Boeing planes with patents and an anti-terrorist automatic-landing model for kidnapped airliners. Thus, the government that gains a clandestine oversight with reference to the uninterruptible auto-pilot control can optimize the system’s auto-landing function.

The technology contains its power source self-reliant of any electronic elements on the aircraft. To ensure its full independence, the model contains its power supply autonomous of the system’s circuit breakers. The plane remains in the automated mode till it lands whereby governmental security workers or mechanics come on to disengage it (Boeing, 2015). System’s Interface with Other Sensors/Equipment On board the Airplane and the Relevant Inputs/Outputs to Every Interfaced Unit The pilots, sensors onboard or government agencies (through satellite links or radio) can activate the uninterruptible autopilot system. The U.S.

Patent stipulates that current defensive approaches are less than immune – flyers can choose to open the bulletproof, lockable cockpit doors (Learmount, 2010). The system contains an onboard supercomputer, which once switched on prohibits inputs from pilots, and averts any efforts by persons on board from interjecting an sudden landing strategy, which could be radioed or predefined by government regulators and airline staff and conducted by the guidance and control system of the airplane. To ensure its full independence, the system has its reserved supply of power, independent of the circuit breakers of the aircraft.

The aircraft maintains its automatic mode until upon landing, when government security operators or mechanics are called in to disengage it. The system’s interface is such that different sensors and equipment onboard the aircraft can be used to activate it.

Read More