• 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.

FAA and IATA also responsible for MH370 loss

mjpnathan

Alfrescian
Loyal
With regard to the missing MH370 flight one wonders why the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), and the International Air Transport Association (IATA) when they reputedly works to ensure that all air travel is safe, allow passenger carrying aeroplanes to have the facility in the plane to switch off all communications. One can understand such facilities being there in non-passenger carrying war planes and planes doing some stealth work. However, aeroplanes carrying fare paying passengers should be mandated not to be allowed to have this facility anywhere in the plane.

Although it may give some commercial advantage to an airplane company to offer a system in which the Aircraft Communication Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS), and other communication facilities to be turned off when desired, as this would then allow the plane to be used for purposes other than to just carry passengers, it should never have been allowed.

Hence, the FAA and the IATA should not turn a blind-eye to the dangers posed by offering this facility, which brings along with it all sorts of suspicions of criminal activity.

Further, passenger carrying planes still having only the decades old Black Box, in this present age of cloud computing, is quite surprising. Is this also to enable these planes to be easily used for other purposes than to purely carry fare paying passengers?
 

sadshishamo

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Equipment on board aircraft can be a source of fire and hence they should be able to be switched off for isolation purposes . It is a safety consideration.
 

mjpnathan

Alfrescian
Loyal
Equipment on board aircraft can be a source of fire and hence they should be able to be switched off for isolation purposes . It is a safety consideration.


The reason appears like an excuse because the power used for this circuitry is minuscule when compared with the power elsewhere in an aircraft, which will continue to be employed as long as the aircraft is running.
 

mjpnathan

Alfrescian
Loyal
The reason appears like an excuse because the power used for this circuitry is minuscule when compared with the power elsewhere in an aircraft, which will continue to be employed as long as the aircraft is running.
 
Top