It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Transponder question

page: 1
1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 12:43 AM
link   
Why is the transponder able to be turned off by the pilot ?
Would it not make since to have it so it cannot be turned off or tampered with in any way ?




posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 12:48 AM
link   
reply to post by JHumm
 

Turning it off is moot.

There are occasions when transponder codes are changed at the request of traffic control so the cockpit needs to have the capability of doing so. Changing to an unspecified code would be just as effective as turning it off entirely.



posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 12:54 AM
link   
Transponders provide EXCELLENT target tracking information. You should research the idea of Identification of Friend or Foe, commonly called IFF. Also, if it emits radio frequency, you can kill it. So turning off your transponder if they're are any russian or chinese migs around makes ducking into the clouds or getting 30 feet off the deck a little better proposition as far as survival goes if your not TELLING THEM where you are and were your headed in the first place. If your there for the sole purpose of shooting down russian or chinese migs? enjoy. It's almost as hard as skeet shooting, but you sweat a lot more. !



posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 12:57 AM
link   

Phage
reply to post by JHumm
 

Turning it off is moot.


Apparently not. Where's the plane?



There are occasions when transponder codes are changed at the request of traffic control so the cockpit needs to have the capability of doing so.


Then they need to change the technology to where air traffic control can do it remotely.



Changing to an unspecified code would be just as effective as turning it off entirely.


Which should make it even more clear that that technology needs to change. !0 days ago it didn't need to change because this has never happened before. But now that someone HAS done it.............
edit on 16-3-2014 by DeepImpactX because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 01:01 AM
link   
reply to post by DeepImpactX
 


Apparently not. Where's the plane?
Transponders don't indicate where a plane is, it just identifies the plane being painted by ground radar, if it is being painted.


Then they need to change the technology to where air traffic control can do it remotely.
Maybe. But ATC is generally a pretty busy place. Lots of planes.


Which should make it even more clear that that technology needs to change.
Yup. Lots of stuff to work on and the ramifications of each change can lead to other problems. We could always go to fully automated systems though, right? That would solve it.



edit on 3/16/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 01:13 AM
link   
Thanks for the input guys .

I guess what I dont get is why is there not just a way to keep track of a commercial aircraft that cannot be turned off by anyone on the plane ?

I didn't know all that much about what the transponder does.

Thanks again



posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 01:20 AM
link   

JHumm
Why is the transponder able to be turned off by the pilot ?
Would it not make since to have it so it cannot be turned off or tampered with in any way ?


I just asked the same question on another thread.



posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 01:26 AM
link   

tencap77
Transponders provide EXCELLENT target tracking information. You should research the idea of Identification of Friend or Foe, commonly called IFF. Also, if it emits radio frequency, you can kill it. So turning off your transponder if they're are any russian or chinese migs around makes ducking into the clouds or getting 30 feet off the deck a little better proposition as far as survival goes if your not TELLING THEM where you are and were your headed in the first place. If your there for the sole purpose of shooting down russian or chinese migs? enjoy. It's almost as hard as skeet shooting, but you sweat a lot more. !



I doubt going radio silent will do much to shake modern military interceptors off a commercial airliner. Lol.
Kinda like a big rig turning off his lights to lose highway patrol in pursuit.



posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 01:28 AM
link   
reply to post by JHumm
 

A 777 is a very expensive bird, but any small aircraft that want to operate in class C airspace are required to use a mode c transponder. It is an old technology radio emitter that can be tuned to provide an easy target that can be tracked by ICAO standard radar sets. Air traffic controller can assign a four digit prefix to your particular aircraft to keep an orderly understanding of who is flying where. There are additional emergency locator beacons, which are activated upon impact, or can be switched to emit a distress and they are required in all standard aviation air planes, excluding ultralights and experimental. Then there are on board computer maintenance transmitters, which are used in more expensive commercial aircraft to transmit data and event codes in real time to the aircraft maintenance and dispatch. Lastly, every unit, be it hand held all the way to expensive aircraft display sets that interact with the GPS network give off a position ping, that can be accessed by military ground support.

Aircraft go missing all the time, because the world is big, and crashes can be quite spectacular or very remote. What makes this incident special is that you have competing governments with their own means of tracking airborne targets, and none of them want to admit to what extent their capabilities are. Then you have this theory that there were contractors in electronic warfare on-board, and that could explain the elusive nature of this disappearance, but that is just speculation. Regardless, no need to change the system, search and rescue have a pretty good record, so the beacons work fairly well, and bad guys will always find a way around the system if they want to.

AX
FTNWO



posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 01:34 AM
link   

JHumm
Thanks for the input guys .

I guess what I dont get is why is there not just a way to keep track of a commercial aircraft that cannot be turned off by anyone on the plane ?

I didn't know all that much about what the transponder does.

Thanks again


In a post 9-11 world there's no good reason why every commercial airliner/ cargo plane shouldn't have an electronic Id broadcasting, that cannot be turned off during flight. Unless of course the people in charge of such things don't really believe the official story of 9-11.



posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 01:38 AM
link   
reply to post by VinMan
 




In a post 9-11 world there's no good reason why every commercial airliner/ cargo plane shouldn't have an electronic Id broadcasting, that cannot be turned off during flight.

That is not what a transponder does.
But something like what you suggest is not impossible, just very difficult to implement on a global basis. Who's going to collate all that data? There are very, very many commercial aircraft in the air at any given time.



posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 01:55 AM
link   

VinMan

In a post 9-11 world there's no good reason why every commercial airliner/ cargo plane shouldn't have an electronic Id broadcasting, that cannot be turned off during flight. Unless of course the people in charge of such things don't really believe the official story of 9-11.


Why don't we just go further and track everything -- including all cars, trucks, buses, trains, boats, bicycles, motorcycles, etc? After all, there has been violence perpetrated using all sort of vehicles! Anything moving could be a threat to someone or some group at some time. Think of all the missing people who could be instantly found!!!!

I don't think I'd want to be in that type of world, but that is where this type of thinking eventually leads.



posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 01:56 AM
link   

Phage
reply to post by VinMan
 




In a post 9-11 world there's no good reason why every commercial airliner/ cargo plane shouldn't have an electronic Id broadcasting, that cannot be turned off during flight.

That is not what a transponder does.
But something like what you suggest is not impossible, just very difficult to implement on a global basis. Who's going to collate all that data? There are very, very many commercial aircraft in the air at any given time.


My thought is maybe have a little dome type thing on the outside of the plane that just transmits its position , each one has a sort of registration number that could even just be the tail number of the plane .
And if the plane goes missing you just look it up by number .

I'm not even saying that it be monitored all the time , just there for if it needed .

edit on 1601u3 by JHumm because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 02:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Collating the amount of data which would track planes would take, maybe, a laptop. It's not much data these days. Commercial planes don't do anything very rapidly.



posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 02:00 AM
link   
reply to post by JHumm
 


Transmit it where? All that data from all those planes would have to be collected. What sampling rate? Every minute? Every hour?
It is doable, but not easy. It can be done but it will take a lot of cooperation, time, and (mostly) money to implement.



posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 02:01 AM
link   
reply to post by VinMan
 


Yeah. Fair enough. But I was talking russian and chinese migs. and an airliner may be slower and bigger, but if you can drag a modern jet fighter ANY MODERN JET fighter down to a low enough altitude and airspeed, especially if your over the ocean, you may just get lucky enough to spin him into the drink with you. then you and all the folks that ditched in the airliner can swim over to the mig pilots raft and drown the little booger for screwing up your day on your way to your windjammer vacation !



posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 02:03 AM
link   

JHumm

Phage
reply to post by VinMan
 




In a post 9-11 world there's no good reason why every commercial airliner/ cargo plane shouldn't have an electronic Id broadcasting, that cannot be turned off during flight.

That is not what a transponder does.
But something like what you suggest is not impossible, just very difficult to implement on a global basis. Who's going to collate all that data? There are very, very many commercial aircraft in the air at any given time.


My thought is maybe have a little dome type thing on the outside of the plane that just transmits its position , each one has a sort of registration number that could even just be the tail number of the plane .
And if the plane goes missing you just look it up by number .

I'm not even saying that it be monitored all the time , just there for if it needed .

edit on 1601u3 by JHumm because: (no reason given)


Right. Exactly that.



posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 02:05 AM
link   
reply to post by JHumm
 


Yes I agree.

I said so here www.abovetopsecret.com...

We are not talking of a private plane, car or truck. We are talking of a commercial airliner carrying hundreds of people. This is not the first time that a large airliner cannot be found.

Obviously it can and should have been implemented long ago. It wasn't! If Rolls Royce can track engine information in close to real time then it stands to reason we should be able to track the whole bloody airframe. The only stupid part of this is that it can be turned off in flight!

P



posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 02:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


I don't know, I figured it would be similar to the Lo - Jack that is in some cars , I don't think they are monitored all the time , just when it gets stolen and the cops look for it . I guess I opened a can of worms with my question ....but then again what question on ATS doesn't?



posted on Mar, 16 2014 @ 02:08 AM
link   

BayesLike

VinMan

In a post 9-11 world there's no good reason why every commercial airliner/ cargo plane shouldn't have an electronic Id broadcasting, that cannot be turned off during flight. Unless of course the people in charge of such things don't really believe the official story of 9-11.


Why don't we just go further and track everything -- including all cars, trucks, buses, trains, boats, bicycles, motorcycles, etc? After all, there has been violence perpetrated using all sort of vehicles! Anything moving could be a threat to someone or some group at some time. Think of all the missing people who could be instantly found!!!!

I don't think I'd want to be in that type of world, but that is where this type of thinking eventually leads.



I'm not sure that's necessary. I don't remember any motorcycles knocking down iconic skyscrapers and plunging us all into seemingly unending war.


VinMan



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join