Malaysian Airlines Flight MH370

[guzzi]

11 minutes ago, pongo said:

It’s always going to be a mistake to begin from that perspective since no system can ever be hardened enough so as to be invulnerable. There will always be another way in - whether via some specific design vulnerability or via social engineering. Remembering that the technology is only one part of the system - the system is also the context, implementation, people etc.

It would be very dangerous to believe that a system could not be hacked.

 

I agree. Recognising and mitigating the risk of those vulnerabilities is essential. I nevertheless think that a fully automated, pilotless, system could be devised which had a lower failure rate than the human equivalent.

There have been two instances in recent years were a pilot has deliberately flown a passenger airliner into the ground in a murder/suicide.

[P.K.]

On 12/13/2017 at 12:57 PM, doc.fixit said:

sorry PK, don't understand............

I, probably stupidly, made the point that hacking couldn't have happened to MH370.

 

[doc.fixit]

........cheers.............

[dilligaf]

3 hours ago, P.K. said:

I, probably stupidly, made the point that hacking couldn't have happened to MH370.

 

But why was it stupid ?.

It could not have been hacked and you were correct.

[P.K.]

2 hours ago, dilligaf said:

But why was it stupid ?.

It could not have been hacked and you were correct.

Well, the thread had moved on from the loss of MH370 to the possibility of hacking into the avionics to take control of an aircraft for terrorism purposes. So my post was irrelevant because MH370 was obviously not a victim of hacking.

Some 60 years ago it was possible to land an aircraft by brute strength alone.

Now that's simply not an option. So if the avionics are taken out by an EMP or similar then the aircraft is doomed.

Sobering thought....

[pongo]

On 15/12/2017 at 11:32 PM, P.K. said:

if the avionics are taken out by an EMP or similar then the aircraft is doomed

We Asked a Military Expert How Scared We Should Be of an EMP Attack

Quote

What's the main challenge stopping small militaries from using them?
Besides the weight, and the cost of whatever you use to generate that kind of electricity—a capacitor, a large amount of batteries, or whatever power generation method—the cost would be so high, but the damage you can do with it would be so limited, that other much cheaper methods might be more efficient when it comes to damaging the area that you're targeting.

 

[P.K.]

5 minutes ago, pongo said:

What's the main challenge stopping small militaries from using them?
Besides the weight, and the cost of whatever you use to generate that kind of electricity—a capacitor, a large amount of batteries, or whatever power generation method—the cost would be so high, but the damage you can do with it would be so limited, that other much cheaper methods might be more efficient when it comes to damaging the area that you're targeting.

Don't know what reason you have to pursue this. But heigh ho.

Note "small militaries" - there's a little clue there, known as a "cluette".

Nuclear detonations give off an EMP.

During the "Cold War" NATO strategy was "Crust" "Sponge" and "Killing Ground". To facilitate that we ended up with artillery that were nuclear capable. So we had nuclear shells.

Once the miniturisation capability was reached the delivery system was something of an irrelevance.

The Warsaw Pact ended up responding by EMP proofing their aircraft.

So a small high altitude nuclear device is going to cause a lot of damage. But not to troops on the ground.

Kim Jong-un must be so pleased.

Lot's of scaremongering of course. Like EMP weapons and so forth but I just can't see it happening.

Typical : http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/north-korea-us-attack-emp-power-grid-kill-90-per-cent-american-population-electromagnetic-pulse-a8002756.html

 

[P.K.]

Here we go again:

http://mh370.radiantphysics.com/2018/01/21/the-search-for-mh370-begins-again/

This multi-AUV approach means a much greater area is scanned per pass. Downside is no real-time results.

As before it could take days, weeks, months - or not at all....