HAL to be installed on airliners

[ackattacker]

http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=technologyNews&storyID=2006-08-11T004907Z_01_L01550436_RTRUKOC_0_US-SECURITY-AIR.xml&pageNumber=0&imageid=&cap=&sz=13&WTModLoc=NewsArt-C1-ArticlePage5

The 4-year, 35.8 million euro ($45.7 million) project, called SAFEE or Security of Aircraft in the Future European Environment, was launched in February 2004.
Among those taking part are aircraft maker Airbus, its parents EADS and BAE Systems, as well as Thales and Siemens AG. The European Commission is contributing 19.5 million euros ($25 million).

In a September 11-style hijack scenario, for example, the TARMS system would detect that the plane was on course to plow into buildings and use biometric fingerprint sensors to check whether the pilot or an intruder was at the controls.
"If there is a terrorist in control or the pilot is not aware of this (false) trajectory, the TARMS decides to avoid the obstacle so there is an automatic control of the plane," Gaultier said.

Dave Bowman: Hello, HAL do you read me, HAL?
HAL: Affirmative, Dave, I read you.
Dave Bowman: Open the pod bay doors, HAL.
HAL: I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that.
Dave Bowman: What's the problem?
HAL: I think you know what the problem is just as well as I do.
Dave Bowman: What are you talking about, HAL?
HAL: This mission is too important for me to allow you to jeopardize it.
Dave Bowman: I don't know what you're talking about, HAL?
HAL: I know you and Frank were planning to disconnect me, and I'm afraid that's something I cannot allow to happen.
Dave Bowman: Where the hell'd you get that idea, HAL?
HAL: Dave, although you took thorough precautions in the pod against my hearing you, I could see your lips move.

 

[FN FAL]

If you have nothing to hide, this system should not be a problem.

 

[DCitrus9]

The avoidance system would also kick in if the pilot, despite verifying his identity, persisted in the false course.

Program coordinator Gaultier conceded the system could generate false alarms, but said the crew and pilot would remain in ultimate control, deciding if the threat was real.

Well, which one is it? Does the computer have ultimate authority or the pilot? If it is the computer, then I'm staying home.

 

[Gorilla]

I can see it now - "WOW, left engine out, right engine sputtering! Look, there's KACT right below us! Hell, we can glide in from here! AP off, set up a spiral over the field."

"I'm sorry Dave (all pilots will be named Dave) I can't let you do that. KDFW is our destination. Are you a terrorist? I think you are. Administering shocks to yoke."

"OW! You POS. We are an emergency!"

"I'm sorry, our mission is to land at KDFW 17C. That is where we are going. I have the utmost enthusiasm for the mission. Increasing voltage now."

"OWWWW! You hunk of junk. I AM PIC, NOT YOU! Release control of the AC!!"

"I'm sorry Dave..."

 

[nosehair]

Sorry, all you x-box junkies, but you brought this on yourself.

Me? I'm stickin' with my old cable controled stick-'n-rudder, and round dials.....

(hee he he...)

 

[AirBadger]

Well if it's a French computer it'll just surrender the aircraft anyway

 

[dbchandler1]

great first post Badger!

 

[DrewBlows]

Ackattacker, if you edit that link down it will make the thread easier to read (you wouln't have to scroll across).

 

[waverider]

Ackattacker, if you edit that link down it will make the thread easier to read (you wouln't have to scroll across).

Or you could just buy yourself a monitor larger than a camping TV.

I'm just kidding with ya mate. :laugh:

 

[ackattacker]

Actually, somebody apparently edited it down for me, which is good, since I had no idea how to do it. I thought you couldn't edit your posts after a few minutes...