Wondering why airliners don’t use cameras

LongRoadBob

LongRoadBob

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
Feb 26, 2016
Messages
1,393
Location
Oslo, Norway
Display Name
Display name:
Jacker
for a while now I’ve been wondering why airliners don’t have outside (and or inside) cameras.
With the advances in camera tech it would seem like a huge help in situations that can come up.

Watching air crash investigations, you see instances where the pilots wanted to get a visual, either themselves or send a flight attendant to go look at the wings, engine, etc, but where there was an obvious problem that could not be seen from the tiny passenger windows.

Wouldn’t it be a huge advantage if a pilot could see outside what control,surfaces etc were doing?
Just saw one where fuel was being consumed from one tank at an alarming rate. Their solution from indications turned out to be the exact wrong one for the actual situation, and if they had seen the trail of fuel streaming off the one side, they could have conserved what they had left.

Or incidents where the stabilizer was damaged, or out of control, where they had to use precious time fighting it, and trying to figure out what was wrong, when a simple video feed of it would have shown them exactly what was wrong.

Some car makers, like my RAV4, have backup cameras and they are a huge help.

Just seems like certain angles, positions having a camera in place would give a lot of valuable info. Stabilizer, wings, under visual of the landing gear, etc.
 
LongRoadBob said:
for a while now I’ve been wondering why airliners don’t have outside (and or inside) cameras.
With the advances in camera tech it would seem like a huge help in situations that can come up.

Watching air crash investigations, you see instances where the pilots wanted to get a visual, either themselves or send a flight attendant to go look at the wings, engine, etc, but where there was an obvious problem that could not be seen from the tiny passenger windows.

Wouldn’t it be a huge advantage if a pilot could see outside what control,surfaces etc were doing?
Just saw one where fuel was being consumed from one tank at an alarming rate. Their solution from indications turned out to be the exact wrong one for the actual situation, and if they had seen the trail of fuel streaming off the one side, they could have conserved what they had left.

Or incidents where the stabilizer was damaged, or out of control, where they had to use precious time fighting it, and trying to figure out what was wrong, when a simple video feed of it would have shown them exactly what was wrong.

Some car makers, like my RAV4, have backup cameras and they are a huge help.

Just seems like certain angles, positions having a camera in place would give a lot of valuable info. Stabilizer, wings, under visual of the landing gear, etc.
Click to expand...
Along the same lines, (if they don't already do this) they should upload the voice, data AND CAMERA IMAGES, along with position information, to the cloud. After all, they are right there next to them any way.;)
Then they wouldn't have to search under the ocean, or in the flaming wreckage at the bottom of a crater, to get at least some of the valuable information.
 
The larger airliners, like the 777-300, A380, A350, have external cameras to assist with taxiing.
 
JOhnH said:
Along the same lines, (if they don't already do this) they should upload the voice, data AND CAMERA IMAGES, along with position information, to the cloud. After all, they are right there next to them any way.;)
Then they wouldn't have to search under the ocean, or in the flaming wreckage at the bottom of a crater, to get at least some of the valuable information.
Click to expand...

Well since they are most of the times above the clouds, they technically cannot upload to the cloud, they have to download to the cloud and that’s just wrong
 
WannFly said:
Well since they are most of the times above the clouds, they technically cannot upload to the cloud, they have to download to the cloud and that’s just wrong
Click to expand...
And, OMG, what if they were IN the cloud?... they wouldn’t have to send it anywhere? :dunno: Or just toss it out a window?
 
Last edited:
No good reason really. Of course it would absolutely help in accident investigations and improve saftey.

Money is a factor though. Saftey can be expensive.
 
There are far more auto accidents and fatalities than commercial aviation. So lets put cameras and microphones in all cars so we can help in accident investigations. I'm sure many here will support that.

Also, GA has a high number of accidents and fatalities, so lets mandate all GA aircraft be retrofitted with cameras and microphones, you know, to aid in accident investigations.

I'm sure many here will support that as well.
 
Along the same lines, I’ve always thought it would be a good idea to set up cameras to monitor the approach and departure ends of each runway, at least at busier airports, since that is where most accidents happen. You see lots of ramp and security cameras that only capture accidents in their peripheral vision (Asiana at SFO for example).
 
All those electrons must weigh a lot. They would never be able to get off the ground.:)
 
Can someone tell me an accident in a 121 airplane that hasn't been solved because there weren't video cameras in the cockpit?
 
Groundpounder said:
The larger airliners, like the 777-300, A380, A350, have external cameras to assist with taxiing.
Click to expand...
At least some Cathay Pacific 777s have outside cameras that the passengers can view on their seatback screens.
 
Groundpounder said:
Can someone tell me an accident in a 121 airplane that hasn't been solved because there weren't video cameras in the cockpit?
Click to expand...

“Because” there were no cameras in the cockpit? Unprovable. No unsolved accident has ever stated that it “could not be solved due to the absence of cockpit cameras.” Can you now show us how the lack of pirates worldwide has lead to increased planetary temperatures?
 
Doc Holliday said:
There are far more auto accidents and fatalities than commercial aviation. So lets put cameras and microphones in all cars so we can help in accident investigations. I'm sure many here will support that.

Also, GA has a high number of accidents and fatalities, so lets mandate all GA aircraft be retrofitted with cameras and microphones, you know, to aid in accident investigations.

I'm sure many here will support that as well.
Click to expand...

Around here most commercial transportation has it. County buses do. Most taxis have at least a dash cam.

Any thoughts on the OPs question? Any reason not to?
 
LongRoadBob said:
for a while now I’ve been wondering why airliners don’t have outside (and or inside) cameras.
With the advances in camera tech it would seem like a huge help in situations that can come up.

Watching air crash investigations, you see instances where the pilots wanted to get a visual, either themselves or send a flight attendant to go look at the wings, engine, etc, but where there was an obvious problem that could not be seen from the tiny passenger windows.

Wouldn’t it be a huge advantage if a pilot could see outside what control,surfaces etc were doing?
Just saw one where fuel was being consumed from one tank at an alarming rate. Their solution from indications turned out to be the exact wrong one for the actual situation, and if they had seen the trail of fuel streaming off the one side, they could have conserved what they had left.

Or incidents where the stabilizer was damaged, or out of control, where they had to use precious time fighting it, and trying to figure out what was wrong, when a simple video feed of it would have shown them exactly what was wrong.

Some car makers, like my RAV4, have backup cameras and they are a huge help.

Just seems like certain angles, positions having a camera in place would give a lot of valuable info. Stabilizer, wings, under visual of the landing gear, etc.
Click to expand...

There are some well thought out reasons described here:
https://www.quora.com/Why-arent-the...-missing-or-inside-fire-in-the-baggage-section
 
Wow. Snarky crowd this morning. I think the cameras would be a good idea especially to OPs point about allowing The Crew 2 see if there are external issues on the plane that they couldn't otherwise see.
 
Groundpounder said:
Can someone tell me an accident in a 121 airplane that hasn't been solved because there weren't video cameras in the cockpit?
Click to expand...

It’s not about finding the accident cause, rather it’s a cockpit visual for the pilots to try to figure out what’s happening to maybe prevent an accident. As cheap and simple as it is, makes sense to me. But I’m no expert.
 
455 Bravo Uniform said:
As cheap and simple as it is...
Click to expand...
Do those in favor think it should be required for flight (MEL, dispatch, whatever)? If so, then a system that can meet the reliability needs will be neither cheap nor simple. If not, then why have it at all?

Nauga,
and another FMEA
 
nauga said:
Do those in favor think it should be required for flight (MEL, dispatch, whatever)? If so, then a system that can meet the reliability needs will be neither cheap nor simple. If not, then why have it at all?

Nauga,
and another FMEA
Click to expand...

Required? No. Helpful? Yes. Conclusive? Impossible to say.
 
Lachlan said:
Required? No. Helpful? Yes. Conclusive? Impossible to say.
Click to expand...
Even if you remove the passengers there isn't enough room for all the stuff that might be 'helpful' in troubleshooting problems. ;)

Nauga,
who keeps his feathers numbered for just such an occasion
 
jbarrass said:
Around here most commercial transportation has it. County buses do. Most taxis have at least a dash cam.

Any thoughts on the OPs question? Any reason not to?
Click to expand...
Pilots' unions. They really don't want this.
 
nauga said:
Even if you remove the passengers there isn't enough room for all the stuff that might be 'helpful' in troubleshooting problems. ;)

Nauga,
who keeps his feathers numbered for just such an occasion
Click to expand...

True story. I think lots of things would be helpful in this world, barring objections like feasibility, accessibility, reliability, cost, physical dimensional limitations, aerodynamics, gravity, taxes, health insurance, how long to cook fish, how often to bathe the dog, weight penalties, induced or parasitic drag, fuel burn, poached vs. hard boiled, and so forth. Helpful does not necessarily mean possible, practical, or real.
 
Most Airline FA contracts also state no cameras in the cabin....Union does not want them
 
The OP was talking about cameras on the outside of the aircraft - not the cabin or cockpit.

I don't think anybody wants cameras watching them while they work. How many cubicle workers would be okay with it? It's not just a union thing.
 
Hmmm...
kayoh190 said:
The OP was talking about cameras on the outside of the aircraft - not the cabin or cockpit.

I don't think anybody wants cameras watching them while they work. How many cubicle workers would be okay with it? It's not just a union thing.
Click to expand...

How many cubical workers would actually work if they knew the boss was watching? o_O
 
455 Bravo Uniform said:
It’s not about finding the accident cause, rather it’s a cockpit visual for the pilots to try to figure out what’s happening to maybe prevent an accident. As cheap and simple as it is, makes sense to me. But I’m no expert.
Click to expand...
First off, we're pilots, right? Nothing in aviation is cheap. If you have cameras, they won't be GoPros, they've got to be super, duper, over-engineered and tested reliable and half as good as anything you can purchase off the shelf. Then you have to make sure they won't catch fire and endanger the aircraft, design smooth optimal fairings with good optics - and hire someone to keep the optic ports clean of bugs and debris, hire someone to monitor the systems, install some sort of looping hard-drive that you have to replace every so often, wire the feeds into the cockpit, make sure that the pilots don't get overly dependent on the feeds, etc... you know where this is going.
And yeah, it'd be cool to have them.
 
kayoh190 said:
The OP was talking about cameras on the outside of the aircraft - not the cabin or cockpit.

I don't think anybody wants cameras watching them while they work. How many cubicle workers would be okay with it? It's not just a union thing.
Click to expand...
Pilots will get cameras staring in their face someday, union is why it hasn’t happened. However, that fight will be lost, just the same as the railroad unions lost it. Most railroad engineers have a camera staring in their face. Management randomly reviews them.

Most cubicle workers have a web cam staring in their face that the company could activate if they desired. Not to mention the fact that most cubicle workers have their direct report within 100 ft of them that is watching them. Our office also has security cameras.
 
455 Bravo Uniform said:
It’s not about finding the accident cause, rather it’s a cockpit visual for the pilots to try to figure out what’s happening to maybe prevent an accident. As cheap and simple as it is, makes sense to me. But I’m no expert.
Click to expand...

I know that, I was referring to people up thread saying there needs to be cockpit cameras with live downlink.
 
jesse said:
Most cubicle workers have a web cam staring in their face that the company could activate if they desired. Not to mention the fact that most cubicle workers have their direct report within 100 ft of them that is watching them. Our office also has security cameras.
Click to expand...

Why do you suppose they haven't activated the web cams? Or better yet, have everyone's screens be remotely monitored? It's because people don't want it, and there's a point where productivity is *hurt* when you treat them like slaves. This is a human thing, not just a union one. I'm not saying this won't happen one day, but there's already voice and data recorders, just like your office has a boss 100 feet away and security cameras. There's no need to take the next step unless someone feels there's a financial reason to do so, and as has been mentioned a number of times on this thread - an airline won't spend a dime unless some bean counter feels they'll make that money back and then some.
 
kayoh190 said:
Why do you suppose they haven't activated the web cams? Or better yet, have everyone's screens be remotely monitored? It's because people don't want it, and there's a point where productivity is *hurt* when you treat them like slaves. This is a human thing, not just a union one. I'm not saying this won't happen one day, but there's already voice and data recorders, just like your office has a boss 100 feet away and security cameras. There's no need to take the next step unless someone feels there's a financial reason to do so, and as has been mentioned a number of times on this thread - an airline won't spend a dime unless some bean counter feels they'll make that money back and then some.
Click to expand...
You’re wrong. In most corporate offices security cameras are standard and they record 24x7. They often are only reviewed if there is an incident, but they are turned on. Web filtering / history / recording is also standard practice (it’s about liability). I install and support these systems. This is the world we live in, like it or not.
 
John221us said:
You’re wrong. In most corporate offices security cameras are standard and they record 24x7. They often are only reviewed if there is an incident, but they are turned on. Web filtering / history / recording is also standard practice (it’s about liability). I install and support these systems. This is the world we live in, like it or not.
Click to expand...

But do you record/monitor from the employee's web cam? Monitor their screen(s) remotely? My post wasn't talking about security cameras and web histories - I'm aware of all that. I used to work in the world of Dilbert in my prior life. ;)
 
The Unions will fight to the bitter end to not have cameras in the cabin or cockpit. The ONLY way I could ever see this happening is if management and the FAA were locked out of the system physically or regulatory like the CVR. Only the NTSB could use the video.

I’m a 100% against it unless I knew I couldn’t get thrown under the bus by the company or a rogue FAA Inspector.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top