After the Loss of Flight MH370 - Airlines to be Given Access to Inmarsat Near-Real-Time Aircraft Tracking Service

As reported by the Seattle Times: Inmarsat Plc, a provider of global mobile satellite communications services, said it will offer free basic tracking services for planes flying over oceans in the hope of preventing another incident such as the loss of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370.

The British company said Monday that the service is being offered to all 11,000 commercial passenger aircraft already equipped with an Inmarsat satellite connection -- most of the world's long-haul commercial fleet.

"This offer responsibly, quickly and at little or no cost to the industry, addresses in part the problem brought to light by the recent tragic events around MH370," said Inmarsat CEO Rupert Pearce.

The Boeing 777 with 239 people on board was en route to Beijing from Kuala Lumpur on March 8 when it disappeared. The plane automatically sent signals to a satellite belonging to Inmarsat after the plane's transponder and its communication systems had shut down -- but researchers were unable to find the plane before the batteries in the black box flight recorder shut down.

Malaysia's government said the plane's last position was in the middle of the Indian Ocean, west of Perth, and that the flight ended there. It has not been found.

Inmarsat, which made its offer ahead of a conference in Canada on aircraft tracking, said it anticipated the adoption of further safety measures following the loss of MH370.

The company said it would also offer both an enhanced position reporting facility and a 'black box in the cloud' service that would stream historic and real-time flight data recorder and cockpit voice recorder information when a plane deviates from its course. These would not be free.

Inmarsat PLC started out in 1979 as an intergovernmental organization that helped track ships at sea, but became a private company in 1999.

Its customers now include airlines, broadcast media, oil and gas companies and aid agencies who use hand-held satellite phones, laptop size Internet devices and antennas linked to the company's 10 satellites to communicate.



Chris McLaughlin, a senior Inmarsat executive, said the uptake of the service could be almost immediate on 90 per cent of the global fleet of widebody aircraft as they have the necessary equipment already installed. He said a simple software upgrade would extend that to “virtually 100 per cent” of long-haul aircraft flying today.

The service would enable the aircraft to transmit data about its speed, height and direction over the Inmarsat network every 15 minutes.

Long-haul aircraft flying over the world’s oceans are out of radar contact for prolonged periods and normally use a combination of radio communications or transmissions via satellite to report their positions. The latter has been a voluntary premium service until now.

The offer by Inmarsat comes ahead of a meeting of the International Civil Aviation Organisation, the UN agency that sets global aviation standards, in Montreal on Monday to discuss real-time tracking of aircraft in the wake of the disappearance of MH370.

An interim report into the disappearance of the Malaysian airliner, which has still not been found despite the biggest international search in history, recommended that aircraft should be tracked in real-time.

This is a repeat of the recommendation made by French air accident investigators following the crash of an Air France aircraft in the South Atlantic in 2009. It was revealed in late March that ICAO had ignored their proposal to introduce a mandatory requirement for all commercial airliners to regularly “transmit basic flight parameters” such as position, altitude, speed and heading.

“By doing this at no cost we are looking to take the immediate stress out of the system as no doubt ICAO will be discussing what to do for the rest of the year,” Mr McLaughlin said.

He added that providing the basic service for free would cost Inmarsat about $3m a year. “It is a marginal cost to us but we think it is worth it.” He said the company hoped to recoup those losses by convincing more airlines to sign up for its premium services which allow the aircraft to transmit information back to the maintenance base about the performance of its systems, such as its engines and fuel consumption.

The take-up of satellite-based communications services by airlines has been slow because of the cost. Inmarsat was originally set up by the UN’s International Maritime Organisation 34 years ago to offer tracking and communications services to the shipping industry. It was privatised in 1999 but has continued to offer a free global maritime distress service.


The search for MH370 has been scaled back in recent weeks after the authorities failed to locate any wreckage in the southern Indian Ocean off the Australian coast. Investigators have focused on this area as the only clue to the whereabouts of the aircraft came from brief “electronic handshakes” that an Inmarsat system on the Malaysian jet had made with one of the company’s satellites.


The Inmarsat system on MH370 was not active because Malaysian Airlines was one of the many airlines around the world that had not signed up for the satellite services.

FCC Chairman Will Reportedly Revise Broadband Proposal

As reported by CNET: The chairman of the Federal Communications Commission has revised details of its proposed plan to rewrite Net neutrality to add assurances that Internet service providers will not be able to segregate Internet traffic into fast and slow lanes, according to the Wall Street Journal.

FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler is expected to reveal the new proposal as early as Monday, the Journal reported. The rules revision is an apparent attempt to quell concern that broadband providers will be allowed to degrade traffic speeds to some sites while allowing other sites to strike deals that assure preferential delivery of their web content to customers.

While not a dramatic revision of Wheeler's proposal, the new draft is expected to include language that will allow the FCC to ensure that broadband providers don't degrade the traffic of nonpaying customers. The new proposal will also seek comment on whether such "paid prioritization" should be prohibited altogether.

The commission's proposed plan ignited a frenzy of criticism on the Internet last month after being spotlighted in news reports. The reports suggested that the FCC had changed its position on certain aspects of its Open Internet rules, including shifting its stance to allow Internet service providers to charge companies for a faster lane of service.

The redrafting comes just days after the world's top tech heavyweights made a plea to the FCC to lay down the law and safeguard Net neutrality, which traditionally has prohibited blocking access or discriminating against Internet traffic traveling over an ISP's connections. Google, Microsoft, Facebook, Amazon, Twitter, Yahoo, eBay, and dozens of others wrote a letter (PDF) to the FCC on Wednesday asking for a "free and open Internet" and rules that protect users and Internet companies. In all, nearly 150 Internet companies signed the letter.

Over the past few weeks, Wheeler has worked to calm critics of the proposal saying that he is all for an open Internet. A couple of weeks ago, he wrote a blog post in which he pledged to use "every available power" to prevent ISPs from degrading service for the benefit of a few.

After the letter was released, Democratic FCC Commissioners Jessica Rosenworcel and Mignon Clyburn both issued statements questioning Wheeler's proposal. Clyburn wrote a blog post that called for a free and open Internet, as well as prohibiting pay-for-priority arrangements, and Rosenworcel issued a statement (PDF) asking the commissioners to "delay our consideration of his rules by a least a month. I believe that rushing headlong into a rulemaking next week fails to respect the public response to his proposal."

Wheeler's proposal will be voted on by the four other FCC commissioners at the agency's open meeting on Thursday.

Evaluating the Promise and the Pitfalls of the EOBR/ELD Rules

As reported by FleetOwner: As the commentary period for the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration’s (FMCSA) supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking regarding electronic logging devices (ELDs) begins to wind down, trade groups, industry suppliers, and others trying to analyses the potential promise and pitfalls not only of such devices but the specific regulations governing their use.

In meetings held during the 2014 Zonar Systems user conference in San Antonio, TX, last week, Fred Fakkema, the company’s VP of compliance, cautioned that as things stand right now the soonest FMCSA could issue a final rule regarding ELDs would be the spring of 2015, meaning a final adoption deadline for the devices wouldn't be until the spring of 2017.

“Once a final rule is posted, that’s when the adoption clock starts,” he explained. “But right now there’s a huge push on to extend the comment period another 30 days past the May 18 deadline because this is just such a huge rule; it is 268 pages long.”

One sticking point in current deliberations regarding ELD operation is the issue of “personal conveyance,” when a driver goes off duty but must use his or her tractor to go home, travel to overnight parking, or get something to eat.

“Right now there’s no limit on personal conveyance,” Fakkema (seen at right) said. “For example, if they drive from the terminal yard to dinner or a movie, the device will not record that as on-duty drive time – as long as they are not getting paid.” For authorized in-yard moves, such as shifting a trailer between docks, that time would be recorded as “on-duty not-driving,” he added.

However, other scenarios confuse that issue, such as if a driver uses his or her tractor to go get lunch yet gets paid for that time. “That’s one of the difficulties with this rule – it’s open to multiple interpretations,” Fakkema explained.

Another big issue regarding ELDs – one that sank FMCSA’s first attempt to mandate them three years ago – regards “driver harassment,” which Jack Van Steenburg, FMCSA’s assistant administrator and chief safety officer, revolves around preventing motor carriers from disrupting a driver’s off-duty time via the device as well as giving drivers “ownership” of the hours of service (HOS) information recoded by the devices.

“The big key to this rulemaking are the anti-harassment provisions.” Steeburg explained at the Zonar conference. “It mandates a ‘mute option’ for when the driver is in the sleeper berth, establishes a compliant process and [harassment] penalties, and gives drivers access to their own HOS records.”

Yet in an ironic twist, the proposed ELD regulations also require drivers to provide paper documentation to back up their electronic records from one of five categories: payroll data, schedules/itineraries, trip records/bills of lading, expense receipts, or communication records.

Rob Abbott, VP-safety policy for the American Trucking Associations (ATA), said many in the industry believe that documentation requirement is “too broad,” though he stressed the trade group supports the overall initiative to mandate ELDs as they will improve HOS compliance and thus safety.

Zonar’s Fakkema put it more bluntly: “Is it defeating the entire purpose of ELDs by requiring paper documentation?” he asked.

ATA’s Abbot said the trade group is also expressing concern over what he called the four-year “grandfather period” being provided within the ELD rule for carriers currently using electronic onboard recorders (EOBRs) systems.

“Is four years long enough? Can older [EOBR] devices be upgraded with simple software to comply with the new rules or will carriers need to switch over to new technology?” he asked.
Collin Mooney, deputy executive director of the Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance (CVSA), expressed his group’s concern about the tamper resistance of current ELD technology and whether the FMCSA’s “phase in” approach allowing older EOBRs to be used alongside new ELDs could create difficulties on the enforcement end of things.

As it stands now, FMCSA’s proposed ELD rulemaking would allow fleets using “ELD-like” devices meeting current standards to keep using them until two years after the final adoption deadline for ELDs, which would be four years until after the final rule becomes effective, whenever that may be.

“But that ‘two plus two’ phase-in could create a situation where law enforcement may be reviewing three different types of HOS recording systems – EOBRs, ELDs and paper logbooks – for two years,” he said.

Then there is the ongoing debate over the technical requirements for ELDs within the rule, stressed Zonar’s Fakkema.

“FMCSA is trying to get interoperability of ELDs into the rules, with standard file formats to ease the exporting of data,” he said. “Basically, it’s trying to get all the devices to play together.”
The difficulty is not only in harmonizing electronic HOS data but also how to transfer it to law enforcement during roadside inspections. “Right now in the rule, ELDs must be capable of transferring the driver’s log electronically or by printing a paper record,” Fakkema explained.

During roadside inspections, primary electronic information transfers can occur one of three ways: by email, by wireless web service, or by Bluetooth. Two backup transfer methods must also be available; one must be law be a USB port, with the other either a scanable quick response “QR” code or by “bumping’ electronic devices together.

“And if you can’t show the logbook information in a ‘grid/graph’ format on the ELD display screen then you must print it out,” he added.

Fakkema stressed, too, that there will be information delivery issues regardless of the type of technology involved. “Take QR codes: you can only load so much data into these, so will there be enough room to fit all of the HOS information in one?” he said.

Then there are what he called the “malfunction” rules, which allow a driver to revert to paper logs in case of an ELD failure for up to seven days – though drivers can apply for a five day extension with the FMCSA. “An ELD though must be repaired and back on line in eight days under the rule,” he pointed out.

That’s why Fakkema believes the industry won’t see a final ELD rule for at least another year. “We still have all those issues to get through, plus OMB [the Office of Management and Budget] needs at least eight months to sign off on it,” he said.

SpaceX Injunction Dissolved; US Can Buy Russian Rockets for Space Launches

As reported by arstechnica: Last week, the United States Court of Federal Claims granted an injunction that prevented US-based companies from purchasing Russian RD-180 rocket engines. That injunction was put in place to give the court time to examine whether or not buying those engines contravened Executive Order 13,661 designed to sanction persons in the Russian government over the ongoing Russian-Ukraine crisis. Yesterday afternoon, however, the same court sided with the US government’s appeal—to the best of the court’s knowledge, the purchase of RD-180 rocket engines doesn't violate the executive order.

The injunction was granted in response to a lawsuit by SpaceX and was specifically targeted at the United Launch Alliance, a joint venture between Lockheed-Martin and Boeing that manages space launches for the US government. SpaceX argued that it hadn't been allowed to compete for the contracts currently being serviced by the ULA. It also said that the money ULA uses to buy RD-180 engines for the Atlas V launch vehicle benefits Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin.

Rogozin, SpaceX reasoned, is head of the Russian space program, and the RD-180 engines are manufactured by state-owned company NPO Energomash. Since Rogozin is also on a "Specifically Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List" (due to the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict), payments made to NPO Energomash were effectively made to Dmitry Rogozin—something that, if true, would be explicitly prohibited by Executive Order 13,661.

The injunction had been granted primarily on the basis of that potential violation rather than on whether or not SpaceX had been unlawfully prevented from bidding on the launch contracts. The US government formally filed a motion to dismiss the injunction on May 6; yesterday’s decision to grant the dismissal hinged on a number of letters filed with that motion, coming from the Departments of State, Commerce, and the Treasury.

When issuing the injunction last week, the court specifically stated that it would consider the opinion of those three departments in determining whether to extend or dissolve the injunction; it has now weighed in, with State and Treasury both saying that Executive Order 13,661 is not being violated and with Commerce deferring to the judgment of State and Treasury:

These letters collectively explain that “to the best of [the relevant Department’s] knowledge, purchases from and payments to NPO Energomash currently do not directly or indirectly contravene Executive Order 13,661.” Ex. A at 2; Ex. C at 2 (same); Ex. B at 1 (explaining that the United States Department of Commerce “defers to the Departments of the Treasury and State regarding whether... Deputy Prime Minister Rogozin... controls NPO Energomash and if so whether that control contravenes Executive Order 13,661”).

Much in the same way that the injunction remained open on its potential dissolution, the dissolution order notes that if any agency of the US government does determine that there might be a chance that the rocket engine purchases are violating the executive order, the injunction might be resurrected:

If the Government receives any indication, however, that purchases from or payment of money to NPO Energomash by ULS, ULA, or the United States Air Force will directly or indirectly contravene Executive Order 13,661, the Government will inform the court immediately.

At this point, whether or not SpaceX was unlawfully barred from competing for the contracts remains an unaddressed issue. It's a pretty good bet that we'll see further legal wrangling from SpaceX on the matter.

London Black Taxis Plan Congestion Chaos to Protest Uber

As reported by BBC News: The Licensed Taxi Drivers Association complains that Uber's drivers are using a smartphone app to calculate fares despite it being illegal for private vehicles to be fitted with taximeters.

Transport for London has declined to intervene, because it disagrees that there has been a breach of the law.

LTDA now plans to force the issue by holding the action in early June.

"Transport for London not enforcing the Private Hire Vehicles Act is dangerous for Londoners," Steve McNamara, LTDA's general secretary, told the BBC.

"I anticipate that the demonstration against TfL's handling of Uber will attract many many thousands of cabs and cause severe chaos, congestion and confusion across the metropolis."
TfL told the association last month that it believed Uber's vehicles were not strictly "equipped" with taximeters since there was not "some sort of connection between the device and the vehicle".

Rather, the app was merely making use of data about the distance travelled and time taken, which was not illegal in itself.

 

The LTDA says it expects many thousand black cab drivers to take part in the protest

LTDA rejects this distinction and is now threatening to seek a judicial review.
"We have seen no evidence to suggest that Uber London Ltd are not fit and proper to hold a London private hire vehicle operator's licence, but no final decisions have been made whilst Uber's operating model is still under investigation," TfL told the BBC.

The dispute marks the latest in a series of clashes between Uber and the established taxi trade.

The firm is also facing restrictions on its operations in Paris, Brussels, Berlin, Sydney and a number of US cities.

Disruptive drive San Francisco-based Uber describes itself as a "pick-up" service that connects those needing a ride with a background-checked private driver, and takes a cut - typically 20% - of the fee.
It now operates in more than 100 cities across 30 countries, including Manchester where it launched this week.

The firm markets its service as offering "cutting-edge safety measures":

• allowing customers to see the name and photo of the driver before they arrive
• letting approved friends follow the journey on a live map
• providing an email of the route the car used, so that a client can ask for a charge to be reviewed if they believe the driver took a roundabout journey

 

The Uber app allows customers to see how many available drivers are nearby

Fees are based upon data gathered by the driver's app and whether "surge pricing" is in effect because of heavy demand.

The five-year-old firm acknowledges that it can prove a disruptive force.

"Competition in my view is always good for the customer because it makes all of us up our game in terms of quality and service," Uber's general manager in London, Jo Bertram, said.
"On the driver side, we offer a much more flexible model that is very different from the old-school private hire industry, that allows them to work as independent business operators however and whenever they choose."

The LTDA said while the taximeter was the focus of its complaint, it had wider objections to the firm.

"Uber, funded by Google, Goldman Sachs and others, has a stated aim of challenging legislation that is not compatible with its business model," said Mr McNamara.

"This is not some philanthropic friendly society, it's an American monster that has no qualms about breaching any and all laws in the pursuit of profit, most of which will never see a penny of tax paid in the UK."

A spokeswoman for Uber said it rejected this characterization of its business.

European battles Other traditional taxi associations are also taking a stand against the firm in Europe:

• In Brussels a complaint resulted in a court setting a 10,000 euro ($13,920; £8,205) fine as the penalty for Uber drivers who continued to pick up customers without the necessary licences
• Berlin's taxi association has won a temporary injunction against the firm, but has chosen not to enforce the action to avoid the risk of having to cover lost fees if the ruling is later overturned
• French operators have convinced their government to propose banning the use of GPS-enabled apps by private car services including Uber. The government had previously made such companies wait 15 minutes before picking up a booking, but the country's Supreme Court ruled the move anti-competitive

 

French taxi drivers have opposed Uber's service in Paris

Uber does, however, have support from the European Commission.

Vice-president Neelie Kroes has said her staff used the service to "stay safe and save taxpayers money", adding that European authorities should help the firm comply with standards rather than trying to ban it.

"We very much welcome her support and her comments," said Ms Bertram.

BMW Unveils the Solar Charging Carport of the Future

As reported by Motor Authority: So you have a new BMW i3 or i8 in your driveway, and you’re loving the freedom the electric-drive capability gives you—but you’d like to be even greener? BMW DesignworksUSA has the answer with its stunningly simple, high-tech solar carport.

It’s still a concept design at this stage, but the bamboo and carbon fiber structure just begs to be built. Supported atop the structure is an array of solar panels that harvest the sun’s energy and store it in you BMW i-vehicle.

In addition to being greener than charging from the grid, the solar energy carport allows the BMW i owner to be more self-sufficient in their energy supply. To harness the energy from the solar panels, a BMW i Wallbox Pro is needed. Once integrated, the carport and Wallbox Pro can then directly charge either the i3 or i8. With the Wallbox Pro’s features, excess solar energy not needed to charge the car can be used by the connected house.
“With the solar carport concept we opted for a holistic approach: not only is the vehicle itself sustainable, but so is its energy supply,” explained Tom Allemann of BMW Designworks USA. “This is therefore an entirely new generation of carports that allows energy to be produced in a simple and transparent way. It renders the overarching theme of lightweight design both visible and palpable.”

BMW’s beautiful, functional solar carport certainly complements the ethos behind the company’s i brand. Here’s hoping BMW decides to offer it as an optional upgrade to i owners in the near future.
 

Should the Feds Drive Smart Cars - Making Use of Telematics?

As reported by the Washington Business Journal: Sure, it’s a little Big Brother. But with telematics, government could save a whole bunch of money — and industry could sell a lot of cool technologies.

Here's what telematics — which combines telecommunications and information processing to send, receive, and store information related to vehicle fleets — would allow agencies to do: monitor not only if its employees are speeding in government-leased cars, but whether they’re doing too many rapid starts or sudden stops, or even idling too much. They’ll be able to see if the employee is riding the brakes. They’ll be able to see whether they’re driving reckless — and even how the employee handled the car right before an accident.

Little creepy? Maybe. But the technology could save the government a lot of money, the Government Accountability Office said in a new report. Fleet managers could essentially provide tips for drivers on being more fuel-efficient, for example. They can take privileges away from those that aren't following the rules of the road and risking car crashes. They could even use data to defend employees against frivolous lawsuits by people claiming a federal worker was at fault in an accident. 

On top of that, agencies could analyze precise utilization rates of vehicles in their fleets and eliminate cars or trucks that don’t get used. They could see the remaining brake pad depth and engine diagnostics (yes, this technology gets that granular) to determine when maintenance is needed.

There are examples of savings already achieved by agencies, in fact. A fleet manager at Idaho National Laboratory reported that telematics data contributed to the decision to eliminate 65 vehicles since fiscal 2011, with an estimated average annual savings of about $390,000.

So then, with telematics offered as an option by the General Services Administration on the vehicles that it leases to agencies, why aren’t more using it? For one thing, certain costs that telematics would save are not their problem. For example, fuel costs are covered by a monthly fee, which is based primarily on miles traveled, so being more fuel-efficient isn’t really on their radar.

At the same time, telematics costs money. How much varies depending on what type of technologies are installed and how.

Some might be installed by the manufacturer, some might be add-on systems, and some might be mobile device applications and programs. Some might provide data via satellite or cellular connections, transmitting on a regular basis or when a vehicle passes a fixed-data download station. (Fixed download stations pose mostly upfront, fixed costs, whereas the cost for a satellite connection is typically levied in ongoing monthly data charges, the GAO noted.) On top of all that, fleets may rent telematic devices for a short period of time to obtain a snapshot of usage data, or may select a long-term contract for ongoing monitoring.


That brings us to the contracting community. The General Services Administration is currently engaged in efforts to secure new contracts for telematics devices for federal employees, and hopes to have them available by the end of fiscal year 2014, according to the GAO. None of the specific vendors bidding for the contracts were noted. As part of that effort, though, the agency is hoping to leverage government’s buying power, as it's been doing a lot lately through its strategic sourcing efforts. Whether there's enough demand is tough to know, given that agencies have only recently begun to pursue the technology in significant quantity.