Wi-fi in airplanes

Not surprising, instrument (not only aircraft) manufactures for a long time did not test much less harden their electronics. Now most only do so for the known sources.

The photo is of a 1980s Saab on which the parking brake was not set, that subsequently rolled away from mis-set chocks.

No wifi angle at all.

My comment had to do with personal experience with interference problems. Aero-space, medical, industrial, communications you name it I've had some involvement with the problem.

No chocks, no brakes:

True. However, the original text is relevent.

However the publication is deceptive. There is no reason to show an unrelated aircraft incident. I immediately assumed it was a fake since I've been to crash sites and you don't find a mishap in that kind of shape.

Perhaps it was someone controlling it remotely, like they do in the films? (That could provide the wifi element.)

Chris

It's called stock footage, and for better or for worse, it's part of modern media.

So show a Honeywell EFIS panel, FFS.

Yes, at least show something relevant.

There was a time when stock images or footage would be labeled as such. Now they just put up "wallpaper" imagery that is sometimes relevant, and sometimes not.

If you watch The Rachel Maddow Show, the staff is really into searching out stock imagery used by politicians, often with hilarious results.

Back to aircraft, a part I designed er um had an issue. Let's put it that way. It was used in the VOR vector circuit. Not every part had the problem. The manufacturer had found a way to get the part to work by inserting a resistor in an odd spot. I was harangued to approve this fix by sales. It turns out the FAA allows (or so I was told) the addition of passive components without requiring the device to be approved again. This is insanity. I could add a cap in the right place and make something oscillate that shouldn't, or stop something that should be oscillating. Passive components can cause real problems.

When the manufacturer decided to visit the plant to put the fear of Jesus in me, I arranged (with my bosses permission) not to be found, and made the QA manager deal with it. What I did do is get permission to drop my work and spend some time investigating what shifted in the process to fix the problem, and I did a modification to the part. [Never do a hack of a fix. Find the problem, analyze, and engineer.]

But the main point here is in theory they could add a ferrite here or there to filter the wifi. Or physical shielding, stuff like that.

There should be no way for any RF in the cabin to interfere with the aircraft. I have some parts out of a F-16's network that uses triax and wide band transformers on the data bus. Obviously they wanted good shielding and no ground related issues.

The problem with avionics in general is the integrator makes a pile of money on the product, but the component manufacturer, at least in chips, makes nada. The volume is low, the headaches are big. Custom chips is another story, but COTS is the mindset of the aviation industry.