Safety Investigation Report 2018:1 Factual Information/1.6/1.6.10 Boeing Patent

MH370 DECODED
Jump to navigation Jump to search

SAFETY INVESTIGATION REPORT MH370 (9M-MRO)



1.6.10 Boeing Patent on Remote Control Take-over of Aircraft

There have been speculations that MH370 could have been taken over control remotely in order to foil a hijack attempt. Some of these speculations have mentioned a US patent that Boeing filed for in February 2003 and received (US 7,142,971 B2) in November 2006 for a system that, once activated, would remove all controls from pilots and automatically fly and land the aircraft at a predetermined location.

According to the patent, existing preventative measures such as bullet- proof doors and the carriage of air marshals on board may have vulnerabilities. The flight crew could decide to open a lockable bullet-proof cockpit door [refer to Section 1.6.8, para. 4)] and air marshals, if used, might be over-powered. In light of the potential that unauthorised persons might be able to access the flight controls of an aircraft, the inventors conceived of a technique to avoid this risk by removing any form of human decision process that may be influenced by the circumstances of the situation, including threats or violence on-board.

The ‘uninterruptible’ autopilot envisioned by the patent could be activated, either by pilots, on-board sensors or remotely via radio or satellite links by the airline or government agencies if there were attempts to forcibly gain control of the cockpit. This system once activated would disallow pilot inputs and prevent anyone on-board from interrupting the automatic take- over. Thus, the personnel on-board could not be forced into carrying out the demands of any unauthorised person(s). To make it fully independent, the system described in the patent would have its own power supply, inaccessible in-flight, so that it could not be disengaged by tripping circuit breakers accessible on-board the aircraft. The aircraft would remain in automatic mode until after landing when ground crew working in conjunction with authorised personnel would be called to disengage the system.

Boeing has confirmed that it has not implemented the patented system or any other technology to remotely pilot a commercial aircraft and is not aware of any Boeing commercial aircraft that has incorporated such technology. The technology was never installed on an aircraft.

It should also be noted that the aircraft 9M-MRO was delivered in May 2002 to MAS before the patent was issued in 2006. The aircraft was under the control of MAS for the entire time after delivery except for a short duration at Pudong, Shanghai Airport, China in August 2012, when it underwent wing tip repair by Boeing [refer to Section 1.6.4, para. 2)]. Even then the repair was under the oversight of MAS engineers. Aircraft modification installation data do not indicate that any systems like that described in the patent were installed on the aircraft post delivery and during in-service. Airworthiness protocols require that all modifications are approved for installation and a record kept of each modification incorporated. There is no reason to believe any systems like that described in the patent either were or could have been incorporated without the knowledge of MAS.

From the foregoing, there is no evidence to support the belief that control of the aircraft 9M-MRO (operating as MH370) could have been or was taken over remotely as the technology was not implemented on commercial aircraft.