200 smart AI powered cameras start to detect traffic violations
Mangaluru City traffic police have already commenced the trial run, and violators have been receiving alert messages on their phones. However, the system will be officially launched in July, and thereafter, violators will have to pay penalties as per the Motor Vehicles Rules.
The high-resolution cameras installed at prominent locations in the city started detecting various violations, including two-wheeler riding without a helmet, car driving without a seat belt, wrong-side driving, and signal jumping.
The MSCL installed nearly 200 artificial intelligence cameras at various locations on the main roads of the city. High-resolution cameras equipped with AI tools are monitoring traffic flow and effectively detecting violations.
The cameras provide real-time visuals, while the AI tools analyse the captured footage to identify and track traffic offences.
DCP (crime & traffic) K Ravi Shankar told TOI that the entire system is under a trial run and it will be made fully functional from July 1.
"Those who violate traffic rules will receive messages on their mobile phones during the trial run. However, we are not framing charges based on the camera inputs for the time being. We are planning to launch the system from next month with the help of the National Informatics Centre (NIC).
All cameras are linked to the NIC. After completing all necessary procedures, the system will be in place to check traffic violations in the city. In the next 10 days, we will be able to rectify all technical issues," he said.
Smart cameras have been installed on MG Road, Bendoorwell, Mangaladevi, Pandeshwar, Mallikatta, Bejai, and several other locations.
Follow more information on
Air India plane crash in Ahmedabad here
. Get
real-time live updates
on rescue operations and check
full list of passengers onboard AI 171
.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
an hour ago
- Business Standard
Ex-pilot points to chip fault, not pilot error in report on AI171 crash
A report released by the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau following the fatal crash of Air India flight AI171 indicated a chip malfunction as a cause of the crash, a former pilot told Reuters on Saturday. The AI 171 crash of the Boeing Dreamliner 787-8 aircraft in Gujarat's Ahmedabad killed 260 people, including 229 passengers, 12 crew members, and 19 people on the ground. Senior lecturer at Buckinghamshire New University and former pilot Marco Chan said that although the report did not explicitly exonerate the two pilots from human error, the chances of accidentally switching the fuel cut-off toggle would be "close to zero". The preliminary report, released on July 12, depicted confusion in the cockpit shortly before the jetliner crashed and killed 260 people last month, after the plane's engine fuel cutoff switches flipped almost simultaneously and starved the engines of fuel. "If you will to exonerate the pilots from Pilot Error. This is what the reports were stating. Now they didn't say that explicitly, but from reading the findings, it tells me that it wasn't a Pilot error. What the report seems to be suggesting is the error with the chip," the former pilot told Reuters in an interview. "What the report seems to be suggesting is the error with the chip. It's as simple as one chip not working properly, losing contact," he added. A former pilot has shed light on the possible cause of the AI171 crash, stating that a technical issue may have been responsible for the incident. According to the former pilot, once contact is lost, the system can fail, much like a laptop experiencing a blue screen of death. He explained that the thermal cycle being in a warm condition could have caused the signal to not be contacted properly. "Once you lose contact, it's kind of like how electricity works; the signal is not contacted properly. It's because the thermal cycle is in a warm condition," Chan said. The former pilot further elaborated that the system may have stopped functioning due to excessive workload, similar to a laptop shutting down. "It's been working very hard, like your laptop stops working, basically giving you the blue screen of death and Windows," the former pilot added. During the interview with Reuters, the former pilot pointed out that the fuel control unit (FU) failed to receive a command to stay in a run position, resulting in a brief interruption in fuel supply. "It doesn't command the FU to be in a run position even for a split second. The fuel stopped for a couple of seconds, and the engine will start decelerating," the former pilot explained. Raising key questions about the Air India AI171 crash, highlighting two main areas of investigation. Chan said the investigation should focus on whether Air India carried out necessary maintenance and replacement of certain chips in accordance with the Service Bulletin. "I would say now this spotlight would be on, first of all, whether Air India has carried out the necessary maintenance and replacement of those chips according to the Service Bulletin," Marco Chan added. The former pilot further emphasised the need to investigate the nature of the bulletin issued by GE Aviation (previously known as General Electric) and its partner, Bowen. "The second question will likely be for Bowen and General Electric together, why it was issued as a surface bulletin rather than an airworthiness kind of mandate, where a directive or call that you must carry out those actions," he added.
Indian Express
2 hours ago
- Indian Express
Tail lodged in mess wall, left engine stuck in hostel building: 5 structures that bore brunt of AI 171 crash
On June 12, around 1.38 pm, the Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner passenger aircraft, designated Air India flight AI 171, took off from Runway 23 of Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport in Ahmedabad, bound for London Gatwick. It crashed less than a minute into its flight in the middle of the congested Meghaninagar residential area, flying in the South-West direction, says the preliminary investigation report of the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) made public post-midnight on Friday. A major part of the crash site, located around 1.6 kms from the runway, and surrounded by a number of key government institutions, comprises the hostel buildings and mess of the Byramjee Jeejeebhoy (BJ) Medical College – said to be the oldest medical college in the state. As per the report, the elongated wreckage site covers an area of roughly nine acres (1000 ft x 400 ft), all of it located on the medical college premises. The exact crash site comprises seven buildings — two buildings of a Mess Hall complex and five residential hostel buildings – of which five were impacted. These accommodated more than 150 medical students and doctors, who have since been moved to other accommodations. The crash site, technically, also includes the road outside the hostel premises since a few people lost their lives while passing through the area at the time of the disaster. Just behind the crash site is the compound of the Military Hospital (Armed Medical Corps) and a residential neighbourhood comprising 52 buildings of the Government Housing Board. To the right of the crash site is the State Reserve Police's (SRP) Ghoda Camp. Exactly next to the crash site lies the National Institute of Occupational Health (ICMR-NIOH) whose compound wall was breached by parts of the aircraft. And just 500 metres ahead in the flight path lies the 1,200-bed Woman, Child and Super-specialty Hospital inside the Medicity campus, which also houses the Mortuary Complex that became the site of grief for the families of the deceased in the days following the crash. Here is a breakdown of the AAIB report on the layout of the crash site and the debris field: In Point 5, titled 'Damages', the report stated, 'The Aircraft was destroyed due to impact with the buildings on the ground and subsequent fire. A total of five buildings were impacted and suffered major structural and fire damages.' These buildings, from North to South, are the Mess Building, and four residential hostel buildings viz. Atulyam-4, Atulyam-3, Atulyam-2 and Atulyam-1. There was no damage to the sixth building on the same premises, Atulyam-8, which is located next to the mess building. This building was declared habitable and handed over to the medical college. It was also used as a base of operations of teams of the 6th Battalion of the National Disaster Response Force (NDRF) during the rescue and retrieval operations in the aftermath of the plane crash. Point 6 of the report, titled 'Wreckage and Impact', stated, 'After takeoff, the aircraft impacted the BJ Medical College hostel which is 0.9 nautical miles (NM) from the departure end of Runway 23. The Emergency Locator Transmitter (ELT) was not activated during this event.' The report said, 'As the aircraft was losing altitude, it initially made contact with a series of trees and an incineration chimney inside the Army Medical Corps compound before impacting the northeast wall of the Building A. The distance between the tree on which the aircraft made its initial contact and the point on the Building A where the aircraft impacted is 293 ft. The tree and chimney mentioned in the report can be seen clearly from this area, which the Indian Express reported about earlier. These are the Government Housing Board apartments in Meghaninagar, located behind the IGP compound in which the hostels are located. The terrace of the society, especially Block-1, located just behind the BJMC's Mess Hall, has a clear view of the fag end of the crash site. The wings of the aircraft shaved off the tops of the trees right next to the building, hit a chimney stack on the military hospital premises located next door, and then hit the hostel building (mess). This was corroborated by several residents who were among the first to witness the crash. 'As the aircraft moved forward, it continued fragmenting and collided with other structures and vegetation. The impact witness marks on the building and airplane indicated a likely nose-up attitude (about 8°) and wings level. The vertical stabiliser separated from the aft fuselage and came to rest about 200 feet south of the initial point of contact with the Building A. The tail section and the RH Main Landing Gear (MLG) of the aircraft were found embedded in the northeast wall of the Building A while the rest of the airplane continued its forward movement,' said the AAIB's preliminary report. It further added, 'As the airplane continued its path across the roof of the Building A, the right engine struck the concrete water tank structure, separated from the airplane and rested underneath the water tank structure facing a heading of approx. 226 degrees near the southwest wall of the Building A.' The top floor of the mess hall behind the water tank, visible from the Housing Board apartments, was reduced to a gaping hole from where the tail section had later been removed from its embedded position. According to the report, the right hand side main landing gear was also found on top of the mess hall. The Enhanced Airborne Flight Recorder (EAFR) was also found from the terrace of the mess hall. Notably, the body of a female crew member was discovered in the section of the aircraft. The vertical stabiliser and rudder of the aircraft, painted with the logo of Air India, was found detached from the tail section and lying on the ground next to the mess hall. Of those who died on the ground, while 13 people were either doctors, medical students, visiting relatives or staff in the Atulyam hostels, six others lost their lives outside the compound. 'The inboard (IB) parts of the right wing were found in Buildings A & B and the areas surrounding the buildings. The right-wing mid-section and the outboard section was about 280 feet and 520 feet southwest respectively from the initial point of contact with the Building A,' said the report. Parts of the right wing were spread over a large area — from the mess hall complex buildings right to the campus located opposite the Atulyam hostels — and slammed into the compound wall of the National Institute of Occupational Health (ICMR-NIOH). Scientists at the institute, who witnessed the crash first hand, said three of them were standing in the shaded grove on the front left corner of their campus and moved back when they heard and saw the explosion. Moments later, part of what they later learned was a wing, had crashed through the wall of the campus. The AAIB report said, 'The left main landing gear (LH MLG) and left wing outboard and middle section struck building C, came to rest approx. 345 feet south from the initial point of contact. The left wing middle section of the wing was stuck in the north corner of the fourth floor of the Building C while the left wing inboard section was lying about 670 feet southwest of the initial point of contact with the Building A.' The flight path of the aircraft took it between the four residential blocks of the hostel and the IGP compound wall, which is why the left hand side wing, engine and main landing gear were all found clustered around the Atulyam-4 building (C), which was the second significant ground structure to be hit by the aircraft during the crash after the Mess Hall (A). The report said, 'The left engine got separated from the airplane and struck the north corner of Building D at the ground level where it remained and was roughly perpendicular to the right engine resting position, at heading of approx. 326 degrees. The wall was pushed into the building and the northwest building column was damaged such that portions of the concrete were missing and exposing the internal metal rebar. The engine, remaining portions of attached cowling, and the surrounding area were heavily damaged by fire.' Firefighters of the Ahmedabad Fire and Emergency Services (AFES), who were on the scene immediately after the crash, had described how they had found the left engine of the Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner embedded near the corner of the hostel building Atulyam-3 (D), and had immediately cordoned off that area. 'The nose landing gear (NLG) was found on the ground about 307 feet southwest from the initial point of contact with Building A,' said the report. This shows that the front landing gear had separated from the aircraft right next to Atulyam-4 while the rest of the plane kept moving forward till Atulyam-1. The report said, 'After the tail section was brought down, the APU was inspected and found intact inside the APU compartment. The APU air inlet door, which was intact, was found open.' The Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) is a self-contained engine that helps power up the internal systems, start up of main engines and is used as a backup power generator for the aircraft. 'The fuselage fragmented and sustained thermal damage as it traveled along the northwest faces of Buildings C, D, E, and F with the furthest debris observed at about 765 feet southwest from the initial point of contact with building A. The flight deck area and windshield support structure came to rest at about 650 feet southwest from the initial point of contact with Building A,' said the report on the main body of the Dreamliner. The report suggests that the aircraft had travelled more than 233 metres from the Mess Hall Building (A) till the last building in the campus (F), which is Atulyam-1. The area of devastation, though, was much larger. First responders had earlier described the state of the fuselage in these words, 'It was only from the direction of the tail portion embedded in the mess building that we figured out the placement of each portion of the completely destroyed plane. There was literally no other way to get a vantage point to know the direction of the aircraft because all other flights had been cancelled by that time.'
India Gazette
5 hours ago
- India Gazette
Former pilot points to chip malfunction, not pilot error in initial report on AI171 tragic crash
London [UK], July 13 (ANI): A report released by the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau following the fatal crash of Air India flight AI171 indicated a chip malfunction as a cause of the crash, a former pilot told Reuters on Saturday. The AI 171 crash of the Boeing Dreamliner 787-8 aircraft in Gujarat's Ahmedabad killed 260 people, including 229 passengers, 12 crew members, and 19 people on the ground. Senior lecturer at Buckinghamshire New University and former pilot Marco Chan said that although the report did not explicitly exonerate the two pilots from human error, the chances of accidentally switching the fuel cut-off toggle would be 'close to zero'. The preliminary report, released on July 12, depicted confusion in the cockpit shortly before the jetliner crashed and killed 260 people last month, after the plane's engine fuel cutoff switches flipped almost simultaneously and starved the engines of fuel. 'If you will to exonerate the pilots from Pilot Error. This is what the reports were stating. Now they didn't say that explicitly, but from reading the findings, it tells me that it wasn't a Pilot error. What the report seems to be suggesting is the error with the chip,' the former pilot told Reuters in an interview. 'What the report seems to be suggesting is the error with the chip. It's as simple as one chip not working properly, losing contact,' he added. A former pilot has shed light on the possible cause of the AI171 crash, stating that a technical issue may have been responsible for the incident. According to the former pilot, once contact is lost, the system can fail, much like a laptop experiencing a blue screen of death. He explained that the thermal cycle being in a warm condition could have caused the signal to not be contacted properly. 'Once you lose contact, it's kind of like how electricity works; the signal is not contacted properly. It's because the thermal cycle is in a warm condition,' Chan said. The former pilot further elaborated that the system may have stopped functioning due to excessive workload, similar to a laptop shutting down. 'It's been working very hard, like your laptop stops working, basically giving you the blue screen of death and Windows,' the former pilot added. During the interview with Reuters, the former pilot pointed out that the fuel control unit (FU) failed to receive a command to stay in a run position, resulting in a brief interruption in fuel supply. 'It doesn't command the FU to be in a run position even for a split second. The fuel stopped for a couple of seconds, and the engine will start decelerating,' the former pilot explained. Raising key questions about the Air India AI171 crash, highlighting two main areas of investigation. Chan said the investigation should focus on whether Air India carried out necessary maintenance and replacement of certain chips in accordance with the Service Bulletin. 'I would say now this spotlight would be on, first of all, whether Air India has carried out the necessary maintenance and replacement of those chips according to the Service Bulletin,' Marco Chan added. The former pilot further emphasised the need to investigate the nature of the bulletin issued by GE Aviation (previously known as General Electric) and its partner, Bowen. 'The second question will likely be for Bowen and General Electric together, why it was issued as a surface bulletin rather than an airworthiness kind of mandate, where a directive or call that you must carry out those actions,' he added. (ANI)
