IoT and Service Oriented Infrastructures for Flight 4.0

  • Christos P. Antonopoulos
  • Konstantinos Antonopoulos
  • Nikolaos S. VorosEmail author


Flight 4.0 represents a rapidly expanding research domain that brings IoT (Internet of Things) technology in the aviation domain. Based on various engineering domains such as Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) and embedded systems, Flight 4.0 systems are characterized by high degree of heterogeneity regarding various perspectives, such as communication, hardware, and software solutions. Additionally, in order to be well accepted by the end users, it is of paramount importance to exhibit high degree of configurability and flexibility so as to be applicable in diverse application scenarios. Aiming to address such objectives, this chapter attempts to identify the main aspects and tendencies toward a holistic end-to-end communication infrastructure for Flight 4.0 systems. In this context, and serving as a roadmap, the respective architectures should offer a homogeneous support to a wide range of WSN communication technologies and protocols, while being able to support time-constrained monitor, control, and configuration of critical Flight 4.0 infrastructure. In addition, such architectures must emphasize on the use of distributed components that are able to offer enhanced fault tolerance performance, a critical aspect for most modern aviation systems.


  1. 1.
    F. Hu, Cyber-Physical Systems: Integrated Computing and Engineering Design (CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    S.K. Khaitan, J.D. McCalley, Design techniques and applications of cyberphysical systems: a survey. IEEE Syst. J. 9(2), 350–365 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    G. Hohpe, B. Woolf, Enterprise Integration Patterns: Designing, Building, and Deploying Messaging Solutions (Addison-Wesley Professional, Boston, 2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    J. Blanckenstein, J. Klaue, H. Karl, A survey of low-power transceivers and their applications. IEEE Circuits Syst. Mag. 15(3), 6–17 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    C.P. Antonopoulos, N.S. Voros, A data compression hardware accelerator enabling long-term biosignal monitoring based on ultra-low power IoT platforms. Electronics 6(3), 54 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    I. 8. L. S. Committee et al., IEEE Standard for Information technology- Telecommunication and information exchange between systems-Local and metropolitan area networks-Specific requirements Part11: Wireless LAN Medium Access Control (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY) Specifications Amendmentl: Radio Resource Measurement of Wireless LANs (2009),
  7. 7.
    D. Malan, T. Fulford-Jones, M. Welsh, S. Moulton, Codeblue: an ad hoc sensor network infrastructure for emergency medical care, in International workshop on wearable and implantable body sensor networks, Vol. 5 (Boston, MA, 2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wireless Sensor Technology, Wireless IMU, ECG, EMG, GSR (2017),
  9. 9.
    Memsic Leader in MEMS Sensor Technology (2017),
  10. 10.
  11. 11.
    movisens GmbH, (2017),
  12. 12.
    Revoking Networks, Advanced User Manual Version 4.77. (2011)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bluetooth Special Interest Group, Bluetooth Core Specification v4.0. (2010),
  14. 14.
    IEEE, IEEE 802.15.4-2015 IEEE Standard for Low-Rate Wireless Networks. Technical Report (IEEE, 2015)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Z. Alliance, ZigBee specification, 2008, in ZigBee Document 053474r17 (2008)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    S. Bluetooth, Specification of the bluetooth system-covered core package version: 4.0. (2010)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    The open-zwave Open Source Project on Git Hub (2017),
  18. 18.
    I. Mapanga, P. Kadebu, Database management systems: a nosql analysis. Int. J. Mod. Commun. Technol. Res. (IJMCTR) 1, 12–18 (2013)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    D.D. Hoang, H.-Y. Paik, C.-K. Kim, Service-oriented middleware architectures for cyber-physical systems (2011)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    L. Hu, N. Xie, Z. Kuang, K. Zhao, Review of cyber-physical system architecture, in 15th IEEE International Symposium on.Object/Component/Service-Oriented Real-Time Distributed Computing Workshops (ISORCW), 2012 (IEEE, 2012), pp. 25–30Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sensing and Control Systems (2017),
  22. 22.
    Data aware platforms deliver a differentiated service in M2M, IoT and Big Data (2017),
  23. 23.
  24. 24.
    U. Hunkeler, H. L. Truong, A. Stanford-Clark, MQTT-S-A publish/subscribe protocol for wireless sensor networks, in 3rd International conference on communication systems software and middleware and workshops, 2008 comsware (IEEE, 2008), pp. 791–798Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    A. Stanford-Clark, H. L. Truong, MQTT for sensor networks (MQTTSN) protocol specification version 1.2 (2008),
  26. 26.
    M. Villamizar, O. Garcés, H. Castro, M. Verano, L. Salamanca, R. Casallas, S. Gil, Evaluating the monolithic and the microservice architecture pattern to deploy web applications in the cloud, in 10th Computing Colombian Conference (10CCC), 2015 (IEEE, 2015), pp. 583–590Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christos P. Antonopoulos
    • 1
  • Konstantinos Antonopoulos
    • 1
  • Nikolaos S. Voros
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Technological Educational Institute of Western GreeceAntirioGreece

Personalised recommendations