24th Aug 2003, 16:14
Computer system 'can land aircraft without air traffic controllers'
View Full Version : They Don't Need Us Anymore (Merged)
24th Aug 2003, 16:14
Computer system 'can land aircraft without air traffic controllers'
24th Aug 2003, 17:30
You`ll be able to spend more time at realllll flying events now!!!:ok:
25th Aug 2003, 02:04
British Aerospace scientists have developed a revolutionary airborne computer system that they claim can land aircraft safely without human air traffic controllers. It will enable a pilot to determine an aircraft's landing path simply by pressing a button in the cockpit.
The new technology has been developed by BAE Systems, the British defence and aerospace company, and aims to eliminate human error, save on fuel and increase flight safety. If successful, it will also threaten the jobs of 40,000 air traffic controllers worldwide"
My father used to fly as part of a 5 man crew , 2 pilots, navigator, engineer, radio operator. When he retired there was only him and the co- pilot.
Of course we are and always will be required-- NOT
Take heed and dont think we are indispensable!
25th Aug 2003, 02:11
What happens when the computer 'breaks'??:\
How will 'the computer' deal with an emergency??
What about when the cleaner steps on the wire and pulls the plug out of the wall??:p
Still think all our jobs are at risk?? :ugh:
25th Aug 2003, 02:27
I reckon we will safely retire at a ripe old age still doing ATC and there will have been major progress made towards computerised ATCOs. I wouldnt recommend my great grandchildren applying for ATC training, but I think that we neednt fear for our jobs just yet.
As Roger Dodge said: What happens when the cleaning lady steps on the extension cord? Sure you will get the wise guy arguing that there wont be a cleaning lady because computers dont mess up the place like we do........:O
25th Aug 2003, 02:43
nah, what you'll get is some accountants and bean counters who will do a risk against cost analysis and decide that as the probability of the cleaning machines (!) knocking an important switch is small, they'll decide the risk is acceptable, and go with an automated system - 'cos computers never crash do they?!!
25th Aug 2003, 03:58
In ten years time the levels of redundancy available in computer systems will ensure that the word 'crash' will not be associated with computers anymore (Microsoft excepted). You can actually see it now in the NERC systems. Compare the number of engineers per shift at LTCC looking after NAS compared with OE at NERC.
The best career for the grandkids will be in IT, just like everyone elses grandkids.
25th Aug 2003, 04:09
You can actually see it now in the NERC systems. Compare the number of engineers per shift at LTCC looking after NAS compared with OE at NERC.
Minesapint, surely that comes under the catergory 'cut backs'.
Look at the amount of engineers available to work on the projects we need implimenting last year, and the amount of feedback we get saying 'change not acceptable due to cost'. Maybe by the time computers take over our jobs they'll get the fonts correct :mad:
25th Aug 2003, 04:14
I wonder if Microsoft are working in cahoots with BAE on this one.
OK a show of hands who would fly when you were being controlled by MS ATC 2005?
Not me!!!! :ugh:
25th Aug 2003, 05:25
To quote Henry Ford: "Trouble is, robots don't buy cars...."
Surely if everything can be done by a computer, there'll be no need for pilots, cabin crew, even a safety regulator - as nobody will be flying anywhere! Everything can be done by video conferencing - but wait; why don't the computers just talk directly to each other and we can dispense with that too!
I'm off to sample the Filipino virgins and unlimited free booze in the holodeck now.
25th Aug 2003, 06:22
It may be able to "land aircraft safely" but it won't be anywhere nearly as jolly as what I am over the R/T :D
And also, can it complain about pay, pensions, staff moves and traffic levels as well as we do?
Perhaps if it doesn't validate on one electrical socket it can be moved to one with slightly less voltage in a supposedly quieter part of the room with a slightly looser plug-fit?
Let's hope they do a better job on it than they did on the ATP landing gear assembly too :)
Seriously though, nothing ever ever last forever. And that will include this whole "profession". 'Tis only a matter of time.
25th Aug 2003, 18:45
I too read the article in the weekend newspapers - and began to take it seriously until I read that the company is BAe systems....
Don't worry Guys, your jobs are safe
If BAe systems say that you will be redundant in 20 years for a few million they really mean that after a hundred years of confusion and procrastination at a cost of zillions to the public, they will have got nowhere.
I say again, your jobs are safe.
25th Aug 2003, 20:58
Are they related to the outfit that is making the Eurofighter 2010, that's the plane that had a name change to hide the delay. It's two generations behind the opposition and for the same money you could buy two or three of something else that works. I think I read that the A400 [ that's the proposed Large Transport for the rapid reaction capability......with propellors!!!] will cost at least three times the price of a new C130. Gosh...doesn't this sound familiar....must be an aviation thing.
Barnaby the Bear
25th Aug 2003, 21:02
On the other side of the coin. There are already pilotless aircraft. How long before pilots are needed also with pax?
I can't see it being in the near future. But I am sure it will happen in a generation or so.:}
25th Aug 2003, 22:11
Passengers can go to anywhere they want using the internet, web cams etc, so why do they want to go queuing at airports and flying in pilotless aeroplanes, with computer ATC, when they can just sit at home on their sunlounger under their sun lamp and watch the waves on their three dimension projection screen.
Seems to me the pilotless planes may well be passengerless.
Pass the Pimms.
26th Aug 2003, 06:23
''Computer system 'can land aircraft without air traffic controllers''
If it's anything like the RNAV system currently being tested by BA on early morning approaches into LL I think we've got lots of years left yet.
The automated approaches I've observed are a nonsense and any LL ATCO (on my Watch anyway) would be embarrassed if his vectoring resulted in the flight profiles produced by the system.
1st Sep 2003, 10:36
With the amount of change I've seen over the last 20 years in this job I really doubt the intelligence of anybody who says that ANYTHING can't happen in the next 20.
Boxes on aeroplane dashboards that talk to each other like TCAS does today are not that far fetched.
On trial shortly in Oz is an aeroplane dashboard box that looks like a radar, and the things appearing on it look awfully like radar returns.
Of course the real question is not could they, but SHOULD they? I'm sure the bean counters will make a wise choice.
Spank me baby!!!
1st Sep 2003, 15:34
We all know the direction ATS is heading in, but don't sign the UB40 yet. You won't be out of a job for a long time.
TCAS A great system but not perfect. I was on a B747-400 being shown how it works. It was set to display all traffic within 2500FT below and we watched the lights of an opposite-direction aircraft as it got closer, but nothing appeared on the display. Looked out the window again, definitely aircraft lights heading for us, but still nothing on the display. It was only when the aircraft passed underneath us that the symbol appeared on the display. The Captain's remark..."that shouldn't have happened".
Autopilot/autoland/RNAV Great systems but not perfect. I read a report on a B747 that was a couple of miles to the side of the locator on final. Go-round followed and they tried again, still not aligned with the runway. Another go-round followed and they tried again. Yet again the FMS showed them on the ILS but a look out the window said they were about to land on the passenger terminal building. Another go-round and a narrow miss with the roof of that building.
Computerised traffic management systems Great systems but not perfect. A couple of weeks ago a runway sequencing system crashed in a major ATS enroute centre. Early morning, just after the curfew had lifted. The centre reverted to ATCO sequencing of aircraft.
Integrated ATM systems Great systems but not perfect. I heard a rumour that the New Zealand system crashed last month and that the whole NZ FIR was closed to inbound traffic.
...now what cupboard did we put that box of strips in again....?
2nd Sep 2003, 00:37
I am working on our new computer replacement in the US... Believe me, the computer engineers are NOT ready to replace us yet. There are all sorts of things that we have asked for that the engineers have said, no we can't do that, that is too hard, or you can't afford that <G>...
Will we ever get to the point where computers can actually "think" like we do and do our work. Yup, you can bet on it. They just aren't there yet. I expect it is going to be at least another human generation before we get anywhere close to it. ATC automation is MUCH harder than airplane automation. You have pretty established things for flying an aircraft and they don't change unless something goes wrong with the aircraft. With ATC, it is constantly changing and even a good clearance goes bad when the aircraft doesn't do what was instructed in a prompt manner... Lets not even bother to throw the variables about weather in there <G>...