Pilotless Commercial Aircraft

[Chock Chucker]

Hey guys & girls,

How long do you think it will be until we see pilotless commercial aircraft flying around our skies ?

Before you say it will never happen may i ask you to please get your head out of the clouds. Did you watch the Jetsons cartoons on TV when you were a kid & laugh & think that all of it would never happen.

Yes well it has all happened, electric footpaths, video conference link up, flying cars & more. It can't be to long now before we see pilotless commercial aircraft flying around our skies just like we now see driverless trains & driverless mining trucks & soon to be driverless cars on our roads.

I belive it will be within the next 5-10 years we will see pilotless commercial aircraft transition into our skies.

I didnt want to post this on the pilots forum as i think the share price of Kleenex tissues would go through the roof & thats not due to tears of joy.

No pilots, no worries i say.

Chock Chucker. :ok:

[deadcut]

Why do you even bother?

[flame_bringer]

Problem is the public opinion on this matter as passengers won't feel satisfied and safe in an aeroplane with an empty cockpit, Never the less the machine is much safer than humans as many accidents that took place were due to pilot errors, People however will never accept that and will always favour seeing someone in the cockpit.
I believe the next generation aircraft will continue to have pilots but thier work will be significantly reduced to the point of solely observing what the machine is doing.

[Chock Chucker]

Maybe you could ask the same question to our global militaries.

Why would they bother to send in unmanned drones to do the spying/fighting in war zones when in old times pilot driven fighters were sent in.

I suppose also the airlines are always looking at ways to save money & i saw a time when B747 Classics were phazed out where i worked & that meant that the Flight Engineers on the B747 classic were no longer needed. Some were let go by the company while others were upskilled into First officers positions on B747-400's

The other reason i bother is that i would prefer to fly in a pilotless aircraft to greatly reduce the "human error factor" yes pilots have been known to make mistakes & sometimes its very costly both in lives & financially.

Chock Chucker :ok:

[perantau]

See if it'll gain acceptance with pax-carrying ships. At least if the engine stops, the boat still floats.

Need to change legislation, too, as to who carries the can...

[Chock Chucker]

Only problem with PAX carrying ships is possibly piracy. Crew would need to be onboard to shoot back at the Somalian pirates.

I suppose its already gained acceptance with the public with cars that can reverse parallel park & drive by them selves & trains that take people from 1 location to another with no driver.

The mining trucks & trains haul deposits out of the mines all running driverless on GPS co-ordinates.

Who knows while i am typing this email a pilotless military drone may be flying straight over my house on ruite to another location & controlled by a human or computer controller in another country.

While all of this is going on my new car i have just purchased is being built in the factory (majority by robots & machines) & the operation i will soon need to have in hospital will be preformed by a robot or mechanical arm.

As all of this goes on i can also withdraw money from a hole in the wall (ATM) 24 hours a day 7 days a week with no bank chashier required.

& the best part of it is if i was to say to people 30 year ago this is how life will be today they would all laugh in my face & tell me i'm crazy & it will never happen.

Chock Chucker :ok:

[Hempy]

There's no way in this wide world I would sit in 1A without a grey haired gentleman with 4 bars on his shoulders and 30000 hours of experience smiling* back down the cabin at me. Ever. Systems fail, simple as that.

[Chock Chucker]

Hempy, thankyou for your input however soon enough you will not be able to fly as their will be no pilot & this will be a reality. I would be pretty worried if an old grey haired 4 bars pilot were to be looking backwards down the cabin at me smiling especially if he were to be flying right into a mountain or building or even the ground.

It would be worring enough if a pilot were to be riding a push bike forward while looking backwards & smiling at the same time. I dont know of any pilots that can multi task.

With all the automation going on around us i dont think it will take to long for the general public to accept that this is the way of the future even when flying on an aircraft.

Just another note, Pilots fail a lot more often than systems & we dont need statistics to prove that one.

In this day & age their are so many fail safe redundant systems installed on aircraft that it makes sense to have pilotless aircraft to greatly reduce the human error factor.

Dont forget the aircraft will be pilotless however it can still be operated & commanded from ground via a control centre.

Chock Chucker.

[Skipname]

It is true that there were accidents due to human error but lets not forget how many times the system failed and the pilots saved the aircraft and the human lives.

I believe that in the near future there will be aircrafts that will be able to fly without input from a pilot but there will be at least one pilot in the cockpit monitoring and ready to take control if the system fails.

[rayfill]

For sure you are right about the human factor.
However, maybe the fact you never hear about a failed system is because of the two smiling pilots in the cockpit being able to control and decide.

Also, don't forget about weather conditions, aircraft type and onboard systems. Sure, you can automatize as much as possible, but weather will still be unpredictable. And the weather radar also doesn't always shows you the truth.

Then, the more computers you put in there, the more computers can fail. And if you're the lucky one to have, for example, and electrical fire, or a short circuit.. then who takes over controls, or decides what to do? Who's there to think outside the box?

I would say there are many things a computer can do "much better", however at a cost (pilot's concentration, skills) and to a certain limit (environment, corsschecking, outside the box thinking, etc).

So in the end, I surely hope (and don't expect) massive public transportation in pilotless aircraft.

Cheers,-

[Chock Chucker]

Thanks for your inputs & i dont mean to be rude but i think you guys are really old fashion in your thoughts.

Their is no reason why a pilot could not work in a ground control terminal controlling & monitoring the aircraft that is in flight if required.

Fires on board & failed systems can be controlled & rectified form a control station on ground. Aircraft are fitted with fire detect systems & can discharge automatically at the slightest wif of smoke or fire, way before a pilot could detect.

Failed systems, well their are so many redundant systems that if 1 fails then 2 or 3 will automatically take over. Weather & weather radars will get better overtime & this will be no worries at all either.

i'm just going down to my local radio controlled aircraft club to fly my radio controlled aircraft. Gee their is no pilot in my radio controlled aircraft. OMG Where all going to die!

No pilots in all those pilotless drones flying around also. OMG once again, Gee where all going to die!

If a bank staff member had told you guys 40 year ago that in the future you would be able to get cash out of a hole in the wall called an (ATM) with no cashier 24 hours a day 7 days a week you would have laughed at the bank staff member & told them they were crazy & it would never happen. No way, never ever ever.

Chock Chucker :ok:

[Capetonian]

I run various courses related to aviation, including 'fear of flying' seminars. This is something that often comes up in discussion and I have yet to have even one person who says they would prefer to be on a pilotless aircraft. I fear that whilst there is some obvious merit to the idea, public opinion means it's dead in the water.

[Chock Chucker]

Please, Never say never.

The airlines are always looking for ways to cut cost & save money & the aircraft manafacturers are on the move in this direction of pilotless drones & the like. Its only a matter of time.

I too am scared of flying & i am a Licensed Aircraft Engineer, i see the errors that pilots make on a daily basis & i personally would feel more comfortable with pilotless aircraft.

Think of 911, if the aircraft were pilotless & on a set GPS tracking controlled only by a ground station then the likely hood of the aircraft being overrun & controlled by terrorist + flown into buildings is next to nil.

Maybe you would like to take back that scenario to you fear of flying school.

Chock Chucker. :ok:

[rayfill]

Cock Chucker,

Great comparison between RC aircraft and the real thing.

Though, if you suggest to pilot them from the ground, why not just put them in there?
Just to take the example of a fire, you'd have to have fire detecting/suppressing systems in every part of the aircraft.
Or shall we put an "emergency stop button" on the seats? Also handy in case of a medical emergency.
But then we'd have to hire someone to make sure nobody uses the button without reason.

Also, not all aircraft have autoland. Not all airports are fully equiped.
If you'd rely on automation, you will have to ignore a great amount of airports that would be suitable in case of emergency.
Think outside the box.

And what about airport facility degradations? Or false glide slope interceptions, for that matter?

Even in the trains, there is always a way to control and monitor. Just what we do.

Besides, taking the cockpit off the aircraft isn't really aerodynamic :rolleyes:

[Contact Approach]

Then what to the people do when everything is done for them?

[Chock Chucker]

I am thinking outside the box & a lot of my future visulisation has stemmed from watching the Jetsons cartoons on TV as a kid.

Yep i laughed at the Jetsons back then & thought that it was very futuristic but most probably would never happen, well gee i was wrong along with many others.

I'm a Licensed Aircraft Engineer by trade & have also witnessed the rapid automation that has swept into the aviation industry in the past 5-10 years or so. Self service checkin is just one of them.

It will be incredible to see the further automation in the aviation industry in the comming 5-10 years time with all airlines looking at ways to reduce their staffing numbers & running cost.

Cabin crew numbers are already on the decline on new modern aircraft that have self service food & drink facilities for passengers.

20 year ago if someone told you that in new aircraft in the future would be bigger & their would be less cabin crew & you would have to get up & get your own food & drink you would have laughed & said they are crazy & it would never happen. Never ever ever.

Chock Chucker :ok:

[Chock Chucker]

Their is a simple answer to your question Contact Approach,

The people will go on welfair once everything is done for them, just like has been happening for a long time now.

Its called being made redundant, a nice way of saying your not needed anymore so go away.

It will only be a matter of time before pilotless commercial aircraft are out their & more pilots are made redundant.

I cant wait to see the airlines orders for the first pilotless commercial aircraft. Numbers will be through the roof.


Chock Chucker. :ok:

[Contact Approach]

Let's say your aircraft is on your 'set GPS track' and the aircraft is being controlled via a control centre on the ground somewhere. Regarding 911, which is easier? Gaining access to a Flight Deck in-flight or gaining access to the control centre on the ground? Which is more deadly?

[Chock Chucker]

Ground control centres access would only be granted to authorised employees, just like the cockpit access is only granted to pilots.

Make it all safe & secure & only authorised access allowed + to change aircraft GPS course would normally require cross checking & authorisation from more that one party or employee & possibly by 2 independant ground control centres.

Just like when you take out a large sum of money at a bank you need authorisation & checking / cross checking by multiple back staff & possibly the bank manager.

Checks & balances.

Chock Chucker. :ok:

[Contact Approach]

So what happens when the 'set GPS course' routes an aircraft straight into a storm, or the aircraft needs re-routing for spacing, or diversion, or medical emergency, or for collision avoidance? The cross checking is a fairly time-consuming process, as well as un-resourseful. In this circumstance you have more than two persons controlling one aircraft simultaneously, what have we learn't from that in the past? Disregarding the obligations to other aircraft under their individual responsibility. It's just not going to work, is it?

[Alber Ratman]

Chock Chucker..

AAF 447.. Computers got fed incorrect data and dumped control to Pilots who promptly mucked up, but the computers wouldn't have saved the aircraft either with false info. AP disconnect happens on a regular basis don't they! Best computer still is the human brain, trained in all situations (that Air France and others didn't do). Not even drones fly without experienced pilots watching over them. Its not going to happen and flight crew will stay at a minimum of 2..

Aircraft are not like trains..

[Chock Chucker]

Cheers for your imputs & very old fashion beliefs by some of you out their.

Yes we all laughed at the Jetsons cartoons on TV some 25-30 years ago & thought it was so futuristic at that time & it would never happen.

GEE HOW WRONG WERE WE ALL!

Did all you guys say 30 year ago that we would only ever use a fixed to the wall land line home phone, their will never be a small phone you can carry around with you in your pocket with no phone cord strapped to a wall & you can make a call to anywhere in the world at anytime while on the move or stationary.

Yep its called a mobile phone or Cell phone.

My local beaches are in the process of phasing out a pilot driven Cessna 152 beach patrol aircraft & replacing it with a number of unmanned drones controlled from a ground station. The drones can cover a much larger distance & send such incredible & large amount of hi-tech info & photos back to home base. Much more useful than a pilot in a Cessna 152 radioing back to home base every so often to say he thinks he may have seen something & to please send out the cavelrie to further investigate.

Pilots will become ground based not cockpit based in the future, they will work from ground base control centres & be required to monitor & rectify situations as needed.

The ground base control centres could be airport control towers. The pilots would work side by side with air traffic controllers in the airport control towers.

Just like our modern container cargo shiping terminals are now controlled by a control centre with 6 or so people working within the control centre to load & unload multiple ships at 1 time with radio or GPS operated cranes.


Never say never.

Chock Chucker :ok:

[darkroomsource]

Most pilots don't fly because it's their job, it's their job because they fly.
Even if pilots are removed from the flight deck of commercial airlines, there will always be pilots flying around in other planes.

Just like there are still people who paint, even though we have cameras.

Will companies remove pilots from the flight deck? maybe, maybe not. But they won't be doing it for the reason's you've outlined. If you calculate the cost of an airline ticket with respect to the wages the pilot is paid, you might be surprised to find out that the pilot gets about £3 from that £700 ticket. That's cheap insurance. Or, maybe that's the value of your life? £3? and if you're putting the pilot on the ground, well you're not saving that money are you? So I find a lot of your arguments are unfounded.

As for safety, you need to find out how many failures happen in flight before you can make any comparison between piloted and non-piloted flight. Very few failures ever make the papers...

But mostly, I am amused by your constant references to the jetsons cartoons. I have to tell you, it's been a LONG time since I watched cartoons, what are you doing with your Saturdays?

[Chock Chucker]

Thanks darkroomsource,

Pilots working from ground base will obviously be paid much less than a cockpit based pilot. That being a lot of the prestige & old school this is the way its always been done will be phazed out. Also the ground base pilots will require much less workload & 1 pilot will be able to monitor multiple or more aircraft at the 1 time just the same as an air traffic controller.

Its sad to say that you refer to the 3 pound price people pay on their ticket for pilots salaries as a cheap insurance policy, that is so nice to hear for all the people that have been injured or killed by pilot error. 3 pound well spent, i beg to differ & i'm sure all the families of the loved ones lost due to pilot error would also agree.

I would rather pay an additional 6, 10, or 20 pounds on my ticket to have the flight pilotless & only if urgently required a ground base pilot to step if needed.

My reference to the Jetsons is that we all used to watch them on TV when we were kids or even as adults some 30-40 years ago & most of the things on their that we all thought would never happen have happened. Electric footpaths, flying cars, face to face video link up & so on. Therefore i refer that you can NEVER say NEVER, it will NEVER happen or it will ALWAYS be done this way no matter what.

You refer to even if pilots are removed from the flight deck in commercial aircraft their will always be pilots that fly around in other aircraft. i'm not so sure of this as with regards to pilotless fighter aircraft & drones are rapidly replacing pilots requirments. Just take self service checkin now days offered by most airlines, Just another clear indication of another old school airline job that is rapidly being phazed out. You think the airlines & aircraft designers/ manafactures are just going to stop their at that ?

Going to the doctor or specalist is rapidly changing also with the avalability of internet face time & Skype. No need now to go to Bricks & mortar doctors consulting room, you can get onto the net & have face to face time doctor or specialits appointment then if required an Electronic prescription or Electronic referal to another doctor or specialist can be emailed out. WE ALL WOULD HAVE LAUGHED AT THIS IDEAR SOME 30 YEARS AGO BUT TODAY IT IS REALITY.

Surgeons can operate or run an operation on a patient that is located in another country via face to face video link up, face time or Skype. WOW 30 years ago who would have thought that would be possible today.

So with all this modern change going on i am dumbfounded as to why so many of you are still under the belief that their will always be pilots in the cockpit of aircraft no matter what even while many fighter aircraft & drones today are pilotless in the cockpit & the trend is moving more that way.

NEVER SAY NEVER, IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN, IT WILL ALWAYS BE DONE THIS WAY FOR EVER & EVER.


Chock Chucker :ok:

[Chock Chucker]

Oh Please Contact Approach, Have you not heard of TCAS, (Traffic Collision Avoidance System). Their is no human pilot that can detect better than this system. The human pilot is alerted & told what to do by TCAS such as increase or decrease altitude to avoid a collision.

You really think what would happen if the aircraft is on its set GPS track & it is flown right into a storm. Why would you fly an aircraft right into a storm if you can divert & fly around the storm to make it safe for all ?

Aircraft Avionic systems are technical enough these days to work together with the set GPS system to fly the aircraft in a manner that will widely avoid at best cost things such as storms & turbulents & so on. If the aircraft was to fly into these conditions it would be automatically detected & the aircraft course would be automatically changed immediately to get out of that situartion ASAP & into better weather locations.

Its just like your automatic vaccum cleaner these days that can vaccum your house & if it hits the wall or encounters steps or so on it automatically detects & diverts or tracks side ways or backwards & goes another direction. All of this is happening while you are sucking on an icecream, sitting on your bum & watching the Jetsons cartoon on TV & giggling & laughing & saying it will NEVER HAPPEN. Sorry it has already happened.

I'm sure in future our weather radar systems & other systems will be effective enough to automatically divert aircraft flight path before they enter locations of vulcanic dust clouds, microbursts, hail, storms & many other detrimental conditions.

All systems will be trailed & tested & set in place on ground & in air & approved by FAA, EASA & any other global avaiation regulation authorities before all of this pilotless commercial aircraft goes ahead. Everything will be thought of & set in place just the same as an aircraft manafacturer does the same when designing a new aircraft, testing & applying for airworthiness approval.

Its all checks & balances.

Chock Chucker :ok:

[Capetonian]

Chock Chucker The point you are avoiding is that whilst it even if it were technically possible to have pilotless aircraft as you propose, the public perception will never make it commercially viable. You are flogging the proverbial dead horse.

If I were trying to promote an idea, I would not relate it to a cartoon (which I and probably others have never even heard of.) It doesn't give it the gravitas which you seem to think it deserves.

[Chock Chucker]

FYI Capetonian we already have pilotless aircraft such as pilotless fighter aircraft & drones that have been flying around our skies for some time now. I believe this transition will eventually transition into commercial airline aircraft also.

What do you mean you havnet heard of the Jetsons Cartoons before, Everybody in the western world knows of the Jetsons, say your 25 years of age or older you would have watched the Jetsons cartoons on TV or know of the Jetsons.

Its like saying you & most others would probably not have ever heard of the Simpsons before. Do you have a TV in your house ?

The public has changed their peception on many forms of automation & we are now begining to accept it very well & see it as a normal part of life.

Just look at pilotless military fighter aircraft & drones are now taking to our skies at an ever increasing rate & the general public have adapted very well to that.

How do you think the war is being fought in Afganistan at present ? Send in TOM CRUISE in a pilot driven (Steam Driven) F14 Tomcat fighter aircraft with TOM CRUISE yelling out I HAVE THE NEED FOR SPEED & giving high 5's to everyone or send in the pilotless drones ?

No more TOP GUN MOVIES with TOM CRUISE at the stick of an old F14 TOMCAT bucket of bolts. How dated & backwards is that. Bring in the pilotless fighter aircraft & pilotless drones.

Chock Chucker. :ok:

[Capetonian]

Oh dear ...... how can you purport to tell me that I must have heard of the Jetsons cartoons? I haven't.

Have you heard of Gary and Spider? I thought not. Unless you grew up in South Africa and are of a specific age group, you wouldn't.

Of course I have a TV but I hardly ever watch it. My son watches the Simpsons, I don't but, but obviously, I've heard of it.

Totally irrelevant though.

I'm quite aware that there are pilotless aircraft for various purpose, and that it may be technically possible to have pilotless passenger carrying aircraft. Again, you're missing the point. To be honest you come across as a bit of a fanatic. I'm not discussing this any further with you. Good luck with your endeavour to convince others.

Best wishes.

[Chock Chucker]

Sorry,

I think you have missed the point & i'm not out their to be a fanatic or convince others.

I am just putting across my thoughts of the progression of automation & increased saftey in the avaiation industry as i see it.

In the Jetsons cartoon which came out around the 1950's or so & ran on TV well into the mid to late 1980's. The cartoon had cartoon characters walking on electric footpaths, flying around in flying cars, talking to each other face to face on video link up with big screen TV. It was very futuristic & very out their for its time & most of us that watched it thought that none of these things would ever happen or come true. Well we were all proved wrong.

Go to your local airport & ride the electric footpaths, use your home computer with Skype or your smart phone face time. Someone in the US is currently paintenting a flying car which will soon be available for people like yourself & myself to buy.

There is my reference to the Jetsons cartoon that we all said it would never happen & it has now all happened.

Just like many people have replied to my origional post & said that they believe that pilotless commercial aircraft will never happen.

I say to them did they watch the Jetsons cartoon on TV many years ago & say that electric footpaths will never happen, face to face video link up on big screen TV will never happen, flying cars will never happen & pilotless military fighter aircraft & drones will never happen

Chock Chucker.

[deadcut]

Sorry can't guess if you are for real or taking the piss.

Why do you keep bringing up the jetsons? Also where have you seen a flying car? Before you mention that hideous, unpractical thing they call a flying car stop and think. It's a plane that drives. Hugely unpractical because if you get the slightest ding in it the plane is not airworthy, have to get repaired and you of all people should know how expensive aircraft maintenance is.

That plane is for such a niche market that it will never take off. Excuse the pun.

The 787 an a350 are 2 crew. The next gen 777 and 737 are 2 crew. If they bring up a concept in 10 years it will be 30 before its allowed to fly.

Pilot jobs, in this generation at least, are secure.

[darkroomsource]

i'm not out their to be a fanatic or convince others.
Now I know you're just trying to do a wind up...

You haven't listened to any one's opinions...

you are the most closed minded person I've met on this forum, and that's saying a lot.

[Chock Chucker]

Oh Dear,

Looks like some of you guys want to stay back in the dark ages & fly around on Bi-planes or maybe a broom stick like a witch. HOW VERY CLOSE MINDED.

Close minded people dont start open minded threads.

Cant be to long before we get into new cars & their is no steering wheel. Push a button & the car automatically drives us to where we want while we sit back & read the paper on our tablets or look out the side window.

Their have been nearly 600 views & 31 or so posts to my origional post so i cant be to close minded as that many other people wouldnt want to waste their time on reading & replying to such close minded posts.

I'm not hear to wind people up or take the piss. My thoughts & idear is that this will be the way of air travel in the future.

Thankyou darkroomsource, FYI you have not listened to my opinion at all & then cast judgment on me with childish name calling.

What you havent seen a flying car as of yet, gee the amount of documetries i have seen on TV & on the net in the past few years with guys that have built their own flying cars & show them in flying operation. Some even have patents on them & will be put in production soon enough for people like yourself & myself to buy. Private Pilots Licence required.


Chock Chucker :ok:

[TURIN]

DO NOT FEED THE TROLL!


Posted from Pprune.org App for Android

[Chock Chucker]

Their is no TROLL hear TURIN.

I am a LAE that has posted this origional post.

Please take your silly uneducated TROLL comments elswhere.

If you have nothing positive to post on this thread then please dont post anything else.


Chock Chucker :ok:

[Perrin]

Will someone plz pick up all the toys on the floor and get back to work as I am going on holiday soon and want it safe. We do need aircrew as I do like a stiff G&T.
Keep them up boys
Peter :ok:

[Chock Chucker]

Yes Sir Perrin toys are being picked up as we speak,

Just like we need aircrew in pilotless fighter aircraft & pilotless drones. NOT!!!

No one seems to mind pilotless fighter aircraft that carry missiles & bombs & so on & pilotless drones that spy/fight wars & arial patrol our neighbourhoods & beaches & countries borders & so on.

No one seems to mind self service checkin at the airport nor buying their own airline ticket online with no assistance from the airline or travel agent. Havent times changed from the way we used to do things in the airline industry.

No one seems to mind self service food & drink machines on modern aircraft that have reduced the cabin crew employees number per aircraft even with larger aircraft that carry more passangers.

So really what seems to be the problem then with pilotless commercial aircraft & why would so many of you still think that pilots will always be needed in the copit ? Seems very old fashion to me.

Did we always think that dirt would be required to grow plants/fruits/vegetables & so on ? How about hydroponic plants/fruits & vegetables grown in PVC tubes with roots submerged only in flowing liquid fertiliser soultion. We all buy this produce today in our supermakets & i can imagin the person that first pioneered the Hydroponic idear some time ago was laughed at by many & told it would not be possible & your wasting your time & it will never happen.

The moral of the story is WHO GETS THE LAST LAUGH.

Ive got to go now, gee i'm really hungry, might make myself a tuna & salad sandwith, Tuna from the fish farm sold in the supermarket & the sald from the supermaket that has been hydroponicaly grown & Bread from the supermarket with many of the ingredients modified & grown very differently from the way they were grown in the past.

GEE havent times changed but many of you forget that & still live in the (IT WILL ALWAYS BE LIKE THIS & WILL NEVER CHANGE) past.


Chock Chucker :ok:

[Exup]

When people asked me what I did for a living I used to say that I was a Licensed Aircraft Engineer, but after the chocksters ranting on, unwillingness to listen to others & constant references to a kids cartoon I think I will tell everyone I am a stripper in a gay bar. Far less embarrassing.

[Capetonian]

If you have nothing positive to post on this thread then please dont post anything else.

So anyone who dares to challenge your view may not post on this thread.

It's meant to be a discussion. Maybe you should go and live in North Korea.

On reflection, I think I'd rather be on a pilotless aircraft than on one with you as PIC, so maybe there is some merit in your argument after all.

[The SSK]

What will be their advertising slogan?
You know, the inducement to buy their tickets and get on their aeroplanes.

And why would they want to be the first?

[IFixPlanes]

When people asked me what I did for a living I used to say that I was a Licensed Aircraft Engineer, but after the chocksters ranting on, unwillingness to listen to others & constant references to a kids cartoon I think I will tell everyone I am a stripper in a gay bar. Far less embarrassing.
Exup, you make my day. :ok:

[Chock Chucker]

Yes i'm sure strippers in gay bars laugh at us Licensed Aircraft Engineers all the time.

I mean who would do all this study & training on aircraft to get paid an average salary when you can do next to no training & take of your clothes while dancing & roll around in bucket loads of cash.

WHO GETS THE LAST LAUGH AT THE END OF THE DAY ?

I'm terribly sure Richard Branson had to put up with all you narrow minded guys out their making the same narrow minded comments to him while he was trying to make it. IT WILL NEVER WORK, WHY ARE YOU DOING THAT, YOUR WASTING YOUR TIME, WHAT A CRAZY RANTING MAN, HE WILL NEVER GET ANYWHERE IN LIFE, WHAT A LOOSER & so on.

Hey but Richard Branson is now very rich & very sucessful & very pioneering & now you all bow down to his feet & worship him & listen to everything he has to say. Soon you may give your money to him to buy a ticket on his soon to be passenger space flights. GEE HOW PIONEERING & many narrow minded people said it would never happen.

Dont the tides turn hey fellas ?

At the end of the day if airlines could do away with pilots then look at the massive cost saving. That being also cheaper plane tickets for you & i.

Its hard to believe how many views & posts my origional post has created so far after only a few days.

THIS IS CALLED THINKING OUTSIDE THE BOX, BEING INNOVATIVE & PIONEERING. Just like Richard Branson.


Chock Chucker. :ok:

[TURIN]

Yeeeees, the hundreds of dead and maimed civilians really like armed, pilotless drones don't they?

BTW. Your own comments CC are negative too. Is that allowed?

You have started multiple threads, with some quite ludicrous ideas and comments. Your responses to anyone who disagrees with you is to run them down and bang on about the bloody jetsons. (I'm another by the way, who never watched it). You sound like a Troll.

Bugger, broke my own rule.




Posted from Pprune.org App for Android

[Chock Chucker]

Cheers Turin,

Yes & the terrorist loved 911 didnt they ?

Like i have mentioned in my prevoius posts that if the aircraft were pilotless then 911 most probably would not have occured.

Why would a terrorist want to break into a cockpit that is pilotless when they cannot change the aircraft course or direction as that is all pre-set & controlled by multiple control tower which are ground based ? No airliner aircraft flying into buildings with this set in place.

For the aircraft to change course if required authorisation would be required by multiple staff in each of the multiple control towers. So it would make it extremely difficult for terrorist to try to over-run ground control towers as it would be impossible for them to know which multiple control towers are controlling each seperate aircraft.

If the aircraft is pilotless it wouldent even need to have a cockpit. All the avioncics required would be placed below floor boards in forward MEC avionionic bay.

SAFETY SAFETY SAFETY. Lets make our skies safer for all.

No TROLL hear my friend you are barking once again up the narrow minded tree on that thought.

Chock Chucker :ok: CASA part 66 A1, B1.1 & C Ratings on B767 & GE CF6

[Wolfman3415]

CC, you may find that others are more likely to engage in effective discussion if you calm down a bit. From your username and signature you have been in the trade for some time now; progressing from doing "see offs and chock chucking" all the way through the Pt 66 up to your C license. So you should know that the only unmanned aircraft in near constant use are state owned and therefore operate under different regulations under the ANO. I don't disagree that the future may see unmanned civil aircraft but there needs to be a lot more development before that happens.

Oh and by the way, with your grammar and spelling I'm sure they love you when it comes to ARC time on any frame you've worked on!;)

[Bornfreee]

I do think Civil aviation will go 'airborne' pilotless in time, meaning a pilot will monitor on the ground, however one pilot may (and I'm only thinking aloud here!) monitor more than one aircraft, afterall he/she only has to be alerted to something abnormal to go and deal with that aircraft.

The Military have always been the forward thinking/looking and have the budget to push the boundaries but from their innovations things filter down into civil aviation and even into every day life. Look at HUD's they were a thing of the military aircraft, however we now have commercial airliners with civilian pilots using HUD's in their normal working life.

I think CC you mentioned on here something about timescales 5-10 years I believe. I think that time frame is in my opinion totally wrong, it will be a lot longer than that.

My estimate would be that the military will keep developing their pilotless aircraft and systems, this will lead to civilian users such as fisheries patrol, highway patrols (America use them already) using larger unmanned drones over the next 10 years. Next will come the technology to apply it to cargo aircraft 20 years time. After this has proved to work it will then be applied to civilian air transport 30 - 40 years time.

I suggest it will take this long for a few reasons.

1. Although technology is moving very fast, there is still a huge amount to develop and invent for application to a civil air transport & make it totally safe)
2. Mostly though there needs to be mindset change! that will be the biggest hurdle and it will not happen with the current generation of adults, nor the next however those who are born in 10 years time and approaching their 20's in 30 years time will have been brought up in an environment where pilotless aircraft were a fact of life from the moment they were born and it will be accepted.

Look at London's DLR (driverless trains), when they first announced this concept there was uproar and people categorically saying it would fail and no one would get on a driver less train. Millions use it daily now without batting an eyelid! and before you all jump down my throat, yes I know a train is on rails and cannot fall down but it's about the concept and how peoples attitudes and mindsets change.

I am a pilot and I know that aircraft performing auto-lands do it far better than any pilot and they can do it over and over again without fault, however I currently would still not get onto a passenger airliner tomorrow if there were no pilots up front, even though I know the autopilot can fly it better than the humans but that's because I've grown up with that attitude and having no pilots up front is relatively new to me, but for those born in 10 - 20 years time it will be common place, maybe still in the military or civilian surveillance roles but the change in attitude will have already begun.

3. Legislation would have to change quite drastically

I am not suggesting that every passenger aircraft in the world will suddenly go pilotless, the majority won't but many will.

Someone said something about cost of pilots here, well I would suggest it is a huge incentive for an airline to go pilotless in terms of cost reductions.

Airlines operate with between 4 - 5 full crews per hull (1 crew being 2 pilots), so if an airline has 200 aircraft, it needs 200 x 5 = 1000 crews which equals 2000 pilots to operate it's fleet of aircraft.

Lets say the average salary between the two pilots up front is £100K (it will be more than that). £100K x 5= £500K per hull per year x by 200 hulls = £10 Million (hope my maths is correct!)

£10 million is not an insignificant amount for any company! now of course some of that will still be required to have 'ground' based pilots who would monitor aircraft in the air.

Anyway, I've rambled for far too long, it's a very interesting time in aviation and the debate about pilotless aircraft a fascinating topic. I firmly believe it will happen to passenger airlines but not in my lifetime and I reckon I still have some 30 years left in me (subject to being hit by a bus tomorrow :O)

[TURIN]

CC.
So, you haven't read the recent report about a/c autopilots getting hacked through their com/nav systems by a mobile phone?






Posted from Pprune.org App for Android

[Bornfreee]

spectrum.ieee.org/aerospace/aviation/...unmanned-commercial-airliners/0

and this was written in December 2011 .......

[grounded27]

Here in the USA major steps have been taken beyond the developmeltal failures and fixes of our military to develope civil unmanned flight. The us government have cleared drones to operate in Class B airspace, major funding has popped up for ADS-B install across the country..

As it stands now with FANS, pilots recieve commands to the FMS (easily converted to a digital command sent strait to the FCC).

How hard do you really think it is to automate or remotely control, flaps spoilers etc? Childs play.

The easy argument I hear over and over is will passengers trust to fly on a UAV... Not tomorrow.

I can see this happening in steps,

- police operated UAV's at your local airport.
- Military operating heavy UAV freighters, then pax.
- UAV freighters operating for freight companies, Fred Smith From FedEx has already said he would do it w/o question.
- The F/O is replaced with a dog.. haha..NO we go to a single pilot completely autonomous aircraft that can be controled by the PIC if need be.
- The heavy pax UAV with humans monitoring from the ground.

The hard argument is how safe are the communications to ensure safe flight. Well just like anything elese we have built another man can and will destroy it, why should it be any different than anything else.

A major driving factor is that all airlines would love to remove the liability that comes with allowing one of their employees to crash their aircraft, the manufacturers have been catering to this need for decades with automation. This places the blame on the manufacturer, weather or maintenance.

We can't stop this progress.

[Chock Chucker]

Thankyou to Wolfman3415, Bornfreee & grounded27 for your fantastic posts & belief that it may happen or it will happen.

It's so nice to know that their are many more people out their on the same wave length as myself & that it seems this subject to be on the progression as we speak.

Yes i totally agreee 100% with the poster who mentioined about the military being pioneers of many systems that evenyually are taken up by Civil aicraft. Your reference to HUD's is perfect. Another reference to driverless trains was perfect also & i had mentioned a long way back in my earlier posts driverless trains & driverless mining trucks & soon to be driverless road vehicles.

Maybe i am wrong with my thoughts that pilotless commercial aircraft will transition into our skies within the next 5-10 years however i truly believe it will happen soon enough & yes it may well start out with freighter aircraft first then if all safe & well PAX aircraft.

If you can be on one side of the world on holidays while you house is on the other side of the world & with your smart phone control your garden sprinklers & home security system & see on live CC TV fotage that your cat or dog has enough food & water in its self serving bowls then i cant see why commercial aircraft cant become pilotless in the future & controlled by a ground station & possibly even using a smart phone App.

I too believe that aircraft engineering at the airport terminal will go the same way in future. Their will still be a requirement to do a walk around & top up the eng oils & fix the odd chair & so on however i believe that many engineers will work from a ground control station & monitor/clear defects while the aircraft is in flight or on ground. This will make turn arounds much faster as more can be done before the aircraft has even landed at its next destination.

Some aircraft engineers may be able to work from their own home, logged onto their airlines online portal & monitor/clear aircraft defects & then electronically certify the aircraft tech log. Doctors & specialist have been consulting like this for some time now.

I suppose the other big problem with all of this pilotless aircraft business going on is how will TOM CRUISE make the movie TOP GUN NUMBER II ? Maybe TOMMY CRUISE will have to sit in a ground control station & control an unmanned drone off an aircraft carrier to go up & scare that MIG away.

Maybe TOMMY CRUISE will hi 5 everyone in the ground control station & say I HAVE THE NEED FOR "UNMANNED DRONES" YEEEEEEHAAAAAAAA!

Chock Chucker :ok:

[Chock Chucker]

Gday imperial shifter,

I love a happy ending also.

By all means drink your beer & please let the kids have you password. The kids are better at technological advances than you & i & its a good way for them to earn their pocket money & learn life skills. Got a problem with your smart phone, smart TV or Computer/Tablet give it to a 5 year old kid & he/she will have it fixed in no time.

I recogn the kids would have a good crack at monitoring & clearing aircraft defects in a ground station & have it all nutted out quick smart. Start them at the age of 5 & many will be the CEO's of ground station OPS by the age of 10.

The kids are doing a pretty god job at present flying their radio controlled planes, helicopters & drones with HD cameras strapped to them over our neighbourhoods, spying through our house windows, spying in our backyards & so on.

Gone are the days of the old style peeping tom.

Chock Chucker. :ok:

[3bars]

What would be gained by pilotless flights in commercial aviation? Pilot in the air or pilot on the ground.... Still requires a pilot so airlines save nothing.

It's different in military situation where risk is seriously reduced by remote piloting of aircraft

[Chock Chucker]

3bars,

Thanks for your reply.

The first gain for pilotless commercial aircraft are i believe that if pilotless commerical aircraft were in operation i dont believe 911 would have occured. Please read my earlier posts to this thread for the reason around my belief.

The savings for airlines would be massive as at present you have 2 pilots per commercial aircraft. F/O & Captain & on some older aircraft a flight engineer also.

With a pilotless aircraft system in place run by ground control OPS, pilots may be required to monitor/rectify any issues if needed.

In the ground control OPS 1 pilot can monitor/rectify issues on multiple aircraft at the 1 time, just like an air traffic controller can control aircraft movements for multiple aircraft at 1 time.

Just the same as our modern cargo container shiping ports now use control towers where 6-8 people work using radio control or GPS tracking co-ordinates to operate loading & unloading cranes on multiple cargo ships at the 1 time.

Years ago it was 1 crane operator in the port would operate 1 crane, now 1 operator in the control tower can operate multiple cranes at the 1 time for load & unload functions. This has allowed cargo ships turn times to greatly reduce & shipping ports to load & unload many more container ships than in the past.

Their is the money savings, less employees with higher productivity & hopefully a flow on from this will be cheaper airfares.

Chock Chucker :ok:

[grounded27]

What would be gained by pilotless flights in commercial aviation? Pilot in the air or pilot on the ground.... Still requires a pilot so airlines save nothing.

It's different in military situation where risk is seriously reduced by remote piloting of aircraft

You could have one pilot for dozens of aircraft under the proper conditions, worst case scenario I can see in the future is an unstable approach taken down to Minimums (what ever they may be determined to be) and does a go around if the ground pilot does not get to it in time. This is common with a full flight deck anyways. Obviously more ground pilots would be needed at first.

Just to clarify, the goal out there is for completely automated flight.

[Chock Chucker]

Correct grounded27,

Yes for sure 1 ground station pilot could monitor/control dozens of aircraft. The sky is the limit depending on (limitations put in place by aviation authorities) & the work load per pilot. This would all have to be tested & worked through to get the right balance.

Would be possibly similar senario with air traffic controllers, they take care of X amount of flights at 1 time however if things get to hot with 1 or more aircraft they do have the option to pass off some flights to another air traffic controller to lighten the load.

Correct the aim of the game is to move towards complete automation with eventually no pilots required in cockpit or on ground. I do believe this will eventually be the case as new technologies arise & systems become so much more enhanced & improved.

I'm sure Air traffic control will eventually become more automated with fewer employees required & same goes for aircraft engineering at the terminal.

Chock Chucker.

[pilot and apprentice]

Just like we need aircrew in pilotless fighter aircraft & pilotless drones. NOT!!!

No one seems to mind pilotless fighter aircraft that carry missiles & bombs & so on & pilotless drones that spy/fight wars & arial patrol our neighbourhoods & beaches & countries borders & so on.

The increased combat risk to life means that a higher (much higher) loss of airframes is acceptable, even preferable. The manned aircraft are still there as well, not yet replaced just augmented.

The USAF recently cut back significantly their planned acquisition and use of the Global Hawk because time was revealing it was more expensive and no more responsive than the manned surveillance platforms it replaced.

No one seems to mind self service checkin at the airport nor buying their own airline ticket online with no assistance from the airline or travel agent. Havent times changed from the way we used to do things in the airline industry.

No one seems to mind self service food & drink machines on modern aircraft that have reduced the cabin crew employees number per aircraft even with larger aircraft that carry more passengers.

No one dies when these systems fail. You are under the impression that a/c never have a snag but that isn't so true. I am saddened to see that your professional relationships with the various trades (pilot/LAME/FA/admin/check in/etc) appear to be so weak.

So really what seems to be the problem then with pilotless commercial aircraft & why would so many of you still think that pilots will always be needed in the copit ? Seems very old fashion to me.

Did we always think that dirt would be required to grow plants/fruits/vegetables & so on ? How about hydroponic plants/fruits & vegetables grown in PVC tubes with roots submerged only in flowing liquid fertiliser soultion. We all buy this produce today in our supermakets & i can imagin the person that first pioneered the Hydroponic idear some time ago was laughed at by many & told it would not be possible & your wasting your time & it will never happen.

The moral of the story is WHO GETS THE LAST LAUGH.

Ive got to go now, gee i'm really hungry, might make myself a tuna & salad sandwith, Tuna from the fish farm sold in the supermarket & the sald from the supermaket that has been hydroponicaly grown & Bread from the supermarket with many of the ingredients modified & grown very differently from the way they were grown in the past.

GEE havent times changed but many of you forget that & still live in the (IT WILL ALWAYS BE LIKE THIS & WILL NEVER CHANGE) past.


Chock Chucker http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/thumbs.gif

Times change yes. But many things stay the same. With any luck the same day the first unpiloted 7Q7 goes to work, with you in the back, you can rest easy knowing that when you return from your holiday you won't need to go to work, as the Q9001 Auto Component
Replacement Service Unit has just been installed and now takes care of all routine and heavy maintenance functions. No need to worry though, the computer that will take care of issuing your welfare payments should be just fine, no need to technical support any more.

[Chock Chucker]

Thankyou pilot and apprentice,

Could i please ask you to read back through all of the posts on this thread before you post silly comments like i have mentioned below.

"Why would you think i am under the impression that aircraft never have snags when i am a Licensed Aircraft Engineer myself" ? This thread i started has nothing to do with my professional relationships with Pilots/LAMEs & so on.

Yes those references i used to automation in the aviation industry that you have outlined dont involve loss of life if systems fail however we must think that as the automation contuinues as it will peoples mindsets change & accept that this is the new way we live life.

Your reference to automated pilotless aircraft & automated aircraft maintenance i couldnt agree more that most of this will probably go this way in the not to distant future.

No one seemed to mind when Flight Engineers were no longer required in cockpits on most modern airline aircraft. No one yelled OMG where all going to die now & i'm never going to fly on a modern aircraft unless it has a Flight Engineer based in the cockpit. Just another reference to the increasing automation in the aviation industry. Who will be next to go in the automation drive, F/O, Captain ? or both at the same time ?

I too possibly stand to loose my job as a Licensed Aircraft Engineer in future if my predictions of automation in the aviation industry come true.

It's the way of life, old jobs are phazed out while new jobs arise.

Chock Chucker :ok:

[Tarq57]

Mods, can this thread please be moved to the "Kiddies fantasy" forum.

[Chock Chucker]

Thanks Tarq57,

If you dont have anything of interest to bring to this thread weather your opinions or thoughts are for or against pilotless commercial aircraft then please dont post on this thread anymore.


Chock Chucker :ok:

[Capetonian]

No one seems to mind self service checkin at the airport nor buying their own airline ticket online with no assistance from the airline or travel agent.

No one seems to mind self service food & drink machines on modern aircraft that have reduced the cabin crew employees number per aircraft even with larger aircraft that carry more passengers.

Before making those sweeping statements, I take you have interviewed ALL passengers at ALL airports globally? Or is this just a fantasy based on your poll of you and your mates down the pub?

I am not aware by the way of self service food and drink machines on aircraft - this may just be something I've not come across and maybe it does exist. Anyone?

If you dont have anything of interest to bring to this thread weather your opinions or thoughts are for or against pilotless commercial aircraft then please dont post on this thread anymore.
Could i please ask you to read back through all of the posts on this thread before you post silly comments like i have mentioned below.

What you really want is a platform for your views, not an open discussion, because anyone who disagrees with you is either not of interest, or posting silly comments, whereas yours, based on some obscure cartoon, are of course not 'silly'.

[Chock Chucker]

Capetonian,

It was you that posted on my thread a few posts back & mentioned that you would not waste your time anymore & not enter into anymore post on this discussion. You also wished me all the best.

Then please follow your own word & make no futrther posts on this thread.

I cannot believe you have never heard of self service food & drink facilities on new airline aircraft. Just like you claim to have never heard of the Jetsons Cartoon.

Just look at cabin photos of Qantas & some other airlines A380 & you will see the self service food & drink facilities. Get up out of your own seat & serve yourself. It has reduced the number of cabin crew per aircraft in such aircraft types. Soon enough cabin crew will be phazed out also.

I hope you know who the Wright Brothers are. You really need to globalise & educate yourself Capetonian.

Chock Chucker :ok:

[rayfill]

I must agree with Capetonian though. Everyone who stated their opinion is being ridiculed and called old fashioned. However, if that's your way of having a discussion, so be it:ok:

In the end, when all else fails, the pax are !@#$%^. And when i'm flying and all else fails, I'll try my best to make sure I can enjoy another cold one in the bar ;)
How to tell the awesome X1000 computer that somebody is ill, dying, in need of medical attention? Assuming you'd like to see no crew on board at all...
Again, something as simple as suddenly changing weather can not always be detected by onboard weather radar. So let the pitot tubes ice up. Who needs'm anyways, there are computers flying.
What about technical problems spotted by passengers, something that has happened in the past. I tried talking to my computer. But it didn't respond:sad:

I understand you're an engineer, and sure you have a point when you say things will more and more automatized.
However, either I completely overestimate the possible traps and dangers in our job, or you don't fully understand them.

Fact is, you simply can not automatize everything. Just like your automatic cars, who do you need to open the door? who do you need to start the engine? who do you need to tell it where to go, when to go, and how to go?
And if you were able to automatize that as well, who do you need to start thát machine?

Two happy pilots up front, making sure the machine does what it's supposed to do would the safest in my opinion.
And yes, most accidents are "pilot error". Because 1: airplane error accidents don't occur often since there are 2 pilots to be blamed, and 2nd: there are 2 pilots who can take over, take corrective action, and make sure the airplane does not make any mistakes.

[Chock Chucker]

Thankyou rayfill,

Your very incorrect so please read back through all the posts on this thread. Their have been many people that have stated their opinion & suported my point of view & i have not ridiculed them or called them old fashion . You said i have done that to eveyone in your last post.

Yes 2 happy pilots up the front with a few terrorist, nice work, have we not learnt anything yet from 911 ???

Like i mentioned in my previous posts on this thread if you take the pilots out of the cockpit & the aircraft are on a pre-set course controlled by multiple ground stations then 911 most probably would not have occured.

Rayfill may i ask you how much you or your family would have loved to be on one of those aircraft on the day of 911 being flown straint into bulidings ???? Sounds like a lot of fun to me.

The FAA & EASA & other global aviation authorities would run all senarious, do all the testing, work it all out, bulid & test all required infastructure & when safe it will be approved to go ahead.

Every scenario you & many others are the "WHAT IF's, What if this happens & what if that happens. Imagine if all the people booked on your ATR flights said all the "WHAT IF's" what if we crash, what if the pilot makes an error & nobody turns up for your flights. SOON YOU WOULD BE OUT OF A JOB.

Before you go answering please read back through all the posts to this thread as many of your scenarious put forward have already been covered. Thankyou.


SAFETY SAFETY SAFETY.

Chock Chucker :ok:

[rayfill]

I deeply apologize for the fact that i said "everyone". But you got my point.

Terrorism is a treat, but I believe it is not as big as you make it look like. How many aircraft have been hijacked since 9/11?
Taking pilots out of the cockpit is in any way not the solution. You could still shoot it out of the sky, bring a bomb on board, nuke the control centers.
So that point is rather unvalid.

As you stated in your earlier comments, the goal would be complete automation.
I believe I just stated only a very few things why that would not be responsible (hence I say responsible, not possible).
Even a ground station will not be able to pull/reset a circuit breaker, for example. Or detect a rapid change of weather or circumstances.
He will always be "behind the aircraft", especially in times when he is really needed. So again, its not responsible. Possible though, but not safe.

Thats a very... good question. No.
Neither did the pilots that were on that famous test flight of the Airbus that flew into the forest.

If I read back, I find no solutions for those problems I just mentioned. But i'm more then interested to hear some suggestions. Apart from more computers, covered by maybe even more computers, controlled by a guy in a control station.
But then we come back to start again, don't we?

[Chock Chucker]

No worries, rayfill apoligies accepted. Thankyou.

Please tell your terrorist thoughts that you have just posted to me to all the loved ones that lost their family, friends & partners on 911. I'm sure they would all be so thrilled to hear.

911 never needed to happen & possibly could have been prevented with pilotless commercial aircraft.

You still have not read back through all the past posts on this thread as nearly all you have covered once again has already been mentioned & covered & solutions put in place. Its all automation rayfill.

Automation has been covered over & over again on this thread. Pitot tubes are heated so the chance of icing up is very rare. Has happened but once again very rare & needs a multitude of rare weather conditions to all allign at the same time to cause this.

Why would you have circuit breakers ???? thats old school & not needed. You only need multiple redundant avionic boxes with software to run/control/monitor & self fix all systems.

Just look at the MAT (Maintenance Access Terminal) on B777 aircraft. You can look up or do just about anything form their. Soon it will be able to interrigate itself & auto fix any defects.

Do you see any circut breakers on your computer/laptop or tablet. NO you dont need them.

Chock Chucker :ok:

[grounded27]

Times change yes. But many things stay the same. With any luck the same day the first unpiloted 7Q7 goes to work, with you in the back, you can rest easy knowing that when you return from your holiday you won't need to go to work, as the Q9001 Auto Component
Replacement Service Unit has just been installed and now takes care of all routine and heavy maintenance functions. No need to worry though, the computer that will take care of issuing your welfare payments should be just fine, no need to technical support any more.

What do we do when the Q9001 fails, ahh the super Q90001 will fix it.

[grounded27]

Hey we all get paid to do a job, it is quite pathetic to make a childish argument because your job is threatened or because you are perceived as you would like to see the end of a craft.

I have seen this debate over and over again, I have posted factual points that show progression towards unmanned passenger flight in the future. I welcome anyone (HMM HMM, none up to the task yet) to discount them.

On a positive note I can not see a reason why manned recreational flight will ever end.

[grounded27]

Even a ground station will not be able to pull/reset a circuit breaker, for example. Or detect a rapid change of weather or circumstances.
He will always be "behind the aircraft", especially in times when he is really needed. So again, its not responsible. Possible though, but not safe. The DC-10 was developed with remote control circuit breakers. Modern aircraft make an automatic attempt at resetting systems that fail... Progression will continue.

I have flown in aircraft with monochrome WXR displays, made more work for the pilot, today we have auto stab, colour density, vertical profile and predictive and reactive windshear. There has been progression and it will again continue. It will happen when it is safe and reliable enough to an acceptable margin.

[Artie Fufkin]

Chock Chucker,

Top thread, really enjoyed the comedy :ok: nothing wrong with a bit of light relief on prune.

Wasn't the first fully automated flight, where there was no input from the pilot from start of take off roll to brakes on after flight back in the 1950s? Why have airlines been so slow to adopt this "futuristic" technology? Is it because they haven't watched enough 1980s cartoons?

As has been said before, with all current (and planned future) Airbus and Boeing products being multi crew, with development, production, delivery and economic lifespan, I would suggest oil will run out before we see fully automated airliners making any impact on the industry.

But hey, never say never. I'm still hoping for my own personal jetpack!

[Capetonian]

I cannot believe ..........you have never heard of the Jetsons Cartoon.
And your point is?

Just look at cabin photos of Qantas & some other airlines A380 & you will see the self service food & drink facilities. Get up out of your own seat & serve yourself. It has reduced the number of cabin crew per aircraft in such aircraft types.
If you say so, I wasn't aware, maybe someone will confirm that this is fact rather than hypothesis.

I hope you know who the Wright Brothers are. You really need to globalise & educate yourself Capetonian.
The odds are that I am a lot more 'globalised' and educated than you are, but I'll leave you to your fantasy.

[JSeward]

I think what we really need here is automated maintenance systems, maintenance is a really big cost for airlines and if the maintenance operations were carried out by robots instead of human, there would be no mistakes and nothing would go wrong just like autopilots on planes never go wrong (see: Qantas Flight 72 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qantas_Flight_72)).

The cause of many aircraft crashes could have been averted if there was a computer carrying out the maintenance and doing it properly unlike human maintenance workers because machines never break and humans are useless.

To name a few:
Nigeria Airways Flight 2120 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigeria_Airways_Flight_2120)

Continental Express Flight 2574 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continental_Express_Flight_2574)

Alaska Airlines Flight 261 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_Airlines_Flight_261)

American Airlines Flight 191 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_191)

British Airways Flight 5390 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Airways_Flight_5390)

China Airlines Flight 611 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Airlines_Flight_611)

Japan Airlines Flight 123 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Airlines_Flight_123)

Mexicana Flight 940 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexicana_Flight_940)



I sure as hell never want to get on a plane that is maintained by a person because the leading cause of plane crashes caused by maintenance error is from maintenance personnel!

[grounded27]

First off the topic is not automated maintenance but fully automated flight. This is getting foolish, the last 3 posts though targeted at CC are extremely immature.

No one has argued my factual statements to the eventual commercial UAV.

Jseward if you wish to persist in this nonsense I am sure I could double down on pilot error failures with enough google time.

Can anyone (since you pick a bone) show a modern form of automated maintenance? Thought not! Not to say it is impossible in the future HAHE EG: the Q9001 fictional device.


I view this as a VALID possible, probably inevitable future.


Please stop the foolish banter and place your input based on fact... Do not disgrace me. I am an AIRMAN. I am PRO Aviation. I miss the days of being the flight mech that looked back at the ENG panel as he set thrust to make sure all else was in working order. I am now focused on avionics and see the possibilities.

Please speak with the professional regard I have for all Airmen.

[Artie Fufkin]

Grounded27,

Chock chucker has posted views of making pilots obsolete on a pilots forum. He's obviously a troll looking a bite.

The technology is there for fully automated flight, but is not used, nor is it proposed to be used by the big 2 airframes for the foreseeable future. As he says, never say never, but with regard the rest of the working career of all reading this, it's a pointless discussion.

That really ought to be the end of it.

[Chock Chucker]

Thanks grounded27,

You know your stuff & seems like you & i are on the same wave lenght.

Dont worry to much about the immature doomsdayers, it will never happen posts hear. I have been dealing with them for the past week or so since i first originated this pilotless commercial aircraft thread.

Doesnt matter how many references you put forward to them with automation in avaiation & in general life some still come back hear to post it will never happen posts & the "what if's", what if this happens & what if that happens.

Imagine if the Wright Brothers heard about future aviation with self service check-in, self service food & beverage facilities on aircraft that can carry 600 or so passengers half way around the world. Auto pilots & auto land, HUD's, shall i continue or stop now ????? I think back in the days the Wright Brothers may have fallen flat on their backs in that paddoc where their first flight took place & maybe laughed & giggled & maybe said i dont know about that.

Further automation will continue in aviation & also in general public & it cant be to far off before pilotless commercial airlines transition into our skies.

Chock Chucker :ok:

[Chock Chucker]

Artie Fufkin,

I have mentioned on numerous posts on this thread that i am a Licensed Aircraft Engineer & i too stand to loose my job in the future with further automation in the aviation industry as it continues. Why then would you think i'm a TROLL looking for a bite. Thats a very ignorant comment to make.

I have covered in earlier posts on this thread pilots, flight engineers, aircraft engineers, cabin crew, check-in staff & more.

I have also mentioned that pilots may be required to monitor/control & fix any flight abnomalities from a ground station. How does that make pilots obsolete as per your past post.

I have also mentioned that if pilotless commercial aircraft were in our skies & controlled via multiple ground stations on pre-set flight courses then 911 possibly would not have occured. I'm thinking SAFETY, SAFETY, SAFETY. Please read back through my past posts on this thread in regards to 911.

Yes the technologies are in place for fully automated flight however we will still need to c/out vigourous testing & further developments & so on before approval by FAA & EASA & the likes are granted for pilotless commercial aircraft carrying cargo or PAX.

Chock Chucker :ok:

[Chock Chucker]

Couldnt agree more imperial shifter.

Chock Chucker :ok:

[Artie Fufkin]

Safety, safety, safety?

What would happen to a fully automated, pilotless aircraft that flies through a flock of birds, knocking out both engines at low level, in the middle of a major city like New York?

What would happen if the thrust commanded of the engines on a 777, close to Heathrow, didn't materialise due to a design flaw? What decisions would an autopilot make? Continue to command more thrust? Or come up with a inventive, intelligent, life saving solution?

Classic Man vs Machinery arguments. The argument has been comprehensively won by an interaction of the two. Do you engineers do CRM courses?

[TURIN]

Stop encouraging it!

If it can't feed it will find another bridge to hide under.

DO NOT FEED THE TROLL!!


Posted from Pprune.org App for Android

[JSeward]

Once planes become fully automated then the leading cause of crashes will be computer failure instead of Pilot error.

It could be safer or more dangerous we won't know until we do it but then is it worth the risk to try?

Once we start going down this automate everything path where do we stop? Because I'm quite sure that not everyone wants to be an artist or chef.

[ATSA1]

OK, I will bite,I have read this thread with much interest!

Chock Chucker, I believe your assertion to be flawed on a number of counts, but he main one being NEED.

just because something is POSSIBLE, it doesnt make it PROBABLE.

Von Braun launched the first practical liquid fuelled rockets in 1942, but it was 1957 before the USSR put a satellite in orbit, and then only for political reasons, and it was still another 12 years before Neil Armstrong walked on the Moon, and even then because the Cold War was at its height. If there was a NEED, there would have been bases on the Moon by about 1975, but here we are in 2013, and the only permanent presence we have in space is about 300 miles up on the ISS.

Chuck Yeager went supersonic in October 1947, and supersonic transports became possible in 1968 with the first flight of the Tu-144, and later with Concorde, which became operational in 1976 until 2003. Now we have no SSTs flying anywhere....why? no longer a viable NEED!

Economics drives everything in Aviation these days, the bean counter is King!

is there a NEED for pilotless airliners? Pilot error? why would a ground based "pilot" be any less likely to make an error than one or two in a cockpit on board?Could a ground based pilot have made the right decision to the A320 that ditched in the Hudson River, or would they have got the Sioux City United Airlines DC-10 to a survivable crash landing?

Weight saving? lets say 2 pilots weighing 120 kilos each...avionic weight might save around 100 kilos on them, so not much of a payload saving weight!

Economics? now I accept that pilots are well paid! But what are you going to pay the ground based Pilot? minimum wage? those guys might sit on there backsides a lot of the time, but its too late to wish you had a crew onboard when something goes wrong!

the current price of JET A1 is what makes or breaks an airline these days, not the pilots salary!

If there were such savings to be made, then you can bet your retirement pension on either Boeing or Airbus to be at least discussing such a concept as pilotless airliners with the major players by now...but as far as i know, no such discussions are taking place....its unlikely that even if an airline said yes to such a proposal, that any such aircraft would be carrying passengers any time before 2030 at the earliest...

Remotely Piloted Vehicles (RPVs) have been flown operationally by the Military for over 40 years, the USAF were using them in Vietnam! Yet nobody has even suggested they were used to carry people until you mentioned it a few days ago...ask yourself why this is!

Military RPVs are used to save a humans life in difficult situations, and also can remain on station for much longer than an expensive manned fighter...

Civil air transport is a world away from these criteria, even before factoring in such mundane things as health and safety!

In short, if there was a valid case for it, some Accountant in an office somewhere would be making the right noises.....the silence is deafening!

[grounded27]

Safety, safety, safety?

What would happen to a fully automated, pilotless aircraft that flies through a flock of birds, knocking out both engines at low level, in the middle of a major city like New York?

What would happen if the thrust commanded of the engines on a 777, close to Heathrow, didn't materialise due to a design flaw? What decisions would an autopilot make? Continue to command more thrust? Or come up with a inventive, intelligent, life saving solution?

Classic Man vs Machinery arguments. The argument has been comprehensively won by an interaction of the two. Do you engineers do CRM courses?

First off, Sully was an extremely well diversely trained pilot with over 20k hrs. The common trend towards reliance on automation is breeding quite the opposite in modern pilots. Speaking towards the future I think a pilot on the ground would have the same chances ditching as one in the cockpit, further in the future a totally automated aircraft may be better equipped to ditch than the dying breed of hands on pilots that are still out there.

All adverse scenarios are studied and I am sure will be applied, automation will be updated as the unforeseen (like it always has) gives us something to learn from.

I am sorry, no intent to jab at pilots but I feel you are foolish not to look at history and realize the only thing certain about the future is change. Take the trend aviation has been on and apply it reasonably to the future. Like I had mentioned above, the USA has cleared UAV's for class B airspace and is dumping money into building ADS-B sites. The world does not want verbal communication between aircraft and ground FANS. THE WRITING IS ON THE WALL Artie, all you have to do is read it. Sure hope you have no plans to encourage your children or grandchildren to become pilots.

[grounded27]

Economics drives everything in Aviation these days, the bean counter is King!


is there a NEED for pilotless airliners? Pilot error? why would a ground based "pilot" be any less likely to make an error than one or two in a cockpit on board?Could a ground based pilot have made the right decision to the A320 that ditched in the Hudson River, or would they have got the Sioux City United Airlines DC-10 to a survivable crash landing?

Liability, simply put pilots are a liability to an airline. Automation places the liability on the manufacturer. This is the selling point above reduction in salary. My response to your other questions is in the post above.

Grounded...

[JSeward]

It is possible for a computer to fly a plane from point A to B but this would require radical changes in current Aviation regarding all the regs and ATC etc.

The cost would be enormous but IF enough savings can be made then it is possibly economically advantageous. The question is can a computer think creatively to solve problems like the human can? Can they see the outside world like a human can?

There are lots of cases where an automated plane may have prevented poor Pilot error mistakes. But how many times has a computer done something bizarre (e.g QF72) and the Pilots saved the plane? I suspect most of these occurences would be small problems that don't get reported, but if it was an automated plane these could be serious.

What about when a Pilot has creatively saved a plane? For example the overused Hudson incident and what about the Gimli glider? A pilot landed a 767 on a drag racing strip (the plane went back in to service).

Pilot's are not perfect nor are machines and that is why there is a combination of both being used. The real future outcomes are more likely to be a one Pilot plane or fully automated. The ground station idea is just silly in my opinion, you still have to pay a Pilot (I would rather get a different job than be a ground station Pilot) and then there is the risk of communication jamming or something similar to that, why not have the single Pilot in the plane?

I personally would get on a driverless train and elevator, however I would not enjoy being in a driverless car, boat or plane (or any of these controlled by a remote ground station).

As a 17 year old, I and my "tech-loving" friends that I have asked about this all said they would not go on a Pilotless plane.

[grounded27]

There are lots of cases where an automated plane may have prevented poor Pilot error mistakes. But how many times has a computer done something bizarre (e.g QF72) and the Pilots saved the plane? I suspect most of these occurences would be small problems that don't get reported, but if it was an automated plane these could be serious.


You bring up a good point here, I would feel like aircraft condition monitoring would need much advancement. All those small problems that don't get reported because they are today just in a day's work would need to be compiled to automate.

Once again, we all agree things will happen slowly. The single pilot plane would probably be the first step, the problem would be just the same as is today. Keeping that one pilot proficient (hard enough to keep two with some company procedures i hear of that require autoland quite often). Otherwise he would be sitting there trying to stay awake pushing a button every 15 minutes as PM.

[Artie Fufkin]

Single pilot ops is even less likely.

How would a pilot accumulate enough experience to command an aircraft safely, if the "master and apprentice" system of two pilots is abolished? 200 hour wonders in sole charge of an airliner?

And if he just sits there monitoring, not doing anything until it goes wrong, how will he keep up his perishable handling skills?

And as for remote pilots on the ground - the main conclusions from the Sioux City crash was the need to keep pilots on board. The three pilots on board got the virtually uncontrollable aircraft to a survivable position. Every other pilot in the company was put through the same scenario in the sim, and couldn't replicate it. The conclusion drawn was a pilot will do better if his ass is on board.

[ATSA1]

so are we saying that pilots are not only a liability, but a computer could do it better?

if this is so, then the likely time period before any pilotless airliners are in revenue service is probably 50+ years...Nothing is on the drawing board yet, and not likely to be for a long time...

with the current usage of Oil, what will they be flying on? or should I go and watch some more episodes of the Jetsons?

[grounded27]

Please think of this from a business standpoint.. Don't think much else is diferent. Pilot error is a airline liability, aircraft error is on the manufacturer. Black and white. No one cares who can do better it is a matter of statistics and more so liability...... Remove pilot error, what is the finite resolution?

[JSeward]

Remove pilot error and the leading cause of crashes become computer failure!

10 years later

Hmmmmm how can we lower computer failure rates, it's the leading cause of accidents? Lets put a human up there!

[grounded27]

Stop looking to the past to create your arguments and extrapolate the present to imagine the future

Should be looking at the past to forsee the future, beyond the factual evidence you and I have presented. Yet to be contested.

I am just happy to have known PFE's & some great old captains who just did not want to give up the lifestyle, so they flew sideways, they say the winglets are their toombstones.

[ATSA1]

I am quite aware of the various UAV projects going on around the world, but NONE are even hinting at carrying humans or any other organic lifeforms!

the OP said in his opener that in the not too distant future, hinting at 5-10 years away, we would have pilotless airliners..now the estimate is 2040! also , the only vaild reason we have to fly a pilotless airliner is to make it safer...can we really trust the complex operation of a large aircraft entirely to a computer? Have you never heard of hacking? How else do you think other countries can "capture" a UAV over its airspace without hacking into the nav system? even the White House and the Pentagon get cyber attacks....So lets get this "computers are safer" idea buried once and for ever..

So we are back to my original question....if computers are not any more reliable than a man in the cockpit, why bother?

In case you are wondering, I am actually in favour of unmanned space probes, its a far better way to explore the universe...but an airliner/ship/car without a pilot, no thanks!

and think on this.....computers are designed by humans...and some of the computer programmers i have met, i wouldnt let them anywhere near a car, let alone an airliner!

[JSeward]

Oh thank you for bringing that point up! If people around the world can hack into the US military's and NASA's computers then I would hate to see what could happen to an automated airliner.

[grounded27]

So we are back to my original question....if computers are not any more reliable than a man in the cockpit, why bother?


I have provided this answer before. It takes the liability away from the airline and places it on the manufacturer. You may not grasp the weight of this but the airline industry does because it saves them a ton of money.

As for computer reliability I suspect the design will be super redundant, encryption would have to be top notch. The most troublesome argument is a hack true, but it is like every other fear of man building something another man can destroy. Twin towers are a great example, we had no clue how vulnerable we were. Does it mean we quit progressing out of fear, hell no...

[ATSA1]

so why aren't the Airlines doing it right now? The technology has existed for at least 40 years, if not more!

Pilots aren't the liability, its daft engineers getting too many ideas!

Why not switch off the laptop, take your medication, and go and watch some episodes of the Jetsons?

[grounded27]

so why aren't the Airlines doing it right now? The technology has existed for at least 40 years, if not more!

Pilots aren't the liability, its daft engineers getting too many ideas!

Why not switch off the laptop, take your medication, and go and watch some episodes of the Jetsons?


Really? After my first few years in aviation I started to understand the business. Cutting edge commercial aircraft are at least 20 years behind common technology, the FAA or your CAA will not grant tech w/o serious red tape to cut on new aircraft. You will see it in the military then corperate first.

Pilots and maintenance are the largest liabilty to an airline. You say daft, you have no business sense. let's talk about insurance.

Do not belittle me sir, I have a few beers in me but have not watched the jetsons since I was a child.

The sooner you realise you are not just a pilot, mechanic etc but work for a corperation in a large industry you will see what a little tool you are. I know this and am greatfull for the deposit in my bank every week for the task's I perform.

I know that was harsh but much less disrespectful than your post, hopefully enlightening.

[ATSA1]

I wonder what they call a troll down under?

[JSeward]

Sure computers mainly "fly" the big airliners these day but the most important fact here is that the Pilots are the ones in command of the situation.

If your car has drive by wire and electric steering that pretty much means the car drives itself?

[TURIN]

I wonder what they call a troll down under?

Under Bridge Bluey?

[Waving_tug_boy]

Chock chucker is brilliant. This is the funniest thread I've read in a while.

[IFixPlanes]

Chock chucker is brilliant. This is the funniest thread I've read in a while.
Yes, great stuff for the Comedy Channel ... but trolling level for a aviation forum.

[Alber Ratman]

And how many people bit??:E

[Tarq57]

And how many people bit??:E
How many people kept biting is what made the troll successful.
One of the more effective troll threads I've seen.

[pilot and apprentice]

grounded27:First off the topic is not automated maintenance but fully automated flight. This is getting foolish, the last 3 posts though targeted at CC are extremely immature.

No one has argued my factual statements to the eventual commercial UAV.

Jseward if you wish to persist in this nonsense I am sure I could double down on pilot error failures with enough google time.

Can anyone (since you pick a bone) show a modern form of automated maintenance? Thought not! Not to say it is impossible in the future HAHE EG: the Q9001 fictional device.


I view this as a VALID possible, probably inevitable future.


Please stop the foolish banter and place your input based on fact... Do not disgrace me. I am an AIRMAN. I am PRO Aviation. I miss the days of being the flight mech that looked back at the ENG panel as he set thrust to make sure all else was in working order. I am now focused on avionics and see the possibilities.

Please speak with the professional regard I have for all Airmen.

I almost thought you were a CC alter-ego, but you are far too reasoned and civil. I apologize.

The attacks on his arguments are often taking the same tone as his arguments. His allusions that all accidents would stop if there were no 'pilot error' is an example.

I too agree that all complex systems (aviation is but one) are moving toward increased automation. This will continue until an incident or another paradigm shift happens.

I am normally thick-skinned, but the constant references to 911 from CC are, IMHO, offensive. Bad guys exploited the weaknesses they saw in a complex system, at many levels. Unfortunately, the uniqueness of the plan, in many respects, allowed it to succeed. Manned a/c was not the one fatal flaw. Automate the a/c and the attack would be electronic vice physical, and the attackers wouldn't even need to put themselves at personal risk.

I too am an AIRMAN, as you say. I have been making a living as a pilot since '90 and have some (I want more) experience on the floor as an apprentice AME. I imagine I too will eventually make the transition to UAV support, as it fits my general interests, but still see a role for crew in large commercial a/c for some time.

As for references to AF447, they are equally specious. One crew that made very poor decisions does not mean that an entire profession is at fault. Unfortunately, the current aviation business model does not reward people to strive to be the best. A CEO of a leading offshore helicopter provider has been quoted as saying: "we don't need a few great pilots, we need a bunch of mediocre pilots". The attitude is pervasive.

As for CC and his thread. Enough.

[grounded27]

I really wanted to guide this thread in a positive direction because there is a lot to say about it. I was happy when it almost died and had no interest in "feeding the trolls". Any fool who calls this thread comedy is simply not far from being a troll themselves. Anyways, thanks for the thoughtful response. It would be good to revisit this topic in another few years or when some significant technological step is taken.

Grounded

[Krystal n chips]

" I must say this has been the best thread on Eng. & Techs for years"

Erm, not strictly true......

We had a rather, ahem, extended " debate" as to the differences between a dust cap and a primary seal...

Then we had the fabled Senior Security pillock about whom I was never quite sure as to whether he was the complete troll, or, far more disturbingly, was actually for real.

All we need now is a debate on the pen vs tool kit as the best maintenance tool....::E

[Alber Ratman]

No pikey maintenance company is going to fork out for a robot.. Getting a dust cap for a wheel is hard enough!:E
Pen by day, toolkit for the nightshift guys to fix it when the time is right.. Price is right.. I'll get my coat..:}

[Safety Concerns]

the fact that so many have responded to somebody claiming to have based their thoughts on watching the jetsons as a kid highlights that automation is urgently needed. How gullible are you people?

A LAME calling theirself chock chucker says it all.

[Alber Ratman]

Six pages of laughter..:)

[TinyTim2]

An interesting debate , apart from the name calling ....

The technology is available to make it safe in 90% of flights but that isn't enough for the passengers or the insurers .....

Imagine an A380 going down because a situation similar to Sullys river landing , the airline and aircraft manufacturer would have no-one to point fingers at .. They would have to pay up , instead of having a Captain to thank for saving everyone ....

I've been an LAE for over 30 years and I believe it will happen , but only when the accountants allow it . I will always be happier with a man in the cockpit , wether he's brilliant or mediocre , because he can THINK, something computers can't do YET !!!!!

[grounded27]

Imagine an A380 going down because a situation similar to Sullys river landing , the airline and aircraft manufacturer would have no-one to point fingers at ..

Sully was lucky he had a river to ditch in. I don't really see the logic in ising an incredible feat of piloting (the man had over 20k hrs) and a whole lot of luck to negate the viability of unmanned flight.

I can though give you dozens of examples of pilot error that resulted in death. I shal provide 2 good examples that would have not occured if they unmanned.
The largest crash in history 583 dead being a result of KLM 4805, TCAS would have prevented this. It was though the captain's fault as he took off w/o clearance.
The crew on Flying Tiger Flight 66 should have recieved a darwin award.

[Tarq57]

The largest crash in history 583 dead being a result of KLM 4805, TCAS would have prevented this. It was though the captain's fault as he took off w/o clearance.
No, it probably wouldn't have.

If you're going to argue the tech case, at least learn the tech first.

[grounded27]

I stand corrected, I said that before I reasearched the accident and should have removed it, I was under the impression KLM was on approach. None the less it was human error, the Captain took off w/o clearance. This would have not been as likely to happen today let alone just about impossible in the not so distant future.

[Krystal n chips]

Tenerife.

Just how would TCAS have prevented this tragedy?

Please remind us all again, just what do the initials TCAS stand for ?

You may want to read this article first...and then review your comment.

http://www.ou.edu/cls/online/lstd5683b/pdfs/weick.pdf

[Alber Ratman]

Anyone that knows how TCAS works, know that all TCAS commands are advisory not control functions and require the crew to react to the TA or RA commands. Aircraft with TCAS have collided because one of the crews did exactly the opposite of what their TCAS RA call demanded, but that was due to them obeying a conflicting call by the ATC airspace controller. As reports said, if the crew had gone with the TCAS call (that they would have every right to do over the ATC one), the collision would have been virtually impossible to happen.

[Bornfreee]

www.bbc.co (http://www.bbc.co).uk/news/technology-22511408

By David Coates ([email protected])
Published on 11/05/2013 08:45

The first unmanned flight over British skies has taken place over Lancashire, it has been revealed.
Defence giant BAE Systems has said the Jetstream research aircraft flew 500 miles from its base at Warton, near Preston to Inverness in Scotland being piloted from a base on the ground.
The aircraft - dubbed ‘the flying test bed’ - is fitted with technology to allow it to fly without a pilot in the cockpit.
Lambert Dopping-Hepenstal, programme director of the £62m ASTRAEA project behind the technology, said the trials showed unmanned aircraft could be flown.
He said: “The work being done here today and hopefully continued into the next phase of the ASTRAEA programme, will likely impact all of us in the next five, ten, 20 years as unmanned aircraft and associated technology develop and become a part of everyday life.
“These latest trials help prove the technology we need to routinely operate unmanned aircraft in our airspace and also help the regulators develop the framework in which the aircraft can operate in.
“Simply put, I believe we are writing a new chapter in aviation history.”
Andrew Chapman, an unmanned flight expert at the National Air Traffic Control Services, said the test flight was evidence such forays could take place without impacting other aircraft.
He added: “There is still work to be done but it would seem that, on the basis of this flight, an unmanned air vehicle could operate in different classes of airspace.”
The ASTRAEA (Autonomous Systems Technology Related Airborne Evaluation and Assessment) programme is an industry-backed programme aimed at developing pilotless technology.

[grounded27]

Lockheed Martin Corporation and Kaman Aerospace Corporation have successfully transformed Kaman’s proven K-MAX® power lift helicopter into an unmanned aircraft system (UAS) capable of autonomous or remote controlled cargo delivery. Its mission: battlefield cargo resupply for the U.S. military.
The K-MAX UAS is a transformational technology for a fast-moving battlefield that will enable Marines to deliver supplies either day or night to precise locations without risk of losing life in the process. The aircraft can fly at higher altitudes with a larger payload than any other rotary wing UAS. With its four hook carousel, the K-MAX UAS can also deliver more cargo to more locations in one flight
The team has flown the K-MAX UAS more than 750 hours in autonomous mode since joining forces in 2007. The rugged system can lift and deliver a full 6,000 lbs of cargo at sea level and more than 4,000 pounds at 15,000 ft density altitude.
The K-MAX continues to exceed expectations as an unmanned platform. The aircraft has met all unmanned milestones to date and continues to excel in the commercial logging and firefighting industries. The aircraft will remain optionally piloted for ease of National Airspace Operations, occasional manned mission flexibility, ferry flights, rapid integration of new mission equipment, and allow rapid return-to-service activities.
The manned version of the K-MAX is used for repetitive lift operations by commercial operators for the construction and logging industries. To date, the fleet has accumulated more than 255,000 flight hours since 1994.

The two K-MAX unmanned helicopters being tested in Afghanistan have accumulated 525 flight hours during 485 sorties, while handling as much as 4,500 pounds of cargo per mission.

Marine Corps extends K-MAX Afghanistan deployment to 2013.... This is old news and this is a heli-go-flopter. Fixed wing should be a breese....

[Wolfman3415]

Pilotless Trial in UK Airspace May 2013
BBC News - Pilotless flight trialled in UK shared airspace (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-22511408)

By David Coates
Published on 11/05/2013 08:45

Yes agreed, I was very surprised when i read this (and other articles on it) alas there were crew in the cockpit for safety reasons who conducted take off and landing with the remainder being flown remotely. Now how does this differ from current commercial flights where the crew program the FMS with the route and select autopilot with nav control until just before landing. All that has been proved in this trial is the remote control of the FMS/autopilot. When they get to auto take off and landing that can cope with difficult situations (crosswind, NDB/inst approaches) with far more reliability and the ability to automatically react safely to emergent situations then the future will start to look different.

UAS have been dreamed of and written about for many years but it is emerging technology and in the current climate of heavy regulation for safety reasons coupled with the desire to move away from a "fly, crash, fix" methodology mean that it will be decades before they are ever certified to carry pax or freight on a routine basis.

I don't deny it will happen I'm just a little more realistic of when:rolleyes:

[Bornfreee]

"Yes agreed, I was very surprised when i read this (and other articles on it) alas there were crew in the cockpit for safety reasons who conducted take off and landing with the remainder being flown remotely".


That's why it's called Trials!

[Capetonian]

Unmanned Flight: The Drones Come Home - Pictures, More From National Geographic Magazine (http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2013/03/unmanned-flight/horgan-text)

Article in March NG about drones. I think we're a long way from pilotless commercial flights, if ever, but the article makes interesting reading.

[grounded27]

I don't deny it will happen I'm just a little more realistic of when

I have thought about this statement for about a week now.

Military aviation have completed the most extreme UAV ops.

Civil aviation have completed UAV flights with a single pilot performing only T/O and landing during the mission.

Our current civil aircraft are designed and by many SOP's land in automation (after simple configuration) autonomously.

The rate that we are moving at is exponential towards civil UAV flight.

How can anyone make a "realistic" judgment of when?

The only thing certain in life is change.

The words GLOBAL, CORPERATE, FINANCIAL, LIABILITY etc.. Are the power words we should be thinking of on this matter when you wish to think of what is realistic.

[OBK!]

All this thread proves is how little engineers know about airline piloting.

We had remote control planes decades ago. And you could have programmed them to fly an ILS back then with less technology than a pocket calculator. It doesn't mean there'll be pilotless passenger aircraft anytime this side of 2050. Flying normal takeoffs and normal landings are the simplest/easiest/smallest parts of the job.

50 years minimum. By then we'll probably have robotic engineers, with robot engineer engineers and so on ;)

[ManUtd1999]

An interesting thread. Personally I think we will one day see pilot-less commercial flights, but it's a long long way off. Look at the airliners being made/designed now (A350,787, Neo, Max). They will be in operation for the next 20+ years and they haven't even considered not having 2 pilots.

The next logical step would be to introduce UAVs for non-passenger roles (crop-spraying, aerial surveying etc). Then I think we might move to 1 pilot cockpit designs, where the plane all but flies itself and the pilot is purely a back-up. Then eventually we could have pilot-less airliners, but it's a long way off.

[grounded27]

Flying normal takeoffs and normal landings are the simplest/easiest/smallest parts of the job.

Hmm, 99% of your actual workload as well.

[Capetonian]

Whilst on a train earlier today I was wondering if there are driverless trains on long distance or high speed routes anywhere in the world.

I know that local transit type operations are often driverless, but I think that's the limit.

[hillberg]

Who do you blame when Mr Coffees pooch is serviced?:eek:

[grounded27]

The next logical step would be to introduce UAVs for non-passenger roles (crop-spraying, aerial surveying etc). Then I think we might move to 1 pilot cockpit designs, where the plane all but flies itself and the pilot is purely a back-up. Then eventually we could have pilot-less airliners, but it's a long way off.

Man, have you ever seen those crop dusters go?? Dropping their line and doing a hammerhead for the next. I would doubt this could compete first. The 1 PM design will most likely be the civil aircraft entrance.

[ATSA1]

finally, you have answered your own question..

The reason we have no pilotless airliners, is there is no money in it!

end of...

[OBK!]

Hmm, 99% of your actual workload as well.


Negative. You've proved my point again.

Is 99% of an engineers job topping up the oil?

[exeng]

I am prepared to accept that at some time in the distant future 'anything' is possible - however for the immediate future (i.e. 200 years) pilotless airliners do not make safety, or commercial sense.

Some people here have suggested that also engineers could be replaced. I doubt that is likely ever. (well not in the next 400 years anyway!)

I speak as an ex LAE, ex Flight Engineer, Captain and General Builder.


Regards
Exeng

[t43562]

Your questions answered: ASTRAEA autonomous planes | In-depth | The Engineer (http://www.theengineer.co.uk/aerospace/in-depth/your-questions-answered-astraea-autonomous-planes/1016475.article)

"The first “trailblazer” is likely to be the US Department of Defense. Now that withdrawal from Afghanistan is well under way, there will be a large number of “drones” based in the US. The second will be the deployment of key sub-systems developed for the UAS market in manned aircraft. Here the system is not taking over from the human, but assisting in maintaining situational awareness and helping to select the safest action to take. The first commercial uses of UAS in unrestricted airspace, I believe, will be: freight; inspection of key infrastructure, such as power lines or oil pipelines; and agricultural surveillance, e.g., of livestock or crops.: