Originally Posted by
dr dre
It’s not just the incidents that are reported in the press and are known to the world.
What about the probably 100 incidents a day worldwide that we never hear of where an airliner suffers an autopilot malfunction and the pilots simply disconnect, manually fly and then just write up the defect in the tech log? Or any other system defect automation can’t handle and again all that is written about it is a tech log entry?
Indeed. An this is why we have to move quiclky to what we call "Safety 2 " which is that in addition to only investigating and acting after incidents or accidents , we must look at and learn from situations where it all ended well , mosty because of human actions , and those are curently not looked at.to make changes . When we do we will most probably find that humans " saved the day " hunderds , (and I would even argue possible thoushands) of times a year compared to the 20 or so whrere they actively contributed to an incident/accident.
QF32 is a good example and I talked with De Crepigny on this long ago , thinking outside the box saved them , no following the check lists or EICAS messages , which a computer system would have .
Full automnation carry pax ? not in our lifetime. but sincle pilot ? well Embraer is working very seriously on it , the only major diference between their Business jets and their airliners is the number of pax in the back. The cockpit automation is the same . When the number of flying hours of their single pilots business jets will be large enough to demonstrate ( or not) the safety case things might change and at least keep the discussion alive . But currently , not a good idea to implement.