From my archives...
"There is a very strong feeling, particularly on the part of the engineering community, that the way to get rid of human error is simply to get rid of the pilot. In fact I've seen a letter signed by a senior vice-president of maintenance, of a major airline, which said precisely that.
I don't think that we'll ever see a situation in which we've totally eliminated the human operator, or the pilot, from the flight deck. Because we need the capability to do what thus far only people can do and that is to be creative and to deal with ambiguous situations, new situations, un-anticipated situations in creative ways.
I have an example from the real world that I think vividly illustrates what the human brings to the situation and why we need to design systems so that the human is an integral part of it.
Severeral years ago a large three engined aircraft was taking off from L.A and there was a failure in the horizontal stabiliser - a very serious problem. They were able to gain control of the airplane and in fact bring it around for a successful landing by making use of the differential thrust between the tail mounted engine [which is up high and above the CG], and when thrust is applied tends to pitch the aircraft down, and the wing mounted engines [which are below the CG] , and when power is applied to them tends to pitch the aircraft up. What makes that interesting is that's not an explicit, approved or understood procedure, in fact the crew made use of an adverse characteristic - engineers try to design airplanes so that they don't have pitching moments with power changes. Here a human being, a flight crew, was able to make use of an adverse characteristic to save the day.
It's that kind of creative thinking, that only the human can do, and do effectively, that is going to dictate his continued presence for the foreseeable future in any kind of complex system".
Dr John K Lauber
[Currently the vice president-Safety and Technical Affairs, Airbus Industrie of North America. Dr. Lauber completed two terms as a member of the National Transportation Safety Board in Washington, D.C. He has participated in investigations of major accidents involving all modes of transportation. Dr. Lauber has also served as chief of the Aeronautical Human Factors Research Office for NASA Ames Research Center, where he was instrumental in the development of advanced flight crew training concepts that are now used by airlines around the world.]
So give it a thought the next time you're flying. Are you better off in the hands of a human pilot, whose ability to mess it up is at least matched by his instinct for survival - or is there an alternative?
If we leave it to the computer, have we created the perfect pilot or could human error creep in another way? The old adage says 'it's the pilot who is always the first on the scene of an accident', but in a pilot-less aircraft the fault may lie with a software designer who is busy sipping his G&T at home in silicon valley - at the exact time your plane comes down in the Rockies!
