Neville
It is interesting that we both read the same article but take different things away.
I read the article to be saying that certifying the systems is going to be the challenge, rather than building the systems. Nobody knows how to certify learning systems. A challenge, possibly an insurmountable one, but a totally different challenge.
This, of course, is due to autonomous/automatic systems being held to a higher standard than manned because it is impossible to code check a human.
The article does also say that it thinks the driver for all this may well come from the automotive industry which is interesting because they will have to solve the problem for exactly the same reasons, though with possibly less of a required safety level.
The 1 pilot plus old style automation not as good as 2 plus old style automation bit seems a bit of a "well obviously!" to me.
Uplinker
"Here are a few of the considerations that I and the other pilot will be making as we are following the ECAM:-
Where is the high ground?
Computers better at SA than humans
How much fuel have we got?
Computers better at calculations than humans
What is our endurance?
Computers better at calculations than humans
Is a fuel imbalance building up? If so, why?
Computers better at calculations and systems knowledge than humans
Where are the CB's ?
Computer knows.
Do we have any icing?
Even current airliners have auto deice
What stopping systems have we lost?
Computer knows
What landing distance do we require?
Computers better at calculations than humans
What landing distance is available?
Computer knows
Have we lost any landing capability, e.g auto land?
Computer knows
What is the weather situation at our destination and alternates?
Computer can read a TAF
Do all our slats and flaps work?
Computer knows better than you.
Will the landing gear deploy - What if it doesn't?
Computer can follow checklist
Will our noeswheel steering work? If not, how are we going to control the roll out?
Computer can control better than humans
When we land, will we need to evacuate the aircraft on the runway? If so, we need to brief the Cabin crew and the passengers.
Auto briefs already in use.
All this stuff will take a computer a millisecond, and it can keep updating constantly.
The calculations will be correct and instantaneous, unlike the 10 minute sweaty events we have all seen in a sim that rarely give the correct or accurate LDA
There are examples where a human is better. This is not one of those areas.
Re dumping the fuel.
The fact that an ECAM led human pilots to dump their fuel in to the ocean is hardly an advert for humans.
Your suggestion is that the Humans are there to catch the ECAM errors.
That only works if they catch them.
Saying that a computer would do the same as a human doesn't really help your case.
At least a continually monitoring computer might have caught the problem before they were empty as it noticed what was happening.
Oh, and if you don't think airline flying is dull and repetitive then you really need to get out more. I can think of no duller form of flying, and I've tried most. The tipping point for me to get out was when I read about the BA A320 cowling doors flying off and my first thought was "lucky b@stards! They got to do some of that piloting stuff!"
p.s. There, I've gifted you naysayers a good example of where a computer would have had snags!