Hi Pininstauld, (I see what you've done there), yes I had a human moment and decided that I was making a possibly weak and confusing point, so I edited it out. No shame in that. I have been out all day and didn't see your reply until just now, so I wasn't reacting to you. No harm done.
Tourist:
Most of your replies to mine are baffling. So which commercial aircraft currently do all the things you say they can do, or are you just saying that it is theoretically possible for computers to do them?
"Computers better at SA than humans" Do you really, seriously believe that??? What do you actually know about computers? Do you understand how they are made, how they are programmed and how they work? Honda made a robot called ASIMO. He was impressive. He could walk up and down stairs (which had strategically placed reflective dot markers on them to help him work out the complex positional calculations). Sadly, as he left the room after his demonstration, ASIMO walked into a door.
Your last point is a really weird one. I don't know what flying you did, but you sound very bitter and twisted. I enjoy my work. Flying to the Maldives or Florida for example, or even good old Malaga, is brilliant. Beats working in a factory. If you found that sort of thing dull, what were you before? an Apollo astronaut?
That ECAM fuel balance checklist was written by humans, and has since been revised after the error was discovered. And humans will write the software in the computer that you think will be able to do everything we do so much better. Computers are good at being a tool for humans, for example, as you say to calculate a landing distance or meter the fuel to the engines. But to actually fly the whole aircraft and conduct the whole flight?? A computer is just a machine that has to be programmed for every possible variable and each different set of circumstances. It is very difficult to do that for something as complicated as a commercial airliner at the design stage and not miss anything out or make mistakes. That is why you need the humans - to sort out the unforseen, think around the problem and to plan ahead.
I am not saying humans are infallible, far from it, But humans designing a computer to take their place in the cockpit? Why add a whole raft of extra potential programming errors and problems and remove the very pilots who could take control and land safely in the event of a problem? When a software or hardware fault is uncovered, or realised in the computer in your airliner, where will the humans be to sort it out, or in the case of AirTransat, perform a deadstick landing?
A final thought. Surgeons make mistakes too. Would you remove humans from the operating theater?
Last edited by Uplinker; 10th Dec 2014 at 09:38.