future for pilots?

[captain high]

According to the Sydney Morning Herald:

In the next 50 years, Australian robots will control mines, patrol the coastline and negotiate our harsh agricultural environment, preventing us from risk to our lives. Unmanned aircraft will comb the skies and autonomous vehicles will conduct ground reconnaissance, making Australia a global leader in field robotics.

It looks like we may be the last generation of pilots. When do you think that the major airlines will be totally pilotless - 20 -30 years? Do they even have the technology yet or is it just a matter of people not trusting technology enough?

[lk978]

The biggest component in any technology advance, the culture of the people is what wil determine the use of this type of technology.

I think we will find a phased implementation of this technology as some people will love to jump on a cheap flight with no pilot and other people wil want to pay the extra for the added saftey.

[Navajo King]

I don't think that having a pilotless aircraft would bring the price of tickets down. The relative cost of pilots compared to all the other costs of flying is very small.

So my question is, why would anyone want pilotless airliners? And would you trust Microsoft Windows to fly you half way round the world???

Cheers,
NK.

[disco_air]

we'll have driverless trucks/boats/trains before we have pax travelling on pilotless aircraft!... i think we're safe for some time yet. :\

...disco

[AirSic]

I can see it now...

Windows is shutting down now, we have detected an error...would you like to send a report? End now/Send report

:sad:

[Pinky the pilot]

Pilotless aircraft carrying fare paying passengers?:confused:

Not in my great grandchildrens lifetime!!!! (If I have any that is, which is most highly unlikely!:E )

Last generation of Pilots? As Disco Air inferred, I think we're safe for a while yet.

[disco_air]

Amen Pinky. Would like to see a robot deliver mail :}

[autobrakes]

"...preventing us from risk to our lives."

Sorry, just found that funny. Is flying in an aircraft controlled by a robot not risking our lives?

I wonder what the machine would do if it was under circumstances it wasn't programmed to handle... :ugh:

[lk978]

tell the WWII pilots there will be pilotless bombers in just 50 years....... I think yeh it will be a while but in all honesty i have flown with some pilots that i would have prefered a Unix system to be flying, just a little more stable then Windows.

[podbreak]

I'm sure that annoying little paperclip from MS Office would to a tip-top job of flying our planes :\ :eek: .

[haughtney1]

Pilotless passenger aircraft are a long way off (http://www.aaib.gov.uk/publications/bulletins/september_2006/boeing_747_412__4x_els.cfm)

What would have happened had there not been human intervention?

[Gnirren]

Hehe, Windows Aero 1.0....

"An wing has been discovered, please insert install cd 4 to continue"

"Engine number 2 has quit unexpectedly. Do you wish to send an error report?"

And of course, the dreaded primary display bluescreen on approach.

[bushy]

Haughtny 1 . The interesting part of that is "there was no fault found in either the aircraft equipment, or the ground equipment". I think this may tell us something about our systems, both electronic, and administrative.

[Chimbu chuckles]

That'd be the blue screen of death. :uhoh:

Only individuals who 1/. have never crewed a jet and 2/. live in a computer dreamworld existing only in another reality could dream up this **** and then believe it possible.

Of course the technology exists and a jet could takeoff, fly and land at it's desto sans crew...in a vacuum devoid of other traffic, weather and technical malfunctions.

Crewless jet airliners are as likely to happen as everyone flying around in flying cars...like that tw@t on discovery channel. Take a look at the average idiot driving a car and then imagine him doing 100kts 500' off the ground.:ugh:

[The Messiah]

The cost of the pilots on board a -400 or A380 over the ocean for 15hrs spread across 400 or possibly 550 tickets would have no influence on the ticket price whatsoever. Everything else costs more than they do so after they remove everything else first (fuel included) then they will remove the pilots.

[neville_nobody]

Messiah unfortunately I don't think the likes of Geoff Dixon and Co see it that way. If they can cut the cost of pilots they will. Even the current costs of pilots is a drop in the ocean in terms of hourly operating costs, yet they are hell bent on slashing wages/conditions.

However I cannot imagine insurance companies being big fans of this idea. Wouldn't want to be the guy who signs off that premium. Also who in CASA will be willing to sign off the computer for his 500 Multi dispensation?? :hmm: :}

[tinpis]

Its upon us

Whats a QF SO if hes not a robot?:hmm:

What I think they mean is a robot they dont have to feed and doesnt wear Serengetis. http://www.augk18.dsl.pipex.com/Smileys/cool3.gif

[Chimbu chuckles]

Messiah and neville.

The cost of labour is the only cost in aviation GD etc can have any real chance of influencing...aeroplanes, fuel, enroute and terminal nav charges, spares etc are all out of their sphere of influence.

Not so aircrew and ground staff.:ugh:

It is not about how little they cost as a % of overall costs it is about a raw number that can be saved...until such time as they back enough people into the same corner.

[captain high]

I think the US military uses remote drivers (pilots) already where planes(albeit very small ones) are under the comand of a 'pilot' on the ground. Perhaps this will be the backup one day?

I don't think that technology gets the credit it deserves. Such technology on an aircraft would not be like that on your PC, it would mirror such technology that space crafts have been using for decades - as a lot of space flight is automated. I'm sure 'fly by wire' had just as many opponents when it was introduced. I think that this technology may be on as quicker than we think, but I'm sure we will all be nearing the end of our careers:O

[Bula]

Weve had innovation replace the flight engineer. Now I think its just a matter of time before automation replaces the SO. Is it really necessary to have to pilots operating the aircraft in the cruise?

Now theres a question....

[Chimbu chuckles]

Bula an SO is a cheap FTL extender and nothing more than that...my airline uses two captains, others use two SFOs.

Please point to the piece of electronic wizardry, not already fitted, that can do that.

[777WakeTurbz]

Pilotless recon drones fair enough, they cant kill anyone except those unlucky enough to be underneath them when windows locks up.

But airliners that carry hundreds off pax need at least one person onboard trained to cancel the spyware popups:}

If they GD was really keen on cost cutting he could install MS FlightSim on his planes and have some nerdy 14 year old with bad acne can sit and 'play' all the way from MML to HKG for no more than KFC or Maccas would pay :E

Ive never been able to master the keyboard controls for it, or even been able to bank at a constant rate on it, yet ive seen ppl who know the FMC inside out who cant even do a 1 in 60 or a fuel calculation on the fly in the air :cool:
Saves on training i guess:} :E :suspect:

Turbz:cool:

[disco_air]

with flight sim you can also use the 'pause' button :}

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

G'day 'AIRSIC',
Not to mention.....
......."SESSION TIMEOUT".........
OOOOPPPSSS!!!!!!!
But, not to worry chaps and chapesses, help is on the way......
I hear that nuumeroous people from places, (like Singapore), are soon to be coming to our fine shores to train as
......P I L O T S......
Why?
Because it is CHEAPER HERE, and, THEY CAN!!! (Daddy pays??):}
So, OUR pilots of the future may be like budgies around a waterhole at sunset in the outback............cheep cheep cheep!!!!!!
Who NEEDS an 'expensive' computer????:=
Let's face it.....In the fullness of time.....will ASBK be there? And, wot of YMMB? YPJT?? ABAF?? Shopping Malls Housing Estates???
Our POLITICIANS DON'T APPEAR TO CARE...SO FAR!!!
:yuk: :yuk:

[Needlesplit]

EITHER

By the time robots have taken over the jobs we'll all be out of work and therefore too poor to afford airline tickets!!:ugh:

OR

Given that Airbus pilots can't override the computer they have already taken over!:\

[Transition Layer]

Now I think its just a matter of time before automation replaces the SO. Is it really necessary to have to pilots operating the aircraft in the cruise?

Yeah maybe not, but who is the captain going to rely on to get the girls in the bars to talk to us!

:} TL

[Tripster_747]

Just read an article about uncrewed flights and thought I'd check out what fellow ppruners had to say on the subject (there HAD to be a thread on this ...and obviously there is:) )

I'm sure that there is currently no problem for trains/trams (i.e. any other means of transport on rails) to be completely automated however they are still manned. So why should it be different for a/c? Especially when flying is so much more complex than traintravel.

I think, as other have said before, that it will be a long time before the public is willing to enter a uncrewed a/c. And even MORE so should the "pilot" be controlling the aircraft from the ground ("What?I'm supposed to get on a plane that not even the pilot trusts?!")....

[psycho joe]

For that matter why do we need Flight Attendants surely airlines could have drink dispensing machines etc.

...Then again, the idea of someone getting it on in an aircraft toilet with a drinks dispensing machine is just f:mad:in sick. :E

[rmcdonal]

For that matter why do we need Flight Attendants surely airlines could have drink dispensing machines etc. :ok: :E

I remember seeing a really crap movie on this very topic, a pissed of ex-employee hacks into the aircraft in flight and takes over. Hell of a lot easier then sending a suicide bomber to do the job, plus you get to use him again :ugh:
While it is true that most accidents are in someway human error, it is also true that more accidents are prevented by flight crew then caused.

[mattyj]

its not the aircraft that I would worry about, its ATC. Whats gonna happen when they give the flying robot "circle to join downwind to let traffic backtracking on the active runway depart" instructions, as the flying PC passes over the Final Approach Fix..will the Intel chip have the cooling system to cope. (I know I didn't..especially when the instructor is busy pulling the #1 engine :\ :\ ...Oh well I guess the PC wouldn't do any worse than I did:} )

[ABX]

Not too long ago trains had at least two people up front, three if there was much shunting to be done, now 3000 tons of heavy metal travel from Brissy to MEL with only one occupant in the cab, 'technology' made it possible.

I wonder if we will see RPT flights with only one pilot and technology to take over and divert and land if/when the fertiliser hits the prop?

I bet a dollar that we do - sometime...:8

[27/09]

What about automation in another area - ATC.

I see technology reducing the reliance on ATC for sequencing, collision avoidance and terrain avoidance before pilots get replaced in the cockpit by remote control.

We already have technology like TCAS, this technology will see advances to further to help with "see" and avoid and also help with sequencing.

There has already been work done on using track offset and GNSS technology for enroute navagation allowing one route or corridor to be used in both directions enabling climb and descent.

The GPS terrain mapping technology can allow flight in IMC conditions below MSA. Look at the stuff developed by Chelton that is/was being used in the Capstone project in Alaska.

I see less people on the ground before we see less people in the air, even if it is just for marketing reasons, i.e. the PAX demanding human presence up front.

[Bankstownboy]

Quote by ABX: Not too long ago trains had at least two people up front, three if there was much shunting to be done, now 3000 tons of heavy metal travel from Brissy to MEL with only one occupant in the cab, 'technology' made it possible.

Whose arse did you pull that from?

Last I checked, Brisbane - Melbourne superfreighters still have two buggers up the front. A driver and a driver's assistant.

[Magarnagle]

With the current state of the art in Artificial Intelligence (AI), I can't see it happening any time soon, although it will happen.

At the moment, the largest users of UAV technology are the military. These aircraft are by and large guided by human operators, effectively flight sim pilots, with an aircraft at the end of the signal. Where these aircraft will ultimately prove their strength is in their ability to exceed the limitations imposed on human pilots (eg. high acceleration and G forces, not having to write a letter to a grieving relative etc).

To some extent we are already seeing the use of AI in missile technology.

What they are not currently able to do with AI guided aircraft, is to "think" outside the paramaters they are programmed with. AI is unable to deal with situations that they have not been programmed to deal with.

Neural network technology can allow AI to "learn" from situations (to some degree). If an AI stuffs up an approach for example, it remembers what didn't work, and does better next time. If it leaves a smoking crater in the end of the runway, the data can be uploaded to another AI, which will not make the same mistake, and will learn from every subsequent mistake it makes as well.

So in theory, an AI could learn to fly a plane. It would depend on the technology advancing considerably.

Communication would be difficult, but once again, voice recognition technology is slowly advancing.

In reality, the biggest hurdle would be to persuade the punters that flying as a passenger under computer control is as safe, or safer, than flying under human control. Of course freight, coastwatching, survey work etc. would have less of a problem with this.

At this point, it is nowhere near safe enough, but one day, who knows?

People are fickle. As soon as enough people consider it safe enough, everybody else will follow, especially if they are able to save $1.50 in the process.