Race to the bottom [Archive]

Autobrakes4

31st Jul 2022, 05:24

Lapon

31st Jul 2022, 11:25

Aviation is finished as a lucrative career in Oz. Only for the diehards and passionate lovers of it now.Those who have just started in airlines will have a good job don’t get me wrong, but will not enjoy the [relative] pay that those enjoyed in the past. Pay as we knew it is finished, there’ll be no more $400,000 plus a year for Airline Captains after new future agreements are negotiated. Before people come in and dispute my figures I’ve got mates in Qf who earn $440,000 on the 330 and over $500,000 if they’re in training [including super and allowances]. We’ve already seen 747 + 380 conditions eroded on the 787 and 350 awards. Those currently on the 380 and 330 and 787 at Qf are on the last of the best we’re ever going to see. We’re watching Network, Cobham, Jetconnect, Alliance etc, walk in and fly for half of what the Qf 737 crews get paid. Good luck to them, it’s a job offer and I’d take it too.

Yes it’s definitely a race to the bottom as airline executives pit work groups against one another to hire the cheapest labour they can. Things cannot get better they will only get worse. For those that might say a pilot shortage will change things; there are always stacks of pilots flying around the world willing to come home and fly for less. Rip aviation in Oz and great pay. Airline management has successfully seen to that.

Curiously, why does the Qantas 330 trainer earning 500k or SO earning 200k get quoted as including overtime, super, allowances etc etc.

Do people not bank super before seeing it, spend allowances on dinner and drinks, or refuse overtime? Or is it just a way to peacock?

Its always a mate or someone thats knows someone with a mate doing the quoting too, never the mate themselves.

It was asked on another thread and now I can't not notice it anymore.

Personally I don't consider myself to have any real control over what sort of overtime, bonus, allowances etc I get thoughout a given year so I dont get too fixated on it.

The Love Doctor

31st Jul 2022, 11:38

Or is it just a way to peacock?

Its always a mate or someone that mate of someone knows quoting too, never the mate themselves.

t.
I only look at my take home pay after all deduction/car payments etc so really never compare to anybody really

Jack D. Ripper

31st Jul 2022, 13:10

If you lament the erosion of salaries to $500k I think you need a reality check.

Fatguyinalittlecoat

31st Jul 2022, 14:55

If you lament the erosion of salaries to $500k I think you need a reality check.

why? What are you worth?

josephfeatherweight

31st Jul 2022, 16:21

why? What are you worth?

Absolutely - why do we undervalue what we do in comparison to other professions to our own detriment? We are our own worst enemies when we argue for things to go backwards.

Autobrakes4

31st Jul 2022, 23:43

Curiously, why does the Qantas 330 trainer earning 500k or SO earning 200k get quoted as including overtime, super, allowances etc etc.

Do people not bank super before seeing it, spend allowances on dinner and drinks, or refuse overtime? Or is it just a way to peacock?

That's because it's the top right hand figure on our payslips and includes everything. It's the easiest thing to quote.

Autobrakes4

31st Jul 2022, 23:52

If you lament the erosion of salaries to $500k I think you need a reality check.
I'm lamenting the erosion of salaries from $500,000 because we'll never see them again, despite inflation running away at 6% at the moment.

Pilots used to be compared to the pay scale of judges, now we're a shadow of that. Pilots used to have pays of many multiples of the average weekly earnings, now the multiples are shadows of that. When I say pilots I mean Captains in Qantas which used to be the only international airline in Australia, and I'm talking 60's through to the 90's. since then the contract has been downgraded and continues to be. I stand by my points in my initial post. Pilots at the top end of the industry in Australia are on the last of the good pay, it's a race to the bottom, and as others have said above why are we going backwards versus other professions, and why do we continue to accept it. Have some value about yourself man!!!!!!! We're in a highly skilled professional job with massive responsibility. Why talk yourself down, airline exec's with MBA's and straight out of Uni love hearing us devalue our profession. Divide and conquer in a race to the bottom, I'm glad I'm not starting off in the industry.

dr dre

1st Aug 2022, 00:29

Pay as we knew it is finished, there’ll be no more $400,000 plus a year for Airline Captains after new future agreements are negotiated.

QF’s last 3 negotiated EBAs will see A350 and 787 skippers and A321 skippers (albeit at max hours) making $400k or close to it, so your “future” will have to be aircraft arriving here post 2040.

We’ve already seen 747 + 380 conditions eroded on the 787 and 350 awards.

Really only for S/Os. Plenty of very good feedback from 787 CAs and FOs, no one in those positions stating their conditions have been “eroded”.

Before people come in and dispute my figures I’ve got mates in Qf who earn $440,000 on the 330 and over $500,000 if they’re in training [including super and allowances].

That’s definitely true.

We’re watching Network, Cobham, Jetconnect, Alliance etc, walk in and fly for half of what the Qf 737 crews get paid.

And watching them as they walk out the door almost as fast.

Rataxes

1st Aug 2022, 00:46

Really only for S/Os. Plenty of very good feedback from 787 CAs and FOs, no one in those positions stating their conditions have been “eroded”.
Maybe that's the outlook management count on.

Jack D. Ripper

1st Aug 2022, 02:06

I'm lamenting the erosion of salaries from $500,000 because we'll never see them again, despite inflation running away at 6% at the moment.

Pilots used to be compared to the pay scale of judges, now we're a shadow of that. Pilots used to have pays of many multiples of the average weekly earnings, now the multiples are shadows of that. .

Funnily enough, I can’t find PJRUNe to verify that….

Debating pay is pointless, it’s market economics. The simple fact is that becoming a Judge is far harder than becoming a Qantas Captain (and please don’t quote time to command, thats a BS seniority issue). Lawyers take a pay CUT from being a QC or SC to be a judge.

Good on QF Captains for getting $500k, Pilots across the world should make the most of the current shortage, and lock it in.

There is however a certain irony to your lament given the constant whinging from QF Pilots about their executive pay levels… perhaps a cultural issue?

Icarus2001

1st Aug 2022, 02:44

We’re watching Network, Cobham, Jetconnect, Alliance etc, walk in and fly for half of what the Qf 737 crews get paid.
And watching them as they walk out the door almost as fast.

Some true some not.
Those four companies have base rates for captains of between $170-$195k. Is that HALF of a 737 captains salary? $340-$390k?
All four are certainly learning the folly now of not being an "employer of choice".

aussieflyboy

1st Aug 2022, 05:12

Some true some not.
Those four companies have base rates for captains of between $170-$195k. Is that HALF of a 737 captains salary? $340-$390k?
All four are certainly learning the folly now of not being an "employer of choice".

Only Network 320 and Jetconnect can be compared like for like to a QF 737 pilot.

A 717 and E-Jet/F100 are around 25-30% smaller so you’d need to account for the size difference when comparing pay.

Ollie Onion

1st Aug 2022, 05:28

You also have to remember the market is totally different to when those gold plated salaries were the norm. Many less people used to fly and when they did they paid a premium for it. Regulation ensured National Airlines had a monopoly on the gold palted money making routes and the number of pilots employed on the massive salaries were far fewer. Meeting an Airline Captain was rare. Now days the market has changed, passengers are plentiful but only because the low cost model has changes the game, margins are tight and the sale of onboard items like muffins make up viable cash flows for the airline. Salaries are lower but there are many more jobs for pilots. I went overseas in the 90’s as at that stage Air NZ had over 3000 CV’s on file with appropriately qualified pilots and were recruiting 20 ish per year. The fact is many did go overseas leading to a massive cohort who did enjoy good money making conditions and can afford to come back and work for less further dampening the ‘shortage’ that may or may not exist. Gold plated contracts are gone and only a massive shift in the travel habits of people will bring them back. The likes of Jetstar, Virgin, Jetconnect etc will NEVER pay those numbers.

43Inches

1st Aug 2022, 06:31

Times have changed, pilots are not regarded as highly as they once were and in part it's true that the skills required to be a good pilot are no longer that higher standard. Just about anyone can be trained as a pilot now with reasonable judgement and hand eye coordination, and almost any working age group as well. So in broad terms the job is no longer the highly skilled occupation it was where you needed to be good on the stick and rudder or navigation skills and now is more of a technician working a piece of computerised machinery via a checklist and SOPs. You see the dumbing down every day where approaches are being dropped, radio calls seem to be talking to idiots (being told to hold short of runways you should know you have to), pilots refusing to do visual circuits or the SHEED arrival at Melbourne because its all too complicated, basic visual approaches and dealing with traffic and other airplanes seems all too hard.

So you then have to justify why you get paid this level of income to sit and watch a computer fly from A to B (public perception not mine). The whole glorified bus driver quip from a certain time stuck with the job unfortunately, so yes big paydays will never come back until there is a real sustained lack of pilots, but will that drive up pay? probably not, companies will just pack up, reduce schedules or just shut down to meet supply rather pay more. If GA is proof to the puzzle than companies rather go broke than pay more and look for ways to improve conditions, after all that would take effort.

Sunfish

1st Aug 2022, 07:05

ANCDU

1st Aug 2022, 07:41

I think using the “children of the magenta line” as an excuse for cheaper wages is a bit rich. Sure there is the reduced requirement for actual “flying” and that is something I definitely miss, but there are other aspects that we never really had to deal with when flying the classic noise makers.
Crew these days have a lot less operational support than we used to, every aspect of your flying is under scrutiny through a myriad of flight data reporting, the amount of traffic at airports has increased massively, ground staff etc are inexperienced, little support for management… the list goes on.
it’s a good argument to have over a few beers, but in the end crews today should have the opportunity to be remunerated to a comparable amount that crews have in the past, it’s just the complexities of the job that has changed, not the responsibilities.

43Inches

1st Aug 2022, 08:54

Automation has far less risks, the historical data proves it. There are different risks, but airliners are far safer now than say in the 1970s, when there was a lot of handling accidents on large jets. Part of the reduced handling mishaps are due to better SOPs, but a lot is due to modernisation of approaches, aircraft equipment and ATS coverage. Planes tell you when they get too low, come too close to other planes and getting off course by more than a mile means serious pilot input error to the FMS, rather than just some slight miss tracking or DR between ranged NDBs. You also now have RADAR/ADSB watching you over most areas with alarms built into the system if you stray from plan/clearance. Major airports have sensors to tell ATC when you cross a hold line, etc etc... Then there's just general reliability of the machines and maintenance practices that means major failures are few and far between. Most air returns and shut downs are due to indication errors rather than actual component failures. And when you have a failure its now really not a struggle between man and machine to remain airborne, where early aircraft didn't have the design features or thrust in some cases to deal with problems with many more cases of overloading occurring.

Its very easy to see types that are not as 'foolproof' and have nasty traits, like the ATR, which has an abnormally high accident rate for that type of aircraft. Or some Russian or Chinese types that regularly appear in footage with some catastrophic failure, or fire.

Pre 1980s a Captain was paid to not only fly and command the aircraft but bare a lot of responsibilities on layovers such as making decisions given no or difficult communication with the company. Now you can call company from just about anywhere, and more modern stuff will communicate aircraft issues inflight before the crew know it, with engineering able to send crew alerts and so on.

On the Met side, pilots have ridiculous amounts of information at hand, from close to real time radar coverage of huge areas to satellite pictures, hundreds of automated weather stations, weather cams. If you seriously think that today is anywhere near as bad or worse than years ago you simply are not using the system.

With regard to pay, none of that matters, you get paid what the company offers and what you accept. Now if the accident rate started to go up, you would see some companies lift pay and conditions to attract better pilots as a result, as with recruitment standards and minimums going up. Thing is, the accident rate is very low and really non existent in most notable Airlines, so they see no need to have Chuck Yeager in the left seat anymore. We havn't even got to desperate airlines yet either, where they actually pay for mass cadet courses, then you know the pilot shortage is real.

Lapon

1st Aug 2022, 10:30

Ollie Onion summed it best: The pie is now bigger, but the slices are smaller. Is that a bad thing?

Depends on perspective. Remember you might have been that guy earning 500k a year now like old mate on the QF A330 apparently (I've never met one though, only heard of people who know people who have), or you might have statistically never got an airline gig full stop.

Now i earn a lot less than a 500k salary a year, but I rarely fly at night, and rarely work more than 40hrs in a 28 day period, and don't take on any additional responsibilities. I am happy.
Have a contributed to a race to the bottom? I don't think its an apples and apples comparison anymore as the industry has changed in the last 40 years.

Infact, the entrie casualisation of the workplace means many of my non flying professional peers are either contracting, or employed on a tempory basis no matter the industry/job.

Moral of the story:
Things are changing, some for the better and others the worse. A headline grabbing salary doesn't tell the whole story however, and suggesting someone earning less than 4 or 500k is contributing to race to the bottom is ignorant at best, particularly as not all 'airline pilot' jobs are created the same as they may have been in the old days of the small pie.

RealSatoshi

3rd Aug 2022, 02:20

So now you are all “Children of the magenta line” and you still want the same money as those who flew before its existence? Bean counters want a return on all that expensive new automation hardware and software.
Just as much as Robotic Surgeons should have their conditions reduced when compared to those still wielding scalpels...don't think so.
Robotic surgery, also called robot-assisted surgery, allows doctors to perform many types of complex procedures with more precision, flexibility and control than is possible with conventional techniques. Robotic surgery is usually associated with minimally invasive surgery — procedures performed through tiny incisions. It is also sometimes used in certain traditional open surgical procedures.
Just imagine surgeons being told to accept reduced conditions, or that shiny new operating table with state-of-the-art foot controls - the one that saves the hospital money - will go next door...:ugh:

Icarus2001

3rd Aug 2022, 03:37

We, as a pilot group have a lot learn from these doctors. The AMA is one of the most successful unions in the country and does not present as such. With input as far reaching as who gets in to medical school and who gets a treasured provider number. Strictly controlling the supply of doctors to maintain the profession, clever people.

Ollie Onion

3rd Aug 2022, 04:18

Why would we be compared to a surgeon? We are not in the same league.

RealSatoshi

3rd Aug 2022, 04:41

Why would we be compared to a surgeon? We are not in the same league.
Maybe we are not...although I know of a number of Doctors, Lawyers, Accountants and Engineers who became career pilots - it is more an analogy of how we allow our 'profession' to be degraded as long as we get to play with the newest toys.

I'm sure Train Drivers are not chomping at the bit to have their conditions reduced every time a more economical train with increased pull capacity is introduced...or the surgeon's receptionist same for the absolute privilege of transferring from Windows to Mac.

Engineers scrap their mistakes
Surgeons bury their mistakes
Pilots are buried with their mistakes
CEO's get golden handshakes for their mistakes

By George

3rd Aug 2022, 04:51

Not in the same league academically perhaps, but I don't understand this desire to constantly put down the job of professional flying. I spent eight years in GA and then ten years in the right seat to gain the position of Captain. Eighteen years of apprenticeship is a fair amount in anybody's book. Not to mention all the exams, ground schools and simulator sessions. I have seen many struggle in the simulator over the years. Sure automation has made operating the aeroplane easier but the emphasis in other areas has shifted to being more demanding. Just keeping up with all the rules, regulations and bull-**** is more difficult compared to the seventies and eighties. In some ways a 727 is easier to fly than a 747-400, simple autopilot, manual thrust and a helpful flight engineer. The job has changed but still requires somebody with half a brain and real dedication.

das Uber Soldat

3rd Aug 2022, 22:23

There is a difference between putting down, and simply being realistic,

You are not a surgeon. Your job is not difficult.

finestkind

3rd Aug 2022, 22:53

Why would we be compared to a surgeon? We are not in the same league.

Thank god for that. The amount of aircraft incidents would be extraordinary.

finestkind

3rd Aug 2022, 23:00

There is a difference between putting down, and simply being realistic,

You are not a surgeon. Your job is not difficult.

Find that an interesting comment. So slicing and dicing, generally the same way, every day, in the same non changing environment, with the responsibility of the one that's on the table becomes more difficult or less after a few years. Being simply realistic about the medical profession I am pleased that a lot of surgeon's are only in charge of one person at a time.

tossbag

4th Aug 2022, 00:32

43Inches

4th Aug 2022, 00:52

Again ridiculous comparisons. A surgeon is the top of the medical profession, comparable in Aviation to say only the very top positions, like say an A380 Captain or even C&T on the A380, or even skilled top test pilots in some cases. And then there are many variations to the average surgeon from the top Heart and Brain surgeon to the top plastic surgeon and who knows in-between. The vast majority of doctors are not surgeons. Just like the vast majority of commercial pilots are not A380 check and trainers. You can practice as a GP after 12 years or so of study and experience and earn between $100k-$400k depending on location, experience and clientele. Guess what, a commercial pilot will be earning between $100k-$300k easily in less than 5 years, depending on time to command and workload. Surgeons also work long hours fitting a number of surgeries in one day and then multiple consultations on other days, fitting in with OR vacancies depending on specialisation again, which might mean a number of back of the clock operations.

Same as comparing the job to plumbers. Which plumbers, apprentices, short term contractors, self employed contractors, plumbing business owners, plumbing supply owners.... The pay varies from $30k a year to infinite depending on how successful you are, as would the case of a self employed pilot who expanded their own business.

By the way a few NQR jobs in either the medical or plumbing industry and your name will be mud and good luck getting those gravy pays, if you avoid court actions. A few NQR flights will probably be swept under the carpet and you can keep piloting and flying with nobody knowing it was you.

RealSatoshi

4th Aug 2022, 02:00

You are not a surgeon, but your work has its complexities and difficulties. A surgeon does a degree, a pilots licence when ATPL exams are included are certainly degree level education. Certainly similar levels of responsibility exist.
The entire context of the post was missed - I guess that is why we are not surgeons.
The point is, name any professional occupation (or other for that matter), that will consistently sell down their own worth in order to operate the newest equipment on the market. Do plumbers charge less per hour when they arrive with state of the art carp-blockage-trackers?

43Inches

4th Aug 2022, 02:25

Advance surgery techniques are different and may or may not reduce the pay return per surgery for a given surgery. That is the patient pays for the hire of the OR that has the equipment, the OR may charge more for the use of advanced equipment for the facility, not the surgeon. The surgeon may be able to do more advanced surgery which then increases the rate they may charge, or they maybe be able to do existing surgery faster, meaning less cost to the patient for their time, and they get paid less per surgery, but can perform more surgeries in one day allowing more income over the day. Everything is more complicated than indicated on here when comparing jobs. The new technologies in medicine either allow new procedures altogether or reduce the time or mess of existing procedures, which could actually reduce the time and cost to the patient. Whether the surgeon gets paid more or less is dependent on the technologies purpose. If the technology made something much easier than the specialists available to do it increases and the cost will reduce, meaning those surgeons will have to reduce rates on it and yes, lose income.

The motivation for surgeons to move to new technology is also as complicated. A surgeon that perfects a procedure on the new tech and gets known for less pain and recovery time will get more work and referrals. Some stick to the old ways and slowly lose clientele and can become critical of the new ways and bitter about it, just like pilots get bitter about not being hired for the newest and shiniest. "Oh don't beleive (x surgeons claims), yeah you recover faster, but his technique has higher rate of breakage and complications, my way takes longer, slower recovery but guaranteed better results" etc etc... or " I have access to the latest scanning robot thing, so everything is painless and fast recovery, parts are made in Germany not china, so your new artificial thingy will last X longer than B".

das Uber Soldat

4th Aug 2022, 04:28

Find that an interesting comment. So slicing and dicing, generally the same way, every day, in the same non changing environment, with the responsibility of the one that's on the table becomes more difficult or less after a few years. Being simply realistic about the medical profession I am pleased that a lot of surgeon's are only in charge of one person at a time.
It takes something like 15 years of training to be a surgeon. You can take someone off the street and 18 months later, they're flying 240 pax down the ILS.

Do you really, really think the jobs are on the same level?

Put another way. You need an ATAR of 99.95 to get into medicine (which is just the first step of being a surgeon). Aviation degree requires 73. And you don't even need a degree. I certainly don't have one, but it didn't stop me being offered positions at Qantas, JQ, Virgin and others over the years. and as tossbag will enthusiastically tell you, I'm an idiot.

Buckshot

4th Aug 2022, 05:36

A reminder of the old adage: the surgeon doesn't go down with the ship when (s)he screws up!

Ascend Charlie

4th Aug 2022, 05:51

A surgeon came to my flying school to learn to fly helicopters. He had long, delicate fingers and thin wiry arms. His arms were so thin that he could not pull himself up the side of the aircraft to inspect the rotor head. He could not hold the control forces of an R22 for more than a few minutes, and had to change to the B47 which had hydraulic controls.

He was absolutely useless as a pilot. He gave up after about 10 hours, never got to the hydraulics-off sorties, and went back to being a millionaire.

I am working on my third million dollars at the moment. I gave up on ever making the first two.

Chronic Snoozer

4th Aug 2022, 07:07

Ascend Charlie

4th Aug 2022, 10:53

The point I was making was that despite being a noted surgeon, with degrees up the gazoo, his physical skills were way different from what was needed to fly.

Comparing a pilot with a bare grade 10 to a surgeon is a waste of neurons. 105 hours to qualify as a pilot, 72 months for a doctor plus the years of extra stuff to be a surgeon.

finestkind

4th Aug 2022, 12:19

It takes something like 15 years of training to be a surgeon. You can take someone off the street and 18 months later, they're flying 240 pax down the ILS.

Do you really, really think the jobs are on the same level?

Put another way. You need an ATAR of 99.95 to get into medicine (which is just the first step of being a surgeon). Aviation degree requires 73. And you don't even need a degree. I certainly don't have one, but it didn't stop me being offered positions at Qantas, JQ, Virgin and others over the years and as tossbag will enthusiastically tell you, I'm an idiot.

Fair points but the other side of the coin is, you do not get to be check and training Captain on the newest bit of gear in 18 months. Think the jobs are the same level, of what? Dedication, motivation, desire to improve. Yes there are a lot of similarities. Don't recall the movie but the line was " I can teach you how to take out an appendix in 20 min. But it will take me years to teach you what to do if something goes wrong". Another similarity with flying. Yes they are apples and oranges but there are similarities.
As far as an ATAR goes that changes with the demand for that position. Like anything academia, if you have a great memory you can get a degree for anything. It does not necessarily make you good at that specialisation.

das Uber Soldat

5th Aug 2022, 09:09

Fair points but the other side of the coin is, you do not get to be check and training Captain on the newest bit of gear in 18 months. Think the jobs are the same level, of what? Dedication, motivation, desire to improve. Yes there are a lot of similarities. Don't recall the movie but the line was " I can teach you how to take out an appendix in 20 min. But it will take me years to teach you what to do if something goes wrong". Another similarity with flying. Yes they are apples and oranges but there are similarities.
As far as an ATAR goes that changes with the demand for that position. Like anything academia, if you have a great memory you can get a degree for anything. It does not necessarily make you good at that specialisation.
I didn't follow any of this. Plenty of boys and girls who secured jet commands inside 18 months when timing favoured them. There is no shortcutting the training requirements to be a surgeon.

I honestly can't believe you're labouring this argument. You're trying to equate a job that requires 15 years of tertiary and above training and qualification with something you can do as a year 10 drop-out, and do perfectly well.

There is nothing wrong with our job, but don't get carried away thinking it makes you special. You drive a bus. It's not difficult, it doesn't require a decade of training and nearly anyone can do it.

BTW, love that you think all that is required to attain a degree in pure mathematics is a good memory. Highly entertaining take.

tossbag

5th Aug 2022, 10:11

and as tossbag will enthusiastically tell you, I'm an idiot.

You're certainly not an idiot, a **** wit yes, but idiot? Far from it.

tossbag

5th Aug 2022, 10:17

And anyway, when it comes down to it, the money you get is what your union fights for with the support of its members. Like Doctors, the AMA tightly controls surgeon numbers, the AMA is a union and its members don't carry on like pilots. So they will be paid more, because they don't carry on like pilots.

Lead Balloon

5th Aug 2022, 10:19

[T]he AMA tightly controls surgeon numbersYeah, nah.

There are power struggles and ego wars in the medical industry, too. But they are smart enough not to do it the way pilots do and there ain’t no way that the AMA has any control over who’s recognised as a surgeon.

tossbag

5th Aug 2022, 10:29

But they are smart enough not to do it the way pilots do

Oakey-doak then, delete the tightly controlled bit and leave the bit about d!ckhead pilots :ok:

tossbag

5th Aug 2022, 10:32

Just out of interest, how does one become a surgeon? Just find an RTO in the city and rock up on a Monday morning?

43Inches

5th Aug 2022, 11:25

A few huge differences between being a pilot and the holder of a doctors qualifications. A pilot will inevitably work with a company that will have everyone standardised and doing the same thing, even across the industry the way you fly x aircraft is pretty standardised. Medical practice is a bunch of educated beings using the technique/method the individual thinks is best, not a set procedure, even in the same facility, very rarely would you be forced to comply with a technique/method pushed by the organisation you work for. Pilots will almost always work as an employee, with few contractors and very few self employed. Doctors can be employees, contractors, own their own practice and a myriad of other options. The big bucks is the doctors/surgeons that run their own practice/business, you still might earn big dollars running a major hospital department, but you will work your ass off doing it. Pilots have known work stresses, which you can sort of relieve yourself by some time off, destressing activities, exercise. Doctors see and hear things that can really change your mental state depending on the type of work, work in mental health or emergency wards and you need to have very tough skin.

Comparing the two jobs is comparing Apples and Orangutans.

PS I watched a plumber once stick a pick right through the brown pipe while digging and a spray of stinking brown sludge went right up into his face, up nostrils and in his mouth. They deserve whatever pay they can get, that's just way more than I could ever handle. The young bloke just shook his head, wiped his mouth with his sleeve and kept digging. It was a bit awkward when he went to shake hands after the job.

tossbag

5th Aug 2022, 12:14

I'm still wondering how a doctor becomes a surgeon, like, do you just identify as a surgeon? Because it's not controlled or anything. I get the 15 year bizzo but one day you just say, stuff it, I'm working on hearts from today, stuff general practice, too many whingers.

RealSatoshi

5th Aug 2022, 14:24

Ryanair CEO salary back at pre-Covid levels; Pilot wages reduced until 2027 - The Brussells Times

Definitely NOT Surgeons :ugh:

finestkind

5th Aug 2022, 22:12

I didn't follow any of this. Plenty of boys and girls who secured jet commands inside 18 months when timing favoured them. So check and training Captain in 18 months ?There is no shortcutting the training requirements to be a surgeon.So there are short cuts to being a check and training Captain

I honestly can't believe you're labouring this argument. You're trying to equate a job that requires 15 years of tertiary and above training and qualification with something you can do as a year 10 drop-out, and do perfectly well. No, the equate was more along the lines of pay versus time to get there, responsibility, and proficiency. I may be wrong but do not believe that the medical profession has yearly checks etc. and also guess I am wrong and you can be a check and training Captain in months?

There is nothing wrong with our job, but don't get carried away thinking it makes you special. Given knowledge of the medical profession, getting a second opinion is a necessity now days so being special is due to what, years of training or proficiency in your area.
You drive a bus. It's not difficult, it doesn't require a decade of training and nearly anyone can do it. Yes it has become easier in that technology has made the requirement of command decisions less onerous but the companies demand for profits has added to the pressure of those decisions.

BTW, love that you think all that is required to attain a degree in pure mathematics is a good memory. Highly entertaining take.Pure mathematics? Given the number of applicants, with degrees, that I have been fortunate enough to assess I am not even certain that a brain is required. .The number of mistakes made by the medical profession and surgeons in particular (some fatal) that I am personally acquainted with would equate to a major accident if not weekly than monthly in commercial aviation.Now you might not believe that you should feel a bit special, even just a teeny weeny bit, when someone puts their trust and lives in your hand even as a bus driver but I disagree

Red69

5th Aug 2022, 22:55

You guys are delusional comparing pilots to doctors. Pilots need to be compared to other vocational careers such as
tradies/bus/train/ferry drivers.

Doctors are not unionised and their earning potential is does not have a roof if they run a successful business. However to get there, there is a requirement of getting a 99 ATAR and performing well at uni/internship to even be considered for a speciality program. Then there’s the additional unpaid research, exams, stress, dealing with death.

Pilots are simply out of touch comparing sitting in the cruise for 10 hours whinging about the EBA or the company to people who have to work 12 hour days constantly, dealing with people and their issues and risking being sued constantly.

BuzzBox

6th Aug 2022, 00:07

…there ain’t no way that the AMA has any control over who’s recognised as a surgeon.

Perhaps not, but the RACS most certainly does! It’s been suggested the various medical colleges restrict the number of training positions for surgeons and other specialties to ensure that supply is less than demand, thus bolstering their exorbitant pay packets.

tossbag

6th Aug 2022, 00:23

Perhaps not, but the RACS most certainly does!

Phew! Here I am thinking that just any doctor can rock up with a scalpel! A bit like just any CPL can rock up to an A320 apparently.

Icarus2001

6th Aug 2022, 00:25

Exactly, imagine the same for pilots, a body that dictates the standards and requirements and decides who can enter the industry.

Like I said, we have a lot to learn from them.

43Inches

6th Aug 2022, 01:02

Mythology and rumors. Having an entry ATAR of 99% combined with a massive demand for medical professionals across the board, combined with it requiring people that want to be doctors and willing to endure the mess, long hours, dealing with real people problems and the long and difficult study requirements means there will always be a shortage of doctors. Regardless of how many we train there is also a massive intake of overseas qualified doctors to fill gaps, as we all would have encountered across the board. Pilots can be trained from a much larger pool of the community, however there is a limiting factor of how many actually want to be pilots for a career, it's a lot less of the population than say 40 years ago. If you want a better comparison then the local shipping industry is closer, the maritime union does actually control the amount of skippers that are trained and you have to be recommended to be admitted to the training. That being said there is not a huge amount of jobs within Australia on ships that wholly have to comply with Australian crew requirements, international shipping is a dogs breakfast of conditions and crews. Experienced ships masters are in high demand and paid very well, you might make serious money just being contracted to ferry a ship over a few weeks that a pilot makes in a year. A mate is an experienced captain, tried to retire at 50 with millions in the bank, kept getting calls for one last trip and couldn't refuse the six figure numbers they kept throwing for a few weeks sailing because no one else could do it. Him and the wife now spend up to six months of the year in the south of France aboard their own largish boat pottering around sampling the good life.

BuzzBox

6th Aug 2022, 04:43

Having an entry ATAR of 99% combined with a massive demand for medical professionals across the board, combined with it requiring people that want to be doctors and willing to endure the mess, long hours, dealing with real people problems and the long and difficult study requirements means there will always be a shortage of doctors.

I’m sure we would all agree that high academic achievement is something that’s essential for a career in medicine. Nevertheless, the very high ATAR requirements are set by the universities in response to demand for the limited number of places funded by the Federal Government; they are not a requirement for the job per se and there is hardly a shortage of applicants. A person with an ATAR of 99 or higher does not necessarily make a better doctor than someone with an ATAR of 95. The notion that only those who achieve an ATAR of 99 or higher are capable of passing the course and becoming good doctors is elitist nonsense.

shortshortz

6th Aug 2022, 05:16

The funniest part is you lot think surgeons only make $500k haha. Pulling seven figures by mid 30s isn't unusal once moving into private practice.

Lapon

6th Aug 2022, 06:09

The funniest part is you lot think surgeons only make $500k haha. Pulling seven figures by mid 30s isn't unusal once moving into private practice.

Is this like the SO on over $200k a year, or the A330 trainer on $500k a year.... you know, the ones we all hear of but never meet.

No doubt one or more have, but to imply its the norm? I've never met a mid 30s surgeon earning over $1m a year myself. I could be sheltered, or it could be the exception rather than the norm.

shortshortz

6th Aug 2022, 08:29

Is this like the SO on over $200k a year, or the A330 trainer on $500k a year.... you know, the ones we all hear of but never meet.

No doubt one or more have, but to imply its the norm? I've never met a mid 30s surgeon earning over $1m a year myself. I could be sheltered, or it could be the exception rather than the norm.

Chase it hard and you'll go well over that

Lapon

6th Aug 2022, 12:54

Chase it hard and you'll go well over that

I have no interest in chasing anything or working hard myself.

I just hope to one day met the man / the myth / the legend. Everyone has a mate thats done it (except for me it seems), but nobody I speak to has actually made these salaries themselves.

lucille

7th Aug 2022, 00:16

43inches has hit the nail on the head.

The undeniable reality is that automation has already removed the need for pilots who operate between city pairs which allow the autopilot to remain on until 200AGL. OK, not next week but not that far in the future. Checkout the USAF UAV fleet. You can be sure airline managers and aircraft and avionics manufacturers have long been doing so.

The cost savings resulting in the removal of pilots is enormous and not just in salaries. If you were an airline manager, you’d be working to implement this as soon as possible. Pilots in certain specific areas of aviation will be extinct, it’s only a matter of time. Coincidentally, those areas are also the ones where pilots are paid the most.

I remember the halcyon days of FEs…. They too thought they were indispensable.

5 years ago, I had a go playing with a $2000 Mavic drone, the amazing automation and capabilities in this toy certainly opened my eyes. I assume the new models are even more capable. There’s your clue.

43Inches

7th Aug 2022, 00:44

Pilotless airliners are still a few decades away, but I do expect to see Co-pilot/FOs starting to be replaced by AI by the end of this decade. It might be just FOs with far reduced duties or expanded single pilot smaller aircraft as the technology moves in, but it's certainly already being developed into the latest new cockpit designs. Question then begs as to where the single pilot gets their experience and mentoring from.

morno

7th Aug 2022, 02:08

You blokes are dreaming. Good luck getting the travelling public onboard with that idea.

LexAir

7th Aug 2022, 03:01

Icarus2001

7th Aug 2022, 03:42

Checkout the USAF UAV fleet. You mean the ones operated by a crew of two on the ground? Pilot and weapons specialist.

This old chestnut. When trains are driverless EVERYWHERE and container ships operate autonomously and driverless cars are able to operate safely, THEN you may see pilotless aircraft.

43Inches

7th Aug 2022, 04:06

You blokes are dreaming. Good luck getting the travelling public onboard with that idea.

I think you are getting out of touch with the travelling public, they don't see any need for two pilots if the leading cause of aircraft accidents are 'pilot error'. If automation and pilots don't coexist I don't think it's the automation that will get the flick seeing as it's already well proven to reduce the accident rate be relieving pilot stress and distractions. Good ole Bezos and his Blue Origin also ran vs Virgin Galactic particularly on the point of being pilotless, why waste payload on stuff you just don't need, and frankly costs more to be there.... There is no doubt aircraft pilot days are numbered, its just a matter of how long. Cars are already self driving and will be more so in the near future, road vehicles being far harder to remove the driver than aircraft as there is a more chaotic setting. The general public won't bat an eyelid if its cheaper and more reliable, especially if a 'shortage' of human crew is what causes all their inconvenience when they want to travel at peak times.

PS most of the accidents with self driving cars are not the car driving itself, usually when the owner is self driving and blames the car for the incident, as its the only option other than look stupider.

Big driver of automated vehicles is mine sites, as drivers cost them huge amounts, so lots of RnD constantly being poured into that area.

43Inches

7th Aug 2022, 04:23

You mean the ones operated by a crew of two on the ground? Pilot and weapons specialist.

This old chestnut. When trains are driverless EVERYWHERE and container ships operate autonomously and driverless cars are able to operate safely, THEN you may see pilotless aircraft.

Freight trains have been able to reduce driver numbers over the years, more for multiple head consists. That was a big reason Pilbara drivers got a big payrise, but also in trade off for dropping from 3 or so drivers per consist to a single driver. Large ship crews have diminished significantly in the last 30 years due automation. New freighters need less than 20 crew to operate, and that includes cooks and stewards.

And that gets back to the point that actual fully automated airliners are a while away, but the days of the Co-Pilot are numbered, with HAL most likely appearing as your FO in a new large jet cockpit near you in the next 10 years.

RealSatoshi

7th Aug 2022, 04:34

There is a massive psychological difference between operating a USAF UAV designed for 'Destruction of Things' versus having joe-public onboard a UAV Airliner operated by a Stanford MPL with zero Skin-In-The-Game, operating from a sweltering shipping container in a country with the worst labour laws. Oh wait, nobody anticipates that this will be the then next cost destruction frontier for airline CEO's.

The Boeing 777X (an Old Bird with New bolt-ons), was launched in November 2013 and will only be delivered in 2025 - Clean sheet designs are not in fashion for CEO's seeking short term KPI bonuses.

RealSatoshi

7th Aug 2022, 04:49

And that gets back to the point that actual fully automated airliners are a while away, but the days of the Co-Pilot are numbered, with HAL most likely appearing as your FO in a new large jet cockpit near you in the next 10 years.
The unintended consequence of this would be the final decimation of the profession, even for airline management, as few (if any) would embark on a 20 000 hour career built on solitude in an aluminium tube for extended hours on end...Neurotic Pilots will become an everyday occurrence.

Bula

7th Aug 2022, 05:05

We have already lost one crew member to automation. We will loose another in the cruise segment sometime over the next decade. Takeoff and landing will have two until I’m dead and dust. Airliners have a 20 -30 year cycle. That’s a lot of coin to phase out the next type ahead of this timeline.

Beginning to operate a long haul flight with only 2 pilots… watch this space. FANS with only one pilot in the cruise rotating every 3 or 4 hours…. 10 years. Max

neville_nobody

7th Aug 2022, 06:16

Single or no pilot airliners don't actually solve any problems though they only create new ones. You are taking one of the safest modes of transport ever known and making it less safe. Unless you can deliver the same or better hull loss with autonomous systems you aren't achieving anything and run the risk of destroying an entire industry.

Mach E Avelli

7th Aug 2022, 07:14

There is a metaphoric technological meteor hurtling towards the airline pilot community, which will effectively wipe it out. Just like the dinosaurs.
The pursuit of the god almighty dollar will eventually sway public opinion towards accepting a pilotless aircraft; albeit, maybe, with a ground based pilot monitoring on-board systems just like happens now with military drones.

Exactly - just like the dinosaurs, we will become extinct. In the same way that good voice communications killed off the morse-key wielding radio operator, and inertial navigation systems killed off the sextant wielding navigator, and autothrottle etc the flight engineer, today's UAV technology will soon be safe enough to remove the pilot from the cockpit. Those who embrace this technology could be re-cycled to ground-based control jobs, because it will still require careful monitoring for weather events, malfunctions etc. Hopefully such jobs will reward experience with decent salaries. But the money won't be anything like it was in the golden years gone by, because there will be spotty-faced geeks aspiring to play these ultimate video games.
Managements - as we know - always play pilots off against cheaper options. Instead of denying it will ever happen, the smart thing for today's pilots to do will be to lobby for very strict experience criteria so that today's 20 year old pilots end up as 45 year olds controlling UAVs.
As for public acceptance, if I am still alive to see it (and having met a few sub-standard pilots in my time), I would love to be the poster boy passenger on the first pilot-less flight, but fear I am not photogenic enough.

ScepticalOptomist

7th Aug 2022, 09:00

Exactly - just like the dinosaurs, we will become extinct. In the same way that good voice communications killed off the morse-key wielding radio operator, and inertial navigation systems killed off the sextant wielding navigator, and autothrottle etc the flight engineer, today's UAV technology will soon be safe enough to remove the pilot from the cockpit. Those who embrace this technology could be re-cycled to ground-based control jobs, because it will still require careful monitoring for weather events, malfunctions etc. Hopefully such jobs will reward experience with decent salaries. But the money won't be anything like it was in the golden years gone by, because there will be spotty-faced geeks aspiring to play these ultimate video games.
Managements - as we know - always play pilots off against cheaper options. Instead of denying it will ever happen, the smart thing for today's pilots to do will be to lobby for very strict experience criteria so that today's 20 year old pilots end up as 45 year olds controlling UAVs.
As for public acceptance, if I am still alive to see it (and having met a few sub-standard pilots in my time), I would love to be the poster boy passenger on the first pilot-less flight, but fear I am not photogenic enough.

Fortunately for airline pilots the reliable comms required for UAVs with passengers isn’t anywhere near good enough - not even close. It’s a large problem to solve, and won’t be solved anytime soon.
The failure rate is way too high.

You can all relax.

Lapon

7th Aug 2022, 09:31

So what is the benefit of pilotless airliners exaclty? In the big scheme of the operation the pilots wages are insignificant anyway.

Next is the question of who is going to put thier money on the line to refine and develop the technology, and thats all before some regulator somewhere has to stick thier neck out to even certify it (We all now how difficult it is to even just get a medical renewed in a timely manner)

Once all thats done you have to convince the public there is something in it for them and get them on board... the same public who form thier unwavering views from social media and WhatsApp groups.

Remind me again what the benefits of a pilotless airliner were that make over coming all of those obstacles worth the risk and expense?

I dont doubt it's technologically possible, I just dont think its feasable in the lifetime of anyone here.

The Love Doctor

7th Aug 2022, 10:14

So what is the benefit of pilotless airliners exaclty? .

Executive bonus's bonus's and bonus's!!!!:ok::ok::ok:

Mach E Avelli

7th Aug 2022, 10:29

Sure, there are technical obstacles to overcome and refine. But 20 to 25 years is a long time in the evolution of aviation technology.
Commercial impetus and passenger acceptance of pilot-less flight only needs some nutcase pilot to pull another mass murder suicide, or do a “shut up Gringo” on a grand enough scale.

And yes before the anal retentives jump on me, I know he did not exactly say “shut up Gringo” but his reaction and comment was just as dismissive.

tossbag

7th Aug 2022, 10:33

I just don't think it's feasible in the lifetime of anyone here.

Have a little think about the infrastructure required to support a pilotless aircraft at airports alone then have a think about the country you live in. Australia. A state government announces a long awaited rail line to Tulla airport, then tells you it will be ready in 10 years. Yep, 10 years to build a 20k piece of track. Mind you 10 years is nothing when you consider the airport has been there for 45 years or so before a rail link was announced. Badgerys Creek took 34 years to commence construction. It would be piss easy to pilotless an aircraft from the US to Australia, it's been done before but have another think about the infrastructure required and think about the incredibly average infrastructure that Australia is famous for, Australia 'the lucky country' not.

Mach E Avelli

7th Aug 2022, 10:46

Have a little think about the infrastructure required to support a pilotless aircraft at airports alone then have a think about the country you live in. Australia. A state government announces a long awaited rail line to Tulla airport, then tells you it will be ready in 10 years. Yep, 10 years to build a 20k piece of track. Mind you 10 years is nothing when you consider the airport has been there for 45 years or so before a rail link was announced. Badgerys Creek took 34 years to commence construction. It would be piss easy to pilotless an aircraft from the US to Australia, it's been done before but have another think about the infrastructure required and think about the incredibly average infrastructure that Australia is famous for, Australia 'the lucky country' not.

Tossbag, valid points but the Chinese can build a hospital in a week and a high speed railway in a year. 25 years from now they will be running Australia anyway.

tossbag

7th Aug 2022, 10:52

Mach, pilotless aircraft would happen tomorrow if the Chinese were involved, mind you, that would depend on how soon they could steal the technology and would include quite a few accidents along the way. On your second point, I don't think it will be 25 years.

Gnadenburg

7th Aug 2022, 11:24

Australia is booming. Jobs are being created for pilots that were not there before. We have the USA taking Australian pilots in unprecedented fashion. All this as hundreds, maybe beyond a thousand experienced Australian pilots are home from abroad. We still have retirements and pilots fed up in bigger numbers than before. The employees of all those expat pilots have not recovered yet. Asian demand will eventually be extraordinary and not far behind the US.

Yet these pages are full of nauseating resignation and working class mindset. Start pushing back. I’ve no doubt retention will see you having an ear that wasn’t there before.

neville_nobody

7th Aug 2022, 12:22

Sure, there are technical obstacles to overcome and refine. But 20 to 25 years is a long time in the evolution of aviation technology.

No it isn't........There has been virtually no change in the last 25 years so why is the entire paradigm is going to change for pilot-less aircraft?

Boeing & Airbus will still be making aircraft designed in the 1970s & 80's in the 2030's!!

Mach E Avelli

7th Aug 2022, 12:26

Nauseating resignation or pragmatic pessimism - call it what you will. Boom is always followed by bust.
While there are great opportunities for pilots in the USA now (and if I was 40 years younger I would be there in a heartbeat), in time the USA will implode, just like every hegemony has done since the ancients.
I am not advocating that pilots should be defeatist. In fact if you don’t leverage the current situation to your maximum advantage you are pussies. But this boom is not like herpes; it’s more like true love.

Mach E Avelli

7th Aug 2022, 12:47

No it isn't........There has been virtually no change in the last 25 years so why is the entire paradigm is going to change for pilot-less aircraft?

Boeing & Airbus will still be making aircraft designed in the 1970s & 80's in the 2030's!!

Depends on the incentive. Look at the 20 years between 1939 and 1959. In 1939 the DC 3 was state of the art. By 1959 no one was building large piston aircraft

Gnadenburg

7th Aug 2022, 21:12

in time the USA will implode, just like every great civilisation has done since the ancients.

I didn’t read this thread completely but I’m confident that’s the oddest statement within it. A meteor could end the evolving, unprecedented pilot demand too.

If Asia picks up next year it will be carnage IMO.

Global Aviator

7th Aug 2022, 22:08

I didn’t read this thread completely but I’m confident that’s the oddest statement within it. A meteor could end the evolving, unprecedented pilot demand too.

If Asia picks up next year it will be carnage IMO.

Not if Asia picks up next year, when Asia picks up. Nah not going to China, no way, look at how they treated expats during Covid! Nekminnit USD $20,000 to $30,000 a month tax paid, 3 on 2 off, yeah, nah? Oh wait reverse bases offered with X bonus. Hang on here’s a sign on bonus.

Its a matter of when in my humble opinion.

:)

Mach E Avelli

7th Aug 2022, 22:18

KRviator

7th Aug 2022, 22:30

Freight trains have been able to reduce driver numbers over the years, more for multiple head consists. That was a big reason Pilbara drivers got a big payrise, but also in trade off for dropping from 3 or so drivers per consist to a single driver.Not just the Pilbara trains either. I've worked Driver-Only freight for well over a decade and love it. Though I'm not the most personable person. In Australia DOO freight runs from Kalgoorlie to Perth (without any supervisory system either), from Brisbane-Townsville (supervised by ATP & AWS), and both V/Line & CountryLink regional passenger trains in VIC/NSW are DOO as well, with the exception of the Broken Hill Xplorer - and that's only due to the distance & shift length.

The unintended consequence of this would be the final decimation of the profession, even for airline management, as few (if any) would embark on a 20 000 hour career built on solitude in an aluminium tube for extended hours on end...Why wouldn't they? If you want to fly and the $$ are right, there's no practical difference between having "the system" monitor you and a human. The vast majority of train driver's who work DOO thoroughly enjoy it. You make your cuppa, you put your Spotify on, get comfortable and watch the world go by for 10-12 hours. If you have an ergonomic cab design (not any locomotive designed by an American...), it is genuinely enjoyable, comfortable and relaxing. As above, I've done DOO for 12 years and the only times I've missed having a Coey were where I had to wait for a second Driver to come out by car to shunt out a defective wagon, a rare event in itself, whereas with two on board we could have done it then and there.

Icarus2001

7th Aug 2022, 22:38

Passengers want someone up the front who has a vested interest in the aircraft getting there safely. End of story.

Crew costs are between 13-15% of operating costs (including cabin crew). The driver is not there. No pun intended.

Funny how we have auto land but no auto take off, have a think about that.

shortshortz

7th Aug 2022, 23:21

I have no interest in chasing anything or working hard myself.

I just hope to one day met the man / the myth / the legend. Everyone has a mate thats done it (except for me it seems), but nobody I speak to has actually made these salaries themselves.

Chasing it hard for another 5-700k just results in retiring earlier - I can see why they do it. Throw in a tax rate of only 27% for these guys and it's raining money. Of course you've never met any that only pay 27% tax either - face palm

Mach E Avelli

8th Aug 2022, 00:09

.

Funny how we have auto land but no auto take off, have a think about that.

There are big UAVs been taking off without a pilot for years and Airbus has also done fully automatic taxi and takeoff tests, Admittedly pilots were on board, as obviously we are not quite ready to let an A350 sized machine loose on a public airport without some on-board supervision...yet.
Why would they bother with the development costs if they did not have a game plan for the future? Right now they are saying that the intent is not to replace the pilot in the cockpit...yet

Icarus2001

8th Aug 2022, 00:18

Like I said, we do not have have auto take off but auto land has been around for decades.

Manufacturers test and develop technology for lots of reasons. Google Glass?

43Inches

8th Aug 2022, 02:44

Those that think nothing has changed in the last 20-30 years have forgotten the single most important thing that is driving self driving vehicles, navigation systems. The self contained navigation system that with very little input can guide an aircraft from gate to gate without any issue. GPS is already accurate and reliable enough for all aviation applications. This can be further be refined to cm accuracy using mobile phone towers alone, forget needing fancy GBAS. The future is already here, and they are developing it agressively.

Just because we've stuck with two pilots for 30 years means nothing much. Trains had two drivers, stoker on the foot plate with multiple conductors and brakeman for 100 years, now theres only one driver and no one else. In reality trains could easily go crewless tomorrow, just needs a bit of spending.

Icarus2001

8th Aug 2022, 03:15

Just because we've stuck with two pilots for 30 years means nothing much.

How many pilots did we have before 1992?

Trains had two drivers, stoker on the foot plate with multiple conductors and brakeman for 100 years,

When a train stops, it stops, it is in a safe state. Similar to a car or bus or truck. Not so an aircraft.

In reality trains could easily go crewless tomorrow, just needs a bit of spending.

Yet they are not. REALITY versus possibility.

You don't think that the reasons preventing that are not the same ones that will also hold up "no pilot" aircraft?

Would you say that cargo ships are easier to automate than aircraft? Two dimensional movement, thousands of miles of almost empty ocean between ports. Simply put a "pilot" on at each port as is done now anyway. So why do you think that has not happened? Now apply that to aviation.

KRviator

8th Aug 2022, 04:56

When a train stops, it stops, it is in a safe state. Similar to a car or bus or truck. Not so an aircraft.Not always. When an unattended (or a big-enough manned) freighter loses brake pipe pressure, you are entirely reliant on how tight the seals are in the braking system to prevent it buggering off down the hill and emulating BHP's runaway. Yes, it'll stop when it has a problem, but unless it has spring-applied park brakes, there's no guarantee it'll stay stopped if the gradient is sufficient....

Icarus2001

8th Aug 2022, 05:44

When that happens, how many paying passengers are affected?

Gnadenburg

8th Aug 2022, 06:00

If the Chinese keep playing with their crackers it will be carnage for sure. If we are lucky it will only affect the Asian travel industry. If we are unlucky, bury your gold under the house and dust off that old push bike.

Well Taiwan’s operational tempo has exhausted its supply of military pilots. Many will be clawed back from local airlines.

Asian demand for pilots will be insatiable and demand not met. Of course that’s dependant on CCP blockade of Taiwan or a dinosaur killing meteor. And just for the record, I think it’s ill-advised for Australian pilots to take mainland contracts when they return. The potential to be a political scape goat is too high.

43Inches

8th Aug 2022, 06:16

Icarus2001

8th Aug 2022, 07:16

they will just drop to single pilot operation with ai assisstance, most likely within 10 years. That is hilarious. Not a chance of that timeline.

Lapon

8th Aug 2022, 07:36

I think you'll find that the delevopment of alternative fuels is a far higher priority than pilotless aircraft for airlines (and therefore manufacturers).

The financial rewards are just that much greater that the R&D spend can be better justified.

Gnadenburg

8th Aug 2022, 08:09

davidclarke

8th Aug 2022, 08:14

Fully automated trains have existed for years, Gatwick had them between terminals in the 1980s. I was referring to Australias rail system could be automated if enough money was spent. Aircraft are far easier to automate than ships or cars, far less chaos in the system. I worked with a group that has been flying fully automated drones since the late 1990s, ie they can fly from a to b just by being told where to go.

The issue prior with large train networks going automated is the issue of interaction with other things that might cross or block tracks. Visual recognition systems now have covered that area making it possible. Planes dont have these issues. By the way the new Sydney line is driverless.

In anycase I never said airliners would be fully automated anytime soon, they will just drop to single pilot operation with ai assisstance, most likely within 10 years.

Mate you’re cooked.

It’s taken Boeing over 10 years just to add new engines and a new wing to the 777 and it’s not even certified yet!
New aircraft development is at best 15 years from launch to EIS. Add a massive technological advance like you are talking about and you can double that development time.
The current air traffic control system would need to be completely overhauled and modernised requiring cooperation with every signgle country on earth. Will not happen in our lifetimes.
I think there is higher probably of a world war taking us back to the dark ages before that happens…

Zeta_Reticuli

8th Aug 2022, 10:28

Mate you’re cooked.

It’s taken Boeing over 10 years just to add new engines and a new wing to the 777 and it’s not even certified yet!
New aircraft development is at best 15 years from launch to EIS. Add a massive technological advance like you are talking about and you can double that development time.
The current air traffic control system would need to be completely overhauled and modernised requiring cooperation with every signgle country on earth. Will not happen in our lifetimes.
I think there is higher probably of a world war taking us back to the dark ages before that happens…

43inches usually dribbles alot of cooked garbage...

He should go to a Rio Tinto minesite, where they have litterally spent 100s of millions on Automation and bare witness to the constant communication issues and drop outs they have between the Perth control centres and site! Here he is thinking driverless cars exist, if you call Teslas rubbish autonomous driving system automated driving well you are delusional. Along with all the drop outs, the trucks have the most advanced obstacle detection system in the world, yet they have trucks stopping for spinifex tumble weeds blowing past and then cant recognise cows on the haul road and run them over at 60kph. Yea good luck with the automated passenger jets, give it a few smoking craters and noone will be getting on board. Seen enough haul trucks, drill rigs and trains do the most random cooked crap all thanks to some minor interference or anomoly. When I worked there control would always call us to go and shutdown and reset a truck or drill rig that they have lost comms with or have no control over. Good luck doing that with a pilotless airliner. Enough with the dribble and delusions!

Eclan

8th Aug 2022, 10:41

The mindset here goes a long ways in explaining the predicament of Aussie pilots. Proclamations of wild doomsday scenarios, almost a resignation of accepting downward pressure on wages. It’s a working class mindset.
That may have something to do with the fact that you don't even need a Year 12 education to be an airline pilot in this country.

43Inches

8th Aug 2022, 10:49

Haha, tesla not automated, good one, knowing a number of pilots that now own Teslas I think you may be a bit behind on the times. Only thing the driver has to do is touch the steering wheel periodically to tell it someones watching.

But seriously the new western Sydney train route is fully automated, many mine sites are automated, automated buses are in trial in Europe.

Since 2016 an automated copilot ai has been developed first trials coming in the next few years and rumored to be coming up as an option on some new turboprops and smaller jets in a few years time.

BTW cockpits can be altered by supplemental TC so dont have to go through the whole certification that occurs with a wing or other structural change. Pretty sure they could retrofit the tech into a 1980s turboprop if it was cost effective.

tossbag

8th Aug 2022, 11:31

I agree, 43, you've got your hand on it mate.

43Inches

8th Aug 2022, 11:54

So we are just going to ignore that Airbus is working on certifying the A350 single pilot in the cruise for Cathay by 2025, reducing the need for reserve crew on longer flights.

SimonPaddo

8th Aug 2022, 11:55

Looks like Qantas is getting some well paid baggage handlers. From the BBC:

"Australian airline Qantas has asked senior executives to work as baggage handlers for three months as it tries to tackle an acute labour shortage."

BBC News (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-62460882)

What could possibly go wrong?

Zeta_Reticuli

8th Aug 2022, 12:00

So we are just going to ignore that Airbus is working on certifying the A350 single pilot in the cruise for Cathay by 2025, reducing the need for reserve crew on longer flights.

LOL...
I wish I ran a stock brokerage firm, You would buy all my tech stocks at the peak of the bull market 😂😂😂 Silicon Valley loves pseudo tech suckers like you. Working with automation the last few years, its good to know what works and what goes wrong all the time. All these technologies exist, but are you a gullible uni grad that thinks the future is today? Oversight is a wonderful thing along with ignorance, I am only 30 and the oversight coming from tech pseudos on a daily basis is amazing. Enjoy your AI flown jet 😂, you know the people who design these things dont even know how to use a screw driver...

43Inches

8th Aug 2022, 12:09

It is actually called project connect, seriously it was last years news. I supposed thats how far behind the real world Australians are. Guess what happens when one airline does it without crashing....and a hint it does not involve bringing back flight engineers. Cathay will be the launch guineapig, if it works and is accepted the suite is designed to retrofit to existing airbus a350 at first. Airbus has already highlighted that the mature package will aim for complete single pilot ops in the long run. Airbus has also been running surveys on the general public as to their acceptance of single pilot airliners, its currently sitting around 50/50. Why spend on surveys if you were not working on it (the cat being already out of the bag with Cathay).

davidclarke

8th Aug 2022, 12:14

Ahh I’ve worked it out…….I bet 43 never made I through flight school and now has a chip on his shoulder……
Am I right am I right??

43Inches

8th Aug 2022, 12:20

Zeta_Reticuli

8th Aug 2022, 12:30

So you are saying that if project connect works and there are no problems they wont expand on it. Be serious here, Airbus is working on it and the airlines want it. Project Connect is single piloting, just because its only in the cruise does not make it any less, this could be hours at a time, not just toilet breaks.

And in no way am I saying this to reduce T&C, unions should be working out how to fight poor systems and also how pay should be increased.for the loss of a crew member.

Well goodluck getting it past the regulators. And it may lead to single pilot jets within a decade. But you seem so convinced on automation, as I said go and get a job at a minesite and then you tell me what $2 to $3 billion in R&D gets you. Rio spent over $1B just for its autohaul fleet. BHP wont even entertain the idea so they went and hired and trained 220 new loco drivers. Now your telling me Cathay is going to oneday spend more than that for autonomous jetliners... mate Cathay wont even exist in the next decade at this rate. And yea Cathay does need to look into single pilot ops as they dont even have enough pilots now! Maybe they could hire a fool like you! You certainly fit the right calibre of individual they will be looking for, but who will make the captains bunk when your replaced by project connect 😂.
its not happening period! This country takes 20years to chat about a train line then another decade to build it. We will not be getting the infrastructure to support it and I cant even see AJ spending billions to save 7 to 12% of costs!

43Inches

8th Aug 2022, 12:45

No need, Im in the last 10 years of my aviation carreer and will be joining my seafaring mate in the south of France and Med aboard a big, probably automated private yatch. You guys can slug out the next 50 years vs HAL, I'll be down the back enjoying a good sleep.

The Love Doctor

8th Aug 2022, 14:20

who will make the captains bunk when your replaced by project connect 😂.

Are Cathay still making SOs do that? Far out there is no way in hell I'd be doing that. Totally demeaning to the profession :ugh:

Buckshot

8th Aug 2022, 21:40

Even if technology can be developed for single pilot ops, how would it prevent hull losses such as MU5375, 4U9525, MI185, MS990 and possibly MH370?

t_cas

8th Aug 2022, 21:46

So we are just going to ignore that Airbus is working on certifying the A350 single pilot in the cruise for Cathay by 2025, reducing the need for reserve crew on longer flights.

Who is Cathay?

KRviator

8th Aug 2022, 21:56

Even if technology can be developed for single pilot ops, how would it prevent hull losses such as MU5375, 4U9525, MI185, MS990 and possibly MH370?By reducing the chance of a suicidal pilot being alone at the controls by 50%, straight off the bat??

Orange future

8th Aug 2022, 22:42

in time the USA will implode, just like every hegemony has done since the ancients.
.

Very true and sooner than most people realize. Fiat money ALWAYS returns to zero.

Orange future

8th Aug 2022, 22:52

So what is the benefit of pilotless airliners exaclty? In the big scheme of the operation the pilots wages are insignificant anyway.

Im always interested to read this opinion, it pops up occasionally when discussing airline costs.

Do some simple maths. Multiply the average pilot wage by the number of pilots on the books and then project that out per annum for the life span of a pilotless aircraft.

Now name any airline that wouldn't rather see that money in the coffers instead of spent on labor that can be replaced even when controlled for the related infrastructure costs to support ground based control systems.

Chronic Snoozer

8th Aug 2022, 23:47

Im always interested to read this opinion, it pops up occasionally when discussing airline costs.

Do some simple maths. Multiply the average pilot wage by the number of pilots on the books and then project that out per annum for the life span of a pilotless aircraft.

Now name any airline that wouldn't rather see that money in the coffers instead of spent on labor that can be replaced even when controlled for the related infrastructure costs to support ground based control systems.

You could do the same by carving out 20% of middle management

BuzzBox

8th Aug 2022, 23:48

Are Cathay still making SOs do that? Far out there is no way in hell I'd be doing that. Totally demeaning to the profession :ugh:

Cathay has never made SOs do "that" (ie make the captain's bunk). For starters, there is no "Captain's" bunk; there are two bunks, shared by four pilots (at different times :eek:). In days gone by when Cathay normally operated ULH flights with a Captain, two FOs and one SO, the SO was often a loose wheel during the pre-flight preparation. At the time they weren't allowed to do the walk-around, so they would normally check the safety equipment in the flight crew rest area and while they were there they would make up the two bunks. In most cases the Relief FO and SO would take the first rest, so the SO was in fact making their own bed. As for being "totally demeaning to the profession", there are plenty of occasions where I, as a Senior Captain, would put the SO in the seat during the preflight and go back and do the bunks myself. Funnily enough, I didn't find it the least bit "demeaning". It's all part of the teamwork that goes with ULH flying and it makes life easier for everyone. :ok:

Back to the topic...

Zeta_Reticuli

8th Aug 2022, 23:53

You could do the same by carving out 20% of middle management

As I have said many times before, the one role that should be replaced by automation/AI is management roles I cannot see how a computer could do a much worse job. Qf and Cx would be in a strong position right now had their management been automated...

Chronic Snoozer

8th Aug 2022, 23:56

Computers can’t chuck bags? :ouch:

Zeta_Reticuli

9th Aug 2022, 00:01

Computers can’t chuck bags? :ouch:
they wouldn't need computers for that had management been removed years ago...
reality is every business generally performs better when management isnt in sight. Management breed disgruntled staff and militants.

Mach E Avelli

9th Aug 2022, 00:43

Even if technology can be developed for single pilot ops, how would it prevent hull losses such as MU5375, 4U9525, MI185, MS990 and possibly MH370?

It won't, and in fact makes it more likely. Unless there is some form of ground over ride for when our single pilot gets lonely up there and has a brain-fart.
Which is why I am happy to be the poster boy pax on the first pilot-less flight, once they get the technology bugs fixed. In my lifetime unlikely, but in the next quarter century, feasible.

Lapon

9th Aug 2022, 01:00

Im always interested to read this opinion, it pops up occasionally when discussing airline costs.

Do some simple maths. Multiply the average pilot wage by the number of pilots on the books and then project that out per annum for the life span of a pilotless aircraft.

Now name any airline that wouldn't rather see that money in the coffers instead of spent on labor that can be replaced even when controlled for the related infrastructure costs to support ground based control systems.

Those figures would look very impressive im sure.... until you compare them to every expense item on an airlines books.

Thats why alternative fuels are the bigger prize and the focus, not the already modest wages of a couple of people at the front of the tube.

43Inches

9th Aug 2022, 04:26

Airlines are too cost sensitive to focus on anything other than day to day business. New fuel sources, crew cost reductions, retrofitting technology, fleet replacement etc are all side projects being given time as time permits in varying amounts based on cost return over time. Usually this is all done by a third party, not the airlines them selves. However once one airline figures out a way to get something cheaper, or take advantage of new tech, it filters through the system very quickly, or is made law and has to be complied with. MPL is a good example of how regulators cave to perceived airline crew shortages, as they will also cave to allowing single pilot cruise in long haul, then cave to allow it lower as its proves safe until one day the whole flight is single pilot with HAL. This will happen quickly once the first step is taken and not take more than a decade to the finality. Anyone who thinks otherwise has not studied the history of changes in the airline industry.

WRT to Australia and its anti tech viewpoint, it has to make you laugh some of the antics. Australia was pretty much a laughing stock for converting 767 to have FE positions, Kendell wanted SAABs minus the autopilot, until SAAB said it would cost more to remove it, Easterns bought Dash 8s and elected to remove an FMS to save money and then found out the units were made to talk to each other which caused ongoing issues. If you want a real chuckle, some at Ansett were aiming for A320s with a FE station. Maybe history will repeat and we will be last to have single pilot cruise approved, however I'm thinking QF current management would definitely be the front lobbyist trying to drop a crew member if they could, especially from long haul, remembering that each crew has significant costs on international when you include allowances, accommodation etc etc...

PS the timeframe I'm talking of is from start to having an approved single pilot airliner in operation, not the whole world fleet going single pilot at once. Obviously that will take longer and some airlines will stick with old tech and wear the extra operational cost in lieu of higher capital cost. Rex will be still flying 2 pilot SAAB 340s in 2122.

t_cas

9th Aug 2022, 05:51

vne165

9th Aug 2022, 06:19

The only folks who imagine automation is just around the corner, are folks who have never tried to automate anything.

josephfeatherweight

9th Aug 2022, 06:33

I’m pretty confident that my job and that of the person who sits next to me, isn’t going to be replaced by HAL in my working lifetime and I’ve still got about 15 years to go…

Zeta_Reticuli

9th Aug 2022, 06:38

The only folks who imagine automation is just around the corner, are folks who have never tried to automate anything.

43inches doesnt seem to understand this though...

vne165

9th Aug 2022, 06:44

Just trying to prevent things occupying the same space at the same time in a complex environment is a challenge, let alone at speed and with multiple variations in 3D movement paths.
Mostly it's a marketing pipedream.
Laughable really.

43Inches

9th Aug 2022, 06:51

If anyone writing these comments had actually sat in the front of a modern jet and flown across the planet…. They would then realize how far away total automation is. Single pilot….. redundancy is there for a reason. Systems fail.

And if you were really involved in medium to long haul aviation at present you would also know that controlled rest has been happening for years now, where one of two pilots sleeps in the cruise with only one awake. So single pilot operations is already a thing in low stress segments of the flight, and Jetstar does it. If an engine was to fail during a pilots sleep, how long do you think it will be before that pilot will be fully awake and 100% on the ball to assist. Airbus is now going a step further and moving the sleeping pilot out of the cockpit to the cabin under project connect, and removing a third pilot required for longer flights. So any of these ideas that pilot suicide/some form of accident is less or more likely because of automation, well, pilots are already flying solo now while the other sleeps.

Now that being said, the whole premise of Project Connect is to design the cockpit for single pilot operations if you read the brief. With sleep detection and alarm systems to wake the single pilot if they should nod off. Presently the Flight Attendant plays the sleep nanny with controlled rest, in-case the single flying pilot also nods off. And I have no doubt that part of the Airbus deal will either require some form of reserve pilot initially or remote control capability. This could be a lower paid grade of assist pilot like bare MCPL trained flight attendants in the flight deck for take of and landing etc... The idea is just that the automation can handle things until someone else can intervene, for now. All these ideas are already being circulated as ways to bridge between two full paid flight crew and a single pilot situation.

With the flight attendant scenario you lose a fully paid co-pilot but obviously pay the new crew position more, but overall there would be a large saving as they would be filling the role of pilot for take off and landing and flight attendant for duties outside that, including evacuation once cockpit actions have been completed. So you have still removed a crew member from the payroll.

By George

9th Aug 2022, 07:40

Boeing have had 'Pilot response required' EICAS message for decades. Works well.
I agree there is more automation on it's way but I still think completely automated aircraft are many years away. I have yet to see a computer that can think out of the box. Only the one between your ears works that way. Imagine a computer trying to save QF32. Dozens of ECAM messages, 21 out of 22 systems damaged. One ECAM message alone proves my point, 'FUEL WINGS NOT BALANCED' with the checklist commanding cross-feed to transfer fuel from the good side to the side with a major fuel leak. The QF crew quickly deciding that was not a good idea. Computers have their place and so do humans.
Interesting to watch automation confusion in the SIM with the pilot pressing buttons all over the place trying to get the bloody thing to do what he/she wants. There is room for improvement on both sides of the human/computer argument but I strongly believe in keeping humans in charge. An overnight with 'HAL' sounds like a very dull evening to me.

Mach E Avelli

10th Aug 2022, 01:42

AI is unlikely to completely control aircraft this century, but what might an airline pilot's life look like by 2050? In the role of UAV pilot it could mean:
* No more airline food
* A relaxation of medical standards - many conditions which ground pilots today won't matter, because pilots will be grounded anyway
* No more nervous walking the plank into full-motion simulators (managements will love getting rid of those costly things) - proficiency will be assessed at specialised fixed terminals
* No more airline food
* Far less fatigue - shifts won't be driven by the need to be on board for a whole 18 hour flight, but are more likely to be around 6 to 8 hours = longer healthier life
* No more pressure to stay on duty when feeling crook, because there is no reserve pilot down-route - a temporary relief pilot will be at the console next door and a replacement sitting at home an hour away
* No more waiting around for the crew shuttle bus in some sh!thole country - where the drive to the hotel is the most dangerous part of the job
* No more checking in to some sh!thole hotel in said sh!thole country - where if the food doesn't get you the bedbugs will
* No more divorces or sexual harassment claims because of what happened (allegedly of course) at the hotel room party
* Did I mention no more airline food = longer, healthier life

Chronic Snoozer

10th Aug 2022, 02:33

Mach E Avelli

10th Aug 2022, 09:16

I forgot : No more lining up at security behind a bunch of bogans bound for Bali.
Although if your gig is in the USA you will have to check in the assault rifle at the door - or leave it with the kids to take to school.

tossbag

10th Aug 2022, 10:02

Although if your gig is in the USA you will have to check in the assault rifle at the door

Look at the bright side, you can still take your handgun to work.

Orange future

12th Aug 2022, 20:44

Those figures would look very impressive im sure.... until you compare them to every expense item on an airlines books.

Thats why alternative fuels are the bigger prize and the focus, not the already modest wages of a couple of people at the front of the tube.Labor is the most significant cost for an airline and one of the few that can be controlled.

The cost/productivity of labor is one of the few factors that airlines can control and is often the decider between profit and loss.

Sustainable Alternative Fuels (SAF) constitute around 0.1% of total jet fuel consumption world wide and presently SAF costs 2-3 times as much as jet fuel.

IATA expect SAF’s to increase to only 3% by 2030 and 50% by 2050 at which point its possible that SAF will become price competitive.

But for the foreseeable future, it is labor costs that airlines will be focusing on and reducing cockpit crew numbers will be a significant factor in this.

Both Boeing and Airbus have invested substantial amounts of money into research and development of single pilot and pilotless airliners. The single pilot or reduced crew cockpit will happen sooner than you think.

Icarus2001

12th Aug 2022, 22:04

Labor is the most significant cost for an airline and one of the few that can be controlled.

Where do you get that from? Crew costs are about 10-13% of operating costs.

lucille

12th Aug 2022, 22:43

Lapon

12th Aug 2022, 23:58

Everything an airline pilot does is either rule driven or can be made rule driven.

Are you sure?
I live operate in a country where they cant even make a proper rule set after years of trying.

That aside, are you telling me that as a pilot you have never had to decide on a course of action for which no rule or procedure existed to guide you?

Orange future

13th Aug 2022, 21:59

Where do you get that from? Crew costs are about 10-13% of operating costs.

You are correct. My comment was regarding labor costs.

RealSatoshi

14th Aug 2022, 05:48

Race to the Bottom...Well....this is sure to evoke some heated and emotional discussion amongst Board Executives and C-Suites around the country - long overdue https://www.pprune.org/images/smilies2/eusa_naughty.gif

Treasurer Jim Chalmers says the ability for employers to apply to cancel enterprise bargaining agreements is one of the reasons behind slow wage growth in Australia - The Sydney Morning Herald (12 July 2022)

The ACTU welcomes today's commitment from Workplace Relations Minister Tony Burke to stop employers using the threat of EBA terminations as a bargaining tactic. - The Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) (8 August 2022)

das Uber Soldat

14th Aug 2022, 08:20

Between ILS airport pairs, the technology has long been here to fully automate. Now consider the immense complications of the Tesla autopilots being able to manoeuvre in a totally random environment. In contrast, the aircraft autopilot in a highly controlled environment is simplistic. Check out the Piper M600 Emergency auto land by Garmin. I’m not even sure it needs an ILS to guide it to touchdown. All this in a tin pot GA single. Imagine what Airbus and Boeing could do if they put their minds to it.

Everything an airline pilot does is either rule driven or can be made rule driven. And thus ripe for automation.

Pilot salaries are merely an annoyance to management. Their biggest constraint is rostering and complying with those pesky flight and duty limitations. And this is why automation is inevitable.

On the positive side bush flying in PNG and offshore Heli ops will be the last to be pilotless.
I don't really agree with that. Even the latest Tesla autopilot systems occasionally kills everyone on board when it entirely fails to understand its environment.

For vanilla normal ops, no doubt flight could be fully automated, but how often do you get a perfectly standard ILS to ILS day? Hows automation going to deal with the countless variances that in my view, require a decision based on inputs that aren't easily translatable to a machine? Strange smell on the flight deck? Dangerous weather return vs just heavy precip? Alarming noise during the t/o roll? On the 787 there are dozens of unannunciated checklists, ones that are only executed after a human decision because the aircraft has no idea what is wrong. or even that anything is wrong at all.

I think there is far, far more than needs to be developed for automated flight to occur, and I suspect its a long way off at this stage. My examples are just a drop in the bucket of the challenges that automated flight faces. And given the development time in aviation.. well.

Captain Dart

14th Aug 2022, 08:57

It will be interesting to see how a robot will pick its way through the ITCZ.

Roller Merlin

14th Aug 2022, 13:10

finestkind

14th Aug 2022, 22:35

Two reasons why pilots will always be on flight decks of RPT aircraft:

1. The public need someone to trust for their safely and to keep them informed and secure in an environment they don’t understand. Without people to trust up front, they won’t get onboard.

2. Aviation law needs someone to be held responsible when things don’t go as designed. Without a PIC to be held responsible, the law will need to hold the operators ( ie CEOs) responsible for technical operations they will not comprehend. Then CEOs will have to employ staff who can comprehend these operations to fill this gap - ie….probably pilots. (!!??)

On point one I tend to agree but also think the ice cream eating masses really don't care. With more and more automation being bought in it will become more accepted. On point two absolutely agree. The CEO's and board members will never wish to be held accountable so if it allows a scapegoat to take the blame than a body up the front will be worth it.

RealSatoshi

17th Aug 2022, 06:09

To be fair it is not an international ‘aviation’ disease but a disease of modern corporate culture. Allowing upper management to enrich themselves off short term cost cutting KPI’s drives the behaviour that consigns all workers to ever worsening conditions.

Yes, I know the thought of asking for more money probably makes you feel a little queasy, this is a total non-negotiable. Besides, everyone else is doing it. With inflation burning through 7% of your wallet this year, you need to get at least that much of a payrise, or you'll be going backwards. - Scott Pape, The Barefoot Investor (15 August 2022)