Pilotless planes within 10 years?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 725
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pilotless planes within 10 years?
Was considering the career implications of a pilotless helicopter put together by honey bee biology researchers and an aerodynamicist.
Hmm, bloody clever stuff. Better make sure ITCZ ready to retire by 2017.
Then I read todays story about how a pilotless plane crash landed at demonstration without 'rescuing' the 'victim.'
Oh well, these things take time
Hmm, bloody clever stuff. Better make sure ITCZ ready to retire by 2017.
Then I read todays story about how a pilotless plane crash landed at demonstration without 'rescuing' the 'victim.'
Oh well, these things take time
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UAE
Age: 63
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pilotless aircraft
Why not???
Loads of them unmanned thingies in the Gulf at the moment
They seem to fly around just fine...and they complain lot less than the ones with pilots up the front
Loads of them unmanned thingies in the Gulf at the moment
They seem to fly around just fine...and they complain lot less than the ones with pilots up the front
Sprucegoose
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Hughes Point, where life is great! Was also resident on page 13, but now I'm lost in Cyberspace....
Age: 59
Posts: 3,485
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Won't happen, there will always be at least one pilot, even if it is as the old joke says "to feed the dog"! 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: On a Ship Near You
Posts: 787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There goes see and avoid...
I was told along time ago that FedEx has a program dedicated to 'remoting' some of it's (older) fleet by 2015; they allegedly asked the FAA to remove Class E to facilitate this.
I was told along time ago that FedEx has a program dedicated to 'remoting' some of it's (older) fleet by 2015; they allegedly asked the FAA to remove Class E to facilitate this.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gave me reservations getting into the aviation game a while back re: pilotless a/c.
Truth is the technology has been around since at least the 1950's and as has been mentioned: It will have its applications but as far as carrying pax? It will never sell.
Truth is the technology has been around since at least the 1950's and as has been mentioned: It will have its applications but as far as carrying pax? It will never sell.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Queensland
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airbus has already tried pilotless aircraft without much success
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ve2NV8B8oSc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ve2NV8B8oSc
Let's see ...
First you would have to get an aircraft airworthiness certificate.
Then you would have to get government approvals from every country that you are going to fly in.
Then you have to convince fare paying pax that it is safe to hop in these things.
After getting past these rather significant obstacles then maybe we will see pilotless pax aircraft. BUT after the first one crashes (because one day one will) they will never fly again.
First you would have to get an aircraft airworthiness certificate.
Then you would have to get government approvals from every country that you are going to fly in.
Then you have to convince fare paying pax that it is safe to hop in these things.
After getting past these rather significant obstacles then maybe we will see pilotless pax aircraft. BUT after the first one crashes (because one day one will) they will never fly again.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Brisbane
Age: 56
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RPT too dangerous for humans?
Autonomous vehicles make perfect sense for risky situations where using a manned vehicle would be putting someone at unnecessary risk: So we're seeing a lot of inroads being made deep underwater and underground. If it's a dangerous/hostile environment and someone's life would be at risk to go there, I think it's great to see autonomous alternatives becoming available.
Aviation certainly becomes risky when people are shooting at you - hence the interest the military have in autonomous and remotely operated aircraft. Not only is the F35 often mooted to be "the last ever manned fighter", but apparently Lockheed would like people with large wallets to believe it will be available as an autonomous variant:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...501288_pf.html
Whether the F35 can operate without a pilot or not, wars are inherently dangerous places that it makes sense to avoid putting people if you have the technical ability.
However, one hopes that RPT will never be regarded as so dangerous that it would be worthwhile to avoid putting someone "in harms way" up the front?
Aviation certainly becomes risky when people are shooting at you - hence the interest the military have in autonomous and remotely operated aircraft. Not only is the F35 often mooted to be "the last ever manned fighter", but apparently Lockheed would like people with large wallets to believe it will be available as an autonomous variant:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...501288_pf.html
Whether the F35 can operate without a pilot or not, wars are inherently dangerous places that it makes sense to avoid putting people if you have the technical ability.
However, one hopes that RPT will never be regarded as so dangerous that it would be worthwhile to avoid putting someone "in harms way" up the front?
I'll start to worry when driverless trains become common. Seems to me that that should be a lot less of a challenge - but I have yet to see one.
FTDK
As for the ones flying around the Gulf at the moment - they are hardly "pilotless". There is a bod on the ground "flying" them!
FTDK
As for the ones flying around the Gulf at the moment - they are hardly "pilotless". There is a bod on the ground "flying" them!
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: 24 27 45.66N 54 22 42.28E
Posts: 987
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok FTDK we will rephrase this to be Remotely Piloted aircraft as that is the technology that is available now. The Global Hawk is in and out of our neck of the woods all the time, but I have heard that landing is still a bit of a challenge they haven't quite mastered yet. For Diving Duck, I can't see our airspace working real well if we had to provide 10,000ft separation between everyone as we have to do from the RPV's at the moment. That will be a very high holding pattern at DESDI I'm guessing ( as if the nightly holding pattern up to FL300 right now isn't bad enough).
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UAE
Age: 63
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Driverless planes, trains and automobiles
Hey FTDK, just a quick google search netted this little lot of driverless trains, maybe you HAVE seen one but just didn't notice? Existing driverless systems or those in construction/planning...
Asia Ankara
Kobe Port Island (1981)
Kobe Rokko Island
Kuala Lumpur (1997)
Osaka (1981)
Singapore (2003)
Taipei
Tokyo Waterfront (1995)
Yokohama
Tokyo Nippori
Singapore
Hong Kong
Singapore
Europe Copenhagen (2002)
Lille 1 (1983)
Lille 2
London Docklands
Lyon Maggaly (Line D, 1992)
Paris Météor (1998, Line 14)
Paris Orlyval
Rennes
Toulouse A
Barcelona Line 9
Lille 2 (extension)
London Jubilee Line
Nuremberg (U1/U2)
Paris Météor (St Luz)
Toulouse A (extension)
Toulouse B
Turin
Paris, Météor Olyp.
North America Chicago
Detroit (1986)
Jacksonville
Miami
Newark Airport
San Francisco (Barth)
Toronto (Scarborough)
Vancouver 1 (1986, Skytrain)
New York Canarsie Line
Vancouver 2
and that was the score in 2003...
ANSA, its only 10K due to local rules here, not the case "next door". If they chose, we could have direct comms with the bird at all times, that may change the scenario somewhat.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: ...
Posts: 341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It has long fascinated me that the Sydney monorail, for instance, is not robotic
ScottyDoo
And they do for a lot of the trains mentioned in Asia. Hong Kong definitely has a pimply Asian sitting in the front. Just because they may say the trains are driverless doesn’t mean they don’t have someone on board to stop it in an emergency.
divingduck
Direct coms with an aircraft at all times is impossible with the current infrastructure and technology. Anyone who does long haul flying knows what I am talking about, especially in the Polar Regions. This goes for all forms of communication, i.e. VHF, HF, data link via HF and satellite and voice communications via satellite. If you can’t maintain a guaranteed communication link with an aircraft 100% of the time, remotely piloted aircraft just won’t happen. Some may say what about autonomous pilot less aircraft? Well the technology is being tested by the military for recon aircraft but is still very much in its infancy. The technology is a long long way off ever being used in a commercial aircraft application, especially with pax on board. This is also ignoring the fact that a very large percentage of airports in the world are in Third World countries which don’t have the financial resources to support the infrastructure necessary for autonomous and remotely piloted aircraft. Lastly the airlines will only go for it if:
1. They think the passengers will go for it
And
2. There is a cost benefit in it for them.
In both cases the answer is no. The general public aren’t ready for pilot less aircraft and it would cost airlines much more in ground facilities to operate remotely piloted or pilot less aircraft than it would to just simply have the pilots on board.
By the way most countries in Asia and in Europe don’t allow pilot less aircraft in their airspace period or in the same airspace as commercial aircraft. So in that sense they are considerably more restrictive than Australia.
And they do for a lot of the trains mentioned in Asia. Hong Kong definitely has a pimply Asian sitting in the front. Just because they may say the trains are driverless doesn’t mean they don’t have someone on board to stop it in an emergency.
divingduck
Direct coms with an aircraft at all times is impossible with the current infrastructure and technology. Anyone who does long haul flying knows what I am talking about, especially in the Polar Regions. This goes for all forms of communication, i.e. VHF, HF, data link via HF and satellite and voice communications via satellite. If you can’t maintain a guaranteed communication link with an aircraft 100% of the time, remotely piloted aircraft just won’t happen. Some may say what about autonomous pilot less aircraft? Well the technology is being tested by the military for recon aircraft but is still very much in its infancy. The technology is a long long way off ever being used in a commercial aircraft application, especially with pax on board. This is also ignoring the fact that a very large percentage of airports in the world are in Third World countries which don’t have the financial resources to support the infrastructure necessary for autonomous and remotely piloted aircraft. Lastly the airlines will only go for it if:
1. They think the passengers will go for it
And
2. There is a cost benefit in it for them.
In both cases the answer is no. The general public aren’t ready for pilot less aircraft and it would cost airlines much more in ground facilities to operate remotely piloted or pilot less aircraft than it would to just simply have the pilots on board.
By the way most countries in Asia and in Europe don’t allow pilot less aircraft in their airspace period or in the same airspace as commercial aircraft. So in that sense they are considerably more restrictive than Australia.
Moderator
Didn't the Global Hawk operate from the USA to Australia completely autonomously (without remote assistance)?
I remember when all building elevators had lift drivers.....
I remember when all building elevators had lift drivers.....