REx Management – “OUTthere” or “OUT of there”
Even cattle trucks have drivers.
... I would love to see the faces of future pax when they board a pilotless plane !!!!
Also. controlling the aircraft from the ground will obviously be via satellite links which from experience so far with CPDLC operations can not be relied on
It's all in the up/down links.
As for the weather concerns, I imagine that all airborne aircraft would be continuously downlinking their weather and radar data to enable the computers on the ground to maintain a continuous, high resolution 3D model of the weather. Supplementing the airborne data would be satellite observations and the odd strategically placed ground station.
The weather model would be continuously uplinked to all the aircraft, of course, and weather avoidance would most probably be better than it is today.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Aust
Posts: 378
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The weather model would be continuously uplinked to all the aircraft, of course, and weather avoidance would most probably be better than it is today.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Big Whiskey
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aircraft
You'll certainly get first prize for making bold sweeping statements based on absolutely no research or facts whatsoever.
The passengers would know in advance, and think nothing of it.
with a touch of "intervention" once in a blue moon.
and weather avoidance would most probably be better than it is today.
Keep it up, it's getting hilarious.
Blue Foot
You'll certainly get first prize for making bold sweeping statements based on absolutely no research or facts whatsoever.
The passengers would know in advance, and think nothing of it.
with a touch of "intervention" once in a blue moon.
and weather avoidance would most probably be better than it is today.
Keep it up, it's getting hilarious.
Blue Foot
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,569
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
..........."monoploe" I had a chuckle at yr additional statement as for asking the guy (he being ATC) next to us (us being pilots) for track shortening!..........only to see he can't BS us by saying not avail due traffic 'cause we can see it all right there in front of us both!.............the mind boggles at what funny situations would arise if we (as in again 'them & us") where seated side by side on the ground in some ways both controlling the same plane !:-) Of course they would be funny situations 'cause looking at it any other way is just plane (yes plane) stupidity !!! & the most funniest is the fact that some believe in here that it will happen.....pilotless A/C in our time or anywhere near the forseeable future.............sheeeeeeeeeezzzzzzzeven Jules Vern would turn over in his grave at that thought!
Think about this.................a hijacker (obviously not one that's very bright, in fact are any of them?) boards a pilotless plane thinking it's a ploy to fool him that there are no actual pilots on board. At an opertune time he bursts thru the cockpit door (no further need for bullet proof doors now is there?) only to find......................yep......no pilot/s........well maybe a blow up doll just ic case. (ie: flying high!)so he sits there with no flight controls in sight (assuming there's s seat anyway) & thinks about his few flying lessons he took, hey just had a thought here, now technically it's not a 'pilotless' plane anymore !!............so yes there are advantages in having pilotless A/C but I think for now lets keep the guys/gals there just for instances like the above.................afterall why are we all here right now in PPRUNE?............'casue where pilots etc. or affiliated as such!!:-)
Capt wally :-)
Think about this.................a hijacker (obviously not one that's very bright, in fact are any of them?) boards a pilotless plane thinking it's a ploy to fool him that there are no actual pilots on board. At an opertune time he bursts thru the cockpit door (no further need for bullet proof doors now is there?) only to find......................yep......no pilot/s........well maybe a blow up doll just ic case. (ie: flying high!)so he sits there with no flight controls in sight (assuming there's s seat anyway) & thinks about his few flying lessons he took, hey just had a thought here, now technically it's not a 'pilotless' plane anymore !!............so yes there are advantages in having pilotless A/C but I think for now lets keep the guys/gals there just for instances like the above.................afterall why are we all here right now in PPRUNE?............'casue where pilots etc. or affiliated as such!!:-)
Capt wally :-)
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NEWSFLASH.........
Historians have just discovered a missing novel believed to have been written by Jules Verne under the pseudonym of 'aircraft'......
The book deals with pilotless aircraft flying all over the World carrying passengers and freight.
In his book the passengers have no idea of where the actual pilot is and laugh ,drink,play cards and watch movies while their pilotless aircraft wings it's way across the world.
The pilot's meanwhile sit in a hangar in a mythical airport somewhere in the West Australian outback.They sit at a console and with the latest commodore 64 artificial intelligence and control the aircraft with a joystick and drink weak black tea with lemon.
They can look at each aircraft regardless of it's position via a crystal ball.This allows them to see any obstacles such as Mountains,Buildings and any weather which might be potentially dangerous.
The aircraft-less pilot's can see all the relevant instruments on their school desks and so know when anything untoward is going to happen.
The passengers are given a boxed lunch and a toilet roll and there are drink dispensers which are coin operated situated around the aircraft.
During take off,landing and turbulence the seat belts automatically fasten with the incredible artificial intelligence computers.
All maintenance work on the aircraft is done by the tooth fairy and any medical cases on board will be looked after by the stork who is also there for any impending child birth.
Santa calls in periodically for any children that are bored and every thing is thought of.To cope with any problems of aircraft taxiing all airports are fitting roundabouts on taxi ways.
Apparently,Darth has bought the rights to this book and hopes to make it into a movie and has his R & D people working around the clock to bring this fantasy to reality.
Rumour has it that the author has also written a book on doctor/nurse less hospitals which are run by robots.
John Howard and Tony Abbott has bought the rights to this book
Historians have just discovered a missing novel believed to have been written by Jules Verne under the pseudonym of 'aircraft'......
The book deals with pilotless aircraft flying all over the World carrying passengers and freight.
In his book the passengers have no idea of where the actual pilot is and laugh ,drink,play cards and watch movies while their pilotless aircraft wings it's way across the world.
The pilot's meanwhile sit in a hangar in a mythical airport somewhere in the West Australian outback.They sit at a console and with the latest commodore 64 artificial intelligence and control the aircraft with a joystick and drink weak black tea with lemon.
They can look at each aircraft regardless of it's position via a crystal ball.This allows them to see any obstacles such as Mountains,Buildings and any weather which might be potentially dangerous.
The aircraft-less pilot's can see all the relevant instruments on their school desks and so know when anything untoward is going to happen.
The passengers are given a boxed lunch and a toilet roll and there are drink dispensers which are coin operated situated around the aircraft.
During take off,landing and turbulence the seat belts automatically fasten with the incredible artificial intelligence computers.
All maintenance work on the aircraft is done by the tooth fairy and any medical cases on board will be looked after by the stork who is also there for any impending child birth.
Santa calls in periodically for any children that are bored and every thing is thought of.To cope with any problems of aircraft taxiing all airports are fitting roundabouts on taxi ways.
Apparently,Darth has bought the rights to this book and hopes to make it into a movie and has his R & D people working around the clock to bring this fantasy to reality.
Rumour has it that the author has also written a book on doctor/nurse less hospitals which are run by robots.
John Howard and Tony Abbott has bought the rights to this book
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Living next door to Alan
Posts: 1,521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rumour has it that the author has also written a book on doctor/nurse less hospitals which are run by robots.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aircraft,
I ask for new material, and you deliver!! Funniest stuff I've read to date are coming from your posts.
Tell us the one where everyone else is wrong and your the only one who is right again....champaine comedy.
I ask for new material, and you deliver!! Funniest stuff I've read to date are coming from your posts.
Tell us the one where everyone else is wrong and your the only one who is right again....champaine comedy.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Genius
Either this guy is a comic genius or (dread the thought) is acutally out there and flying around... IN THE AIR!!!!
"The passengers would know in advance, and think nothing of it"
oh dear.... I'd LOVE to know how you know this? If you have indeed perfected time travel to the future to gain this info, I think its time you told us. Either that or give me next weeks lottery numbers by PM.
"The passengers would know in advance, and think nothing of it"
oh dear.... I'd LOVE to know how you know this? If you have indeed perfected time travel to the future to gain this info, I think its time you told us. Either that or give me next weeks lottery numbers by PM.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Perth
Age: 55
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry for shifting the topic away from the Dreamtime Drone, but I'm wondering if this whole discussion is that complex.
In my limited economics education I remember something called supply and demand. It was one of those wonderful economics theories that applied to everything, I was and am a touch sceptical at the simplification. It said that if you didn't have supply of something (pilots) when demand was high (Rex) then costs rose accordingly (wages, T&C's). This cost was then shifted to the consumer (fares) and if demand stayed the same or rose (fuel prices, ease versus time) then the supply of things (pilots) was maintained.
It is disingenuous to suggest that an airline would fail if wages were increased for a segment of employees. It lacks sound business sense and shows up managers as being not that smart in the way they run their company. There are many ways to save money and recoup any payments made to staff, productivity changes, stock control, marketing and other MBA type restructures. Worst case is you pass those costs to the punters and if demand drops you get into an oversupply situation then that funky supply/demand thing kicks in.
I know it's not that simple but how far away from this is it?
In my limited economics education I remember something called supply and demand. It was one of those wonderful economics theories that applied to everything, I was and am a touch sceptical at the simplification. It said that if you didn't have supply of something (pilots) when demand was high (Rex) then costs rose accordingly (wages, T&C's). This cost was then shifted to the consumer (fares) and if demand stayed the same or rose (fuel prices, ease versus time) then the supply of things (pilots) was maintained.
It is disingenuous to suggest that an airline would fail if wages were increased for a segment of employees. It lacks sound business sense and shows up managers as being not that smart in the way they run their company. There are many ways to save money and recoup any payments made to staff, productivity changes, stock control, marketing and other MBA type restructures. Worst case is you pass those costs to the punters and if demand drops you get into an oversupply situation then that funky supply/demand thing kicks in.
I know it's not that simple but how far away from this is it?
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: On the equator
Posts: 1,291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Here There Yonder
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pilotless Aircraft
Interesting topic but we not ready for this by a long stretch. That aside, all this equipment costs money to develop, establish, run and maintain. Who s going to pay? A major reason we still have to fool with HF radios in the 21st century, is that most ICAO member states and all non-ICAO member states will not or cannot come up with the money to pay to have these things.
As with so many issues in the aviation business, and life in general, money talks and everything else walks. I believe that might take us back to many of the problems by REX et all.
Ndicho Moja
As with so many issues in the aviation business, and life in general, money talks and everything else walks. I believe that might take us back to many of the problems by REX et all.
Ndicho Moja
Guys, I think the relentless pursuit of Aircraft is a bit tiresome now. We are focusing too much on the pseudonym and not the argument.
One of the benefits of people like Aircraft is their contrarian attitude and i would like to use some of his(her) points to further the debate.
1. Pilotless aircraft.
The technology that allows pilotless aircraft is effectively here. For it to work with large scale passenger operations, weather avoidance, datalink communications and ground intervention would need to be enhanced, but i that is doable.
However, automation is not going to get rid of on-board crew in the near, or even distant future. I would suggest that there a a few reasons, but they would include;
A. Passenger Acceptance. All passengers I meet seem to be concerned with the quality of the crew up front. There is a human need to identify with whoever has control over us. This alone will require some sort of human authority figure on board for pax to fly.
B. Unexpected non-normals. There is always a chance that even the best designed system may encounter a problem hitherto unplanned. The most effective troubleshooter is the one at the scene. Airlines may be able to do a cost/benefit of a hull loss, but many pax wont.
C. Reality of the job. During command training at my airline there is constant reinforcement the whilst flying the aeroplane is paramount (and we get extensive training in aircraft handling in all phases of flight, both normal and non-normal) there is an almost equally strong emphasis on the management of aspects of the operation that are additional to flying, ie. coordinating with pax, cabin crew, ground staff engineers etc etc.
So, based on the above I believe that there will always be a need to have at least one person that can operate the aircraft and troubleshoot technical and operational problems at the coalface. As all the other systems in the aircraft would have redundancy, then we should probably follow suit and have 2 such people. You can call them whatever you like, but i believe that this job description fits mine as a pilot.
2. Equality of pay.
Pilots cannot fly without engineers, cabin crew, ground staff etc. It is not possible. At best, if all of these people went on strike, then maybe some pilots could do some of their jobs. But the roles are still necessary, it would just be somebody else doing it.
However just because every member of a team is necessary doesn't mean that we get equal pay (unless you are a marxist). Renumeration is based and responsibility, the training required to undertake a role, and as has been discussed already, supply and demand. (amongst other things)
May I suggest that pilots getting a payrise is good for all other employees of an airline. Pilots are usually at the top of the pay totem pole, so if their pay goes up, there is more scope for those under them to also go up. If, however, pilots pay falls to rates that are barely livable on, that does not auger well for a stewardess or check-n staff. There are few (if any) airlines where these staff are not paid less than a pilot.
3. The nature of the business (I am sorry for being long winded).
Can I also suggest that if a business cant price its product so that the cost of doing business is covered, then there is probably an argument that the business is economically unnecessary. I believe that there is a moral and political need for airlines operations in rural Australia, but a lot of rural infrastructure needs to be supported by the government. It is the price we pay for living in this "Big brown land". Maybe there needs to be some sort of contribution from the government. A suggestion, each person living in a rural region gets an allowance that can be spent topping up and airfare. This would be based on factors such as remoteness and levels of service at a station. A person in Dubbo might be allowed to buy a ticket to Sydney for 80% of the fare with the government topping up the rest, whilst a person from Wilcannia might only have to pay 50% of the fare. I think that for this to work there would have to be co-payment by pax (to avoid abuse of the system) and the payment would be made to the airline so that it is not seen as a system to be used to get cash.
Just my humble opinion.
Cheers.
One of the benefits of people like Aircraft is their contrarian attitude and i would like to use some of his(her) points to further the debate.
1. Pilotless aircraft.
The technology that allows pilotless aircraft is effectively here. For it to work with large scale passenger operations, weather avoidance, datalink communications and ground intervention would need to be enhanced, but i that is doable.
However, automation is not going to get rid of on-board crew in the near, or even distant future. I would suggest that there a a few reasons, but they would include;
A. Passenger Acceptance. All passengers I meet seem to be concerned with the quality of the crew up front. There is a human need to identify with whoever has control over us. This alone will require some sort of human authority figure on board for pax to fly.
B. Unexpected non-normals. There is always a chance that even the best designed system may encounter a problem hitherto unplanned. The most effective troubleshooter is the one at the scene. Airlines may be able to do a cost/benefit of a hull loss, but many pax wont.
C. Reality of the job. During command training at my airline there is constant reinforcement the whilst flying the aeroplane is paramount (and we get extensive training in aircraft handling in all phases of flight, both normal and non-normal) there is an almost equally strong emphasis on the management of aspects of the operation that are additional to flying, ie. coordinating with pax, cabin crew, ground staff engineers etc etc.
So, based on the above I believe that there will always be a need to have at least one person that can operate the aircraft and troubleshoot technical and operational problems at the coalface. As all the other systems in the aircraft would have redundancy, then we should probably follow suit and have 2 such people. You can call them whatever you like, but i believe that this job description fits mine as a pilot.
2. Equality of pay.
Pilots cannot fly without engineers, cabin crew, ground staff etc. It is not possible. At best, if all of these people went on strike, then maybe some pilots could do some of their jobs. But the roles are still necessary, it would just be somebody else doing it.
However just because every member of a team is necessary doesn't mean that we get equal pay (unless you are a marxist). Renumeration is based and responsibility, the training required to undertake a role, and as has been discussed already, supply and demand. (amongst other things)
May I suggest that pilots getting a payrise is good for all other employees of an airline. Pilots are usually at the top of the pay totem pole, so if their pay goes up, there is more scope for those under them to also go up. If, however, pilots pay falls to rates that are barely livable on, that does not auger well for a stewardess or check-n staff. There are few (if any) airlines where these staff are not paid less than a pilot.
3. The nature of the business (I am sorry for being long winded).
Can I also suggest that if a business cant price its product so that the cost of doing business is covered, then there is probably an argument that the business is economically unnecessary. I believe that there is a moral and political need for airlines operations in rural Australia, but a lot of rural infrastructure needs to be supported by the government. It is the price we pay for living in this "Big brown land". Maybe there needs to be some sort of contribution from the government. A suggestion, each person living in a rural region gets an allowance that can be spent topping up and airfare. This would be based on factors such as remoteness and levels of service at a station. A person in Dubbo might be allowed to buy a ticket to Sydney for 80% of the fare with the government topping up the rest, whilst a person from Wilcannia might only have to pay 50% of the fare. I think that for this to work there would have to be co-payment by pax (to avoid abuse of the system) and the payment would be made to the airline so that it is not seen as a system to be used to get cash.
Just my humble opinion.
Cheers.
Getting the human driver out of motor vehicles is a far more challenging exercise than getting pilots out of airliners.
REX should simply employ remote pilots to fly their pilotless aircraft! These employees could be positioned close to the managers and constantly monitored. In fact the management could do the remote duties themselves between and during management bonus review meetings.
Pilotless aircraft at REX!
Not going to happen! they can not afford it today, tomorrow or in 10,15, 20 years.
The technology does exist today but it is far off being retrofitted to a 20+ year old turboprop. Then it needs to be capable of operating into airports with only an NDB for guidance, undulating runways etc..., that technology does not exist without human interference.
Besides who will do all the turnaround duties!
When the airforce developes a pilotless herc (or similar) for dangerous missions out of dubious airstrips then i might start rethinking my job, but until then.
Not going to happen! they can not afford it today, tomorrow or in 10,15, 20 years.
The technology does exist today but it is far off being retrofitted to a 20+ year old turboprop. Then it needs to be capable of operating into airports with only an NDB for guidance, undulating runways etc..., that technology does not exist without human interference.
Besides who will do all the turnaround duties!
When the airforce developes a pilotless herc (or similar) for dangerous missions out of dubious airstrips then i might start rethinking my job, but until then.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Pittsburgh, USA
Posts: 601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Given the complexity of airspace these days, I think we are further from pilotless aircraft now than we were in the 1950's. They still have pilots anyway, in remote control rooms...and they still crash, with higher regularity than manned missions.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: dessert island
Posts: 226
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
with the money they've spent on endless training recently.......
could amount to enough to have paid pilots more to stay!...
I've never seen so many pilots recruited in such a small time space.
WWA
could amount to enough to have paid pilots more to stay!...
I've never seen so many pilots recruited in such a small time space.
WWA
