Pilot-less Airliners
*Lancer*
Putting my “bean counter” hat on for a moment I can’t see the cost benefit in having inflight relief done remotely given the cost to implement it. As I mentioned in an earlier post if every airliner in commercial service today was to become remotely piloted tomorrow we only have about 10% the bandwidth required from current satellites to fulfil the task. The infrastructure alone that would be required to support it is immense from extensive buildings to house hundreds of ground based pilot stations for each airline to a 10 fold increase in the available bandwidth from satellite communication. It would also require 100% satellite coverage 100% of the time all over the planet. This at present is extremely problematic above and below 75⁰ north and south latitude. Even GPS coverage can be problematic this far north and south. When you also consider the first communication satellites were launched 50 odd years ago I believe it will be a considerable time before we have the required infrastructure in place to achieve this.
With reference to what has happened to flight engineers, navigators and radio operators, with all due respect to our distinguished ex colleagues they were never a “system critical” element to the conduct of a flight. They served a required purpose at the time but if they became incapacitated the flight wasn’t placed in jeopardy. That is why they weren’t duplicated for redundancy. The same can’t be said of pilots.
Only if it is cheaper. No matter which way I look at it though I just can't seem to see how it would be.
Putting my “bean counter” hat on for a moment I can’t see the cost benefit in having inflight relief done remotely given the cost to implement it. As I mentioned in an earlier post if every airliner in commercial service today was to become remotely piloted tomorrow we only have about 10% the bandwidth required from current satellites to fulfil the task. The infrastructure alone that would be required to support it is immense from extensive buildings to house hundreds of ground based pilot stations for each airline to a 10 fold increase in the available bandwidth from satellite communication. It would also require 100% satellite coverage 100% of the time all over the planet. This at present is extremely problematic above and below 75⁰ north and south latitude. Even GPS coverage can be problematic this far north and south. When you also consider the first communication satellites were launched 50 odd years ago I believe it will be a considerable time before we have the required infrastructure in place to achieve this.
With reference to what has happened to flight engineers, navigators and radio operators, with all due respect to our distinguished ex colleagues they were never a “system critical” element to the conduct of a flight. They served a required purpose at the time but if they became incapacitated the flight wasn’t placed in jeopardy. That is why they weren’t duplicated for redundancy. The same can’t be said of pilots.
The role of Cruise FO / SO is -very sadly- steadily drifting towards 'cruise relief' pilot only. Manufacturers, operators, and regulators are all going down this path. Surely the concept of 'remote relief' pilot isn't really that surprising as a next step?
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,095
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
automatic go-arounds, automatic and dynamic normal configuration, increased automatic abnormal management, fully-automatic asymmetric flight.
I'm reminded of the Airbus that couldn't get out of the hold when trying to land at LHR! Auto go-around after auto go around until the fuel runs out!
I still think obtaining the necessary liabilities insurance cover will be one of the bigger problems.
imperial shifter
UAV by their very definition are "Unmanned" ie, no humans on board. Secondly they will only insure the UAV itself and won't cover you for third party damage. The equation completely changes for military UAV's where insurance isn't available.
I've just inquired with my insurance company in Hong Kong and in Australia about insurance for a "driverless" car. Yes I believe there is a car on the market. In both cases insurance wasn't available. Risk profile was unacceptable.
I can't believe you actually brought up life insurance. No third party risk exists at all. Life insurance companies are taking the risk that you won't die at an early age. That is the only risk. If you were to take out life insurance in your early twenties and kept it until you passed away in your mid seventies you would have generally paid the insurance company more in premiums over the life of the insurance policy than what the pay out is. Life insurance is really only sensible if you are young with dependants and/or have debt that would place these dependants in a bad financial position if you were to die. The older you get the more expensive they become and the less financial sense they make.
UAV by their very definition are "Unmanned" ie, no humans on board. Secondly they will only insure the UAV itself and won't cover you for third party damage. The equation completely changes for military UAV's where insurance isn't available.
I've just inquired with my insurance company in Hong Kong and in Australia about insurance for a "driverless" car. Yes I believe there is a car on the market. In both cases insurance wasn't available. Risk profile was unacceptable.
I can't believe you actually brought up life insurance. No third party risk exists at all. Life insurance companies are taking the risk that you won't die at an early age. That is the only risk. If you were to take out life insurance in your early twenties and kept it until you passed away in your mid seventies you would have generally paid the insurance company more in premiums over the life of the insurance policy than what the pay out is. Life insurance is really only sensible if you are young with dependants and/or have debt that would place these dependants in a bad financial position if you were to die. The older you get the more expensive they become and the less financial sense they make.
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Australia
Posts: 313
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 404 Titan
Putting my “bean counter” hat on for a moment I can’t see the cost benefit in having inflight relief done remotely given the cost to implement it. As I mentioned in an earlier post if every airliner in commercial service today was to become remotely piloted tomorrow we only have about 10% the bandwidth required from current satellites to fulfil the task. The infrastructure alone that would be required to support it is immense from extensive buildings to house hundreds of ground based pilot stations for each airline to a 10 fold increase in the available bandwidth from satellite communication. It would also require 100% satellite coverage 100% of the time all over the planet. This at present is extremely problematic above and below 75⁰ north and south latitude. Even GPS coverage can be problematic this far north and south. When you also consider the first communication satellites were launched 50 odd years ago I believe it will be a considerable time before we have the required infrastructure in place to achieve this.
imperial shifter
Audi actually demonstrated a driverless car at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas earlier this year. California and Nevada in the US have altered the laws to allow driverless cars to be tested on public roads. Europe and Japan have also enacted similar laws.
Well there you go. The insurance companies have caught up with the times. The premiums being asked though make it obvious they consider them a huge risk.
Driverless car insurance is not available because driverless cars are not available.
Google UAV INSURANCE. Liability insurance is available for a price, just like life insurance. I don't claim it's good value!
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,095
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Imperial Shifter - At a time many years ago when UK aviation hit a big dip and layoffs and closures were all around I was lucky enough to work with the major aviation broker in London for nearly three years before aviation lifted again, so insurance issues have always been of considerable interest to me.
The current third party liabilities cover required by airlines equates to something like the estimated resultant liability if two B747/A380 type aircraft having a mid-air over a major city! These are manned aircraft with manned ATC. Obviously talking billions here which comes in several layers and is re-insured out right across the market. A major blip in the system could see several unmanned aircraft out of control and terrorist attacks could bring this about.
I'll leave it to your imagination to work out the kind of chaos and carnage that would ensue and the size of the bill. In one respect you are right, as they say in the insurance market, "There is no such thing as a bad risk, only a bad rate!" It is the rate the underwriters will want to charge for unmanned aircraft that will prevent them taking off, until the risk of terrorist activity has been reduced to nil, IMHO.
Comparison with unmanned cars liability is a furphy, a red herring, there is a vital extra dimension to aviation and you can't just remotely turn off the power supply to an aircraft if things look as though they are going wrong!
(Most military aircraft and UAVs are self-insured by the government that owns them).
The current third party liabilities cover required by airlines equates to something like the estimated resultant liability if two B747/A380 type aircraft having a mid-air over a major city! These are manned aircraft with manned ATC. Obviously talking billions here which comes in several layers and is re-insured out right across the market. A major blip in the system could see several unmanned aircraft out of control and terrorist attacks could bring this about.
I'll leave it to your imagination to work out the kind of chaos and carnage that would ensue and the size of the bill. In one respect you are right, as they say in the insurance market, "There is no such thing as a bad risk, only a bad rate!" It is the rate the underwriters will want to charge for unmanned aircraft that will prevent them taking off, until the risk of terrorist activity has been reduced to nil, IMHO.
Comparison with unmanned cars liability is a furphy, a red herring, there is a vital extra dimension to aviation and you can't just remotely turn off the power supply to an aircraft if things look as though they are going wrong!
(Most military aircraft and UAVs are self-insured by the government that owns them).
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀
Posts: 1,994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you buy one of these 'driverless' cars do you still sit behind a set of 'override' controls or is there just comfortable seating?
Are 'pilot-less' aircraft being remotely piloted from the ground, or are they flying 'pre-programmed'?
If they being remotely flown from the ground, is the only benefeit the redundancy of one extra crew member, or is said 'ground pilot' going to be expected to monitor/step in when required several aircraft at once?
How difficult would it be for a university educated terrorist to hack into the flight control system remotely and have himself a lovely little 9/11 encore from the secure luxury of his cave?
I just don't see the point in it all to be honest.
Are 'pilot-less' aircraft being remotely piloted from the ground, or are they flying 'pre-programmed'?
If they being remotely flown from the ground, is the only benefeit the redundancy of one extra crew member, or is said 'ground pilot' going to be expected to monitor/step in when required several aircraft at once?
How difficult would it be for a university educated terrorist to hack into the flight control system remotely and have himself a lovely little 9/11 encore from the secure luxury of his cave?
I just don't see the point in it all to be honest.
I'm sitting here watching the QF32 documentary thinking we can never have a pilotless aircraft...
If something goes wrong a computer can't write a book/do interviews about how good it was....
If something goes wrong a computer can't write a book/do interviews about how good it was....
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NSW- 3rd world state
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think any of us sitting here typing away today will ever see it in day to day ops, but the kids being born 2014 will see it as perfectly normal in the future. They will probably see "typing" as weird also, "why would you type on a computer grandpa".
It will be cost pressures that drives it. Pilots are seen as a necessary expensive to the bean counters of airlines. If they could get rid of you tommorow, they would. You are expensive to train, you get sick, you get tired, you need time off to rest and be with your family etc.
An autonomous plane doesn't have any of those dramas ! No point having pilots on the ground, you've just moved the expensive person from the aircraft, no real saving. The idea is to not have pilots at all. Same for ATC except ATC will go first.
The technology is coming, I have no doubt about that, most of us just aren't ready for it but in a generation or two, people will be. It will be common place. Maybe in the early days it will be a ticketing option, pay more for a flight with pilots ?? Look at the rapid pace of change in computers, smartphones, tablets etc. Its only a matter of time until we have AI that is capapble of running every possible option and a database of every accident/crash.
Maybe its 50-60yrs away, I don't know but I reckon if I went to the Melbourne Cup in 1914 and said to the punters that in one hundred years time, people would fly down from Sydney/Brisbane etc for the day to watch the race and that all the horses would be flown in from all over the world, I'd be locked away in the nut house.
It will be cost pressures that drives it. Pilots are seen as a necessary expensive to the bean counters of airlines. If they could get rid of you tommorow, they would. You are expensive to train, you get sick, you get tired, you need time off to rest and be with your family etc.
An autonomous plane doesn't have any of those dramas ! No point having pilots on the ground, you've just moved the expensive person from the aircraft, no real saving. The idea is to not have pilots at all. Same for ATC except ATC will go first.
The technology is coming, I have no doubt about that, most of us just aren't ready for it but in a generation or two, people will be. It will be common place. Maybe in the early days it will be a ticketing option, pay more for a flight with pilots ?? Look at the rapid pace of change in computers, smartphones, tablets etc. Its only a matter of time until we have AI that is capapble of running every possible option and a database of every accident/crash.
Maybe its 50-60yrs away, I don't know but I reckon if I went to the Melbourne Cup in 1914 and said to the punters that in one hundred years time, people would fly down from Sydney/Brisbane etc for the day to watch the race and that all the horses would be flown in from all over the world, I'd be locked away in the nut house.
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Asia
Posts: 284
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C change, I agree.
Of course some may be disagree. But it is "funny" to see human nature (some) do not accept innovation or imagination. Everything starts from ideas. No ? ask Steve Jobs or any inventor. Think outside the box and it is clearer.
Some talked about terrorists.
I can tell that there is no need pilotless a/c to wait for, for terrorism... nowadays it is very easy to hijack a plane.
With money (terrorist do have) it easier than before to get a place in a cockpit. Just check the stupid programs of Line training market, and ANYBODY can have access in a cockpit legally !! No need to be a genius in IT. Just get money and start a course from PPL to LT program, you will get a plane.
Technology increase as an exponential curve. Not a linear one.
I have seen the job enough, to notice how the pilots are out of the loop step by step.
I flew in LCC, I know how it is. Some can call me immature, or waht, but nevertheless I have my own opinions about it. I have the right to have.
IMO, we have become just a SOP operator (especially in LCC). There are more and more procedure over procedure, reducing pilots decision and initiative.
And as soon as you do not follow it strictly, sanctions fall right away.
If some are not agree with that, I guess you never flew in LCC or you wear pink glasses over the nose.
The job has become easier too. They hire young child in the right seat with 3000 h captain who never did a go around or diversion in their short experience. (except in simulator).
Step by step, (slowly but surely) I had the feeling pilots are put outside of the loop. Nowadays, they do not want pilots, but just young kids who can push buttons the right order at the right moment.
Anyway, let see in the futur who will have right or not. I try to be objective only. It's only my opinion. Maybe I am wrong or not. I do not care actually. I do not want to be right. Just some thoughts outside of the box...
Of course some may be disagree. But it is "funny" to see human nature (some) do not accept innovation or imagination. Everything starts from ideas. No ? ask Steve Jobs or any inventor. Think outside the box and it is clearer.
Some talked about terrorists.
I can tell that there is no need pilotless a/c to wait for, for terrorism... nowadays it is very easy to hijack a plane.
With money (terrorist do have) it easier than before to get a place in a cockpit. Just check the stupid programs of Line training market, and ANYBODY can have access in a cockpit legally !! No need to be a genius in IT. Just get money and start a course from PPL to LT program, you will get a plane.
Technology increase as an exponential curve. Not a linear one.
I have seen the job enough, to notice how the pilots are out of the loop step by step.
I flew in LCC, I know how it is. Some can call me immature, or waht, but nevertheless I have my own opinions about it. I have the right to have.
IMO, we have become just a SOP operator (especially in LCC). There are more and more procedure over procedure, reducing pilots decision and initiative.
And as soon as you do not follow it strictly, sanctions fall right away.
If some are not agree with that, I guess you never flew in LCC or you wear pink glasses over the nose.
The job has become easier too. They hire young child in the right seat with 3000 h captain who never did a go around or diversion in their short experience. (except in simulator).
Step by step, (slowly but surely) I had the feeling pilots are put outside of the loop. Nowadays, they do not want pilots, but just young kids who can push buttons the right order at the right moment.
Anyway, let see in the futur who will have right or not. I try to be objective only. It's only my opinion. Maybe I am wrong or not. I do not care actually. I do not want to be right. Just some thoughts outside of the box...
'Dbleu-a' Am still here reading this thread. The Mods normally would like to see the back of me
Am amazed at the input from it all. Some are still thinking in 2day's terms though using 2day's tech which is not what I was alluding to but that's fine one never knows what's around the next corner with anything in life
50 years from now I'd say that the world will be in an awful mess with aviation just being one small part of the global problem. Keeping mankind alive for the next 50 years after that as we slowly self destruct will be the real challenge but disorder will reign am sure!!
Wmk2
Am amazed at the input from it all. Some are still thinking in 2day's terms though using 2day's tech which is not what I was alluding to but that's fine one never knows what's around the next corner with anything in life
50 years from now I'd say that the world will be in an awful mess with aviation just being one small part of the global problem. Keeping mankind alive for the next 50 years after that as we slowly self destruct will be the real challenge but disorder will reign am sure!!
Wmk2
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NSW- 3rd world state
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We may well be in a mess in 50 yrs but if we haven't managed to completely trash the place or kill eveyone, we might just have pilotless RPT aircraft.
Have a look at these if your interested,
Boeing Little Bird, Autonomous Helicopter
Boeing: Unmanned Little Bird
Google X47B and Phantom Eye as well.
Whilst not aviation, this thing is just scary.
Watch a Galloping Four-Legged Robot Sprint Through a Parking Lot | Motherboard
Have a look at these if your interested,
Boeing Little Bird, Autonomous Helicopter
Boeing: Unmanned Little Bird
Google X47B and Phantom Eye as well.
Whilst not aviation, this thing is just scary.
Watch a Galloping Four-Legged Robot Sprint Through a Parking Lot | Motherboard
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Aussieland
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The " tech "will get there, maybe in 10 years. Processor power is at levels unheard of 10 years ago. But for now if none of us were over-riding our auto throttles on a daily basis you'd be getting sick of the headlines.
As another poster mentioned the problem is OIL. If your in your 20's chances are you will not be retiring as an airline pilot.
As another poster mentioned the problem is OIL. If your in your 20's chances are you will not be retiring as an airline pilot.
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Asia
Posts: 284
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
superG3
Completely agree. This problem is coming before all the rest.
And the funny thing again (like people who do not believe technology), in another thread, some people here do not believe about that, they think oil is eternal and that we have not reached the oil peak.
As another poster mentioned the problem is OIL.
And the funny thing again (like people who do not believe technology), in another thread, some people here do not believe about that, they think oil is eternal and that we have not reached the oil peak.
'greenie' & others I agree OIL would be a problem in the NEAR future but we simply don't know what medium would be used to power the airliner in 50+ years time if indeed we are even using a conventional power-plant as we know it TODAY. The turbine as we know it today was indirectly invented well b4 any plane ever left the ground. A simple water wheel (WaterMill) used to make flower centuries ago was in fact a simple reactionary turbine, used the same principles to extract power/energy, what's next?:-)
Hydrocarbon products have been with us since day one to power our machines. also who knows what's next!:-)
Society will be the problem if we have a sustainable one in the year 2070!!!
Wnk2
Hydrocarbon products have been with us since day one to power our machines. also who knows what's next!:-)
Society will be the problem if we have a sustainable one in the year 2070!!!
Wnk2
