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. |
Originally Posted by neville_nobody
(Post 11274461)
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!! |
Originally Posted by Mach E Avelli
(Post 11274463)
in time the USA will implode, just like every great civilisation has done since the ancients.
If Asia picks up next year it will be carnage IMO. |
Originally Posted by Gnadenburg
(Post 11274672)
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. Its a matter of when in my humble opinion. :) |
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.
|
Originally Posted by 43Inches
(Post 11274278)
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.
Originally Posted by Real Satoshi
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...
|
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. |
Originally Posted by Lapon
(Post 11273984)
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. |
Originally Posted by Icarus2001
(Post 11274719)
.
Funny how we have auto land but no auto take off, have a think about that. 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 |
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? |
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. |
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, In reality trains could easily go crewless tomorrow, just needs a bit of spending. 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. |
Originally Posted by Icarus2001
(Post 11274783)
When a train stops, it stops, it is in a safe state. Similar to a car or bus or truck. Not so an aircraft.
|
When that happens, how many paying passengers are affected?
|
Originally Posted by Mach E Avelli
(Post 11274709)
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. |
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. |
they will just drop to single pilot operation with ai assisstance, most likely within 10 years. |
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. |
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.
|
Originally Posted by 43Inches
(Post 11274821)
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… |
All times are GMT. The time now is 01:42. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.