Pilotless Commercial Aircraft
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: On the couch
Age: 33
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I must agree with Capetonian though. Everyone who stated their opinion is being ridiculed and called old fashioned. However, if that's your way of having a discussion, so be it
In the end, when all else fails, the pax are !@#$%^. And when i'm flying and all else fails, I'll try my best to make sure I can enjoy another cold one in the bar
How to tell the awesome X1000 computer that somebody is ill, dying, in need of medical attention? Assuming you'd like to see no crew on board at all...
Again, something as simple as suddenly changing weather can not always be detected by onboard weather radar. So let the pitot tubes ice up. Who needs'm anyways, there are computers flying.
What about technical problems spotted by passengers, something that has happened in the past. I tried talking to my computer. But it didn't respond
I understand you're an engineer, and sure you have a point when you say things will more and more automatized.
However, either I completely overestimate the possible traps and dangers in our job, or you don't fully understand them.
Fact is, you simply can not automatize everything. Just like your automatic cars, who do you need to open the door? who do you need to start the engine? who do you need to tell it where to go, when to go, and how to go?
And if you were able to automatize that as well, who do you need to start thát machine?
Two happy pilots up front, making sure the machine does what it's supposed to do would the safest in my opinion.
And yes, most accidents are "pilot error". Because 1: airplane error accidents don't occur often since there are 2 pilots to be blamed, and 2nd: there are 2 pilots who can take over, take corrective action, and make sure the airplane does not make any mistakes.
In the end, when all else fails, the pax are !@#$%^. And when i'm flying and all else fails, I'll try my best to make sure I can enjoy another cold one in the bar
How to tell the awesome X1000 computer that somebody is ill, dying, in need of medical attention? Assuming you'd like to see no crew on board at all...
Again, something as simple as suddenly changing weather can not always be detected by onboard weather radar. So let the pitot tubes ice up. Who needs'm anyways, there are computers flying.
What about technical problems spotted by passengers, something that has happened in the past. I tried talking to my computer. But it didn't respond
I understand you're an engineer, and sure you have a point when you say things will more and more automatized.
However, either I completely overestimate the possible traps and dangers in our job, or you don't fully understand them.
Fact is, you simply can not automatize everything. Just like your automatic cars, who do you need to open the door? who do you need to start the engine? who do you need to tell it where to go, when to go, and how to go?
And if you were able to automatize that as well, who do you need to start thát machine?
Two happy pilots up front, making sure the machine does what it's supposed to do would the safest in my opinion.
And yes, most accidents are "pilot error". Because 1: airplane error accidents don't occur often since there are 2 pilots to be blamed, and 2nd: there are 2 pilots who can take over, take corrective action, and make sure the airplane does not make any mistakes.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reply
Thankyou rayfill,
Your very incorrect so please read back through all the posts on this thread. Their have been many people that have stated their opinion & suported my point of view & i have not ridiculed them or called them old fashion . You said i have done that to eveyone in your last post.
Yes 2 happy pilots up the front with a few terrorist, nice work, have we not learnt anything yet from 911 ???
Like i mentioned in my previous posts on this thread if you take the pilots out of the cockpit & the aircraft are on a pre-set course controlled by multiple ground stations then 911 most probably would not have occured.
Rayfill may i ask you how much you or your family would have loved to be on one of those aircraft on the day of 911 being flown straint into bulidings ???? Sounds like a lot of fun to me.
The FAA & EASA & other global aviation authorities would run all senarious, do all the testing, work it all out, bulid & test all required infastructure & when safe it will be approved to go ahead.
Every scenario you & many others are the "WHAT IF's, What if this happens & what if that happens. Imagine if all the people booked on your ATR flights said all the "WHAT IF's" what if we crash, what if the pilot makes an error & nobody turns up for your flights. SOON YOU WOULD BE OUT OF A JOB.
Before you go answering please read back through all the posts to this thread as many of your scenarious put forward have already been covered. Thankyou.
SAFETY SAFETY SAFETY.
Chock Chucker
Your very incorrect so please read back through all the posts on this thread. Their have been many people that have stated their opinion & suported my point of view & i have not ridiculed them or called them old fashion . You said i have done that to eveyone in your last post.
Yes 2 happy pilots up the front with a few terrorist, nice work, have we not learnt anything yet from 911 ???
Like i mentioned in my previous posts on this thread if you take the pilots out of the cockpit & the aircraft are on a pre-set course controlled by multiple ground stations then 911 most probably would not have occured.
Rayfill may i ask you how much you or your family would have loved to be on one of those aircraft on the day of 911 being flown straint into bulidings ???? Sounds like a lot of fun to me.
The FAA & EASA & other global aviation authorities would run all senarious, do all the testing, work it all out, bulid & test all required infastructure & when safe it will be approved to go ahead.
Every scenario you & many others are the "WHAT IF's, What if this happens & what if that happens. Imagine if all the people booked on your ATR flights said all the "WHAT IF's" what if we crash, what if the pilot makes an error & nobody turns up for your flights. SOON YOU WOULD BE OUT OF A JOB.
Before you go answering please read back through all the posts to this thread as many of your scenarious put forward have already been covered. Thankyou.
SAFETY SAFETY SAFETY.
Chock Chucker
Last edited by Chock Chucker; 27th Apr 2013 at 13:54.
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: On the couch
Age: 33
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I deeply apologize for the fact that i said "everyone". But you got my point.
Terrorism is a treat, but I believe it is not as big as you make it look like. How many aircraft have been hijacked since 9/11?
Taking pilots out of the cockpit is in any way not the solution. You could still shoot it out of the sky, bring a bomb on board, nuke the control centers.
So that point is rather unvalid.
As you stated in your earlier comments, the goal would be complete automation.
I believe I just stated only a very few things why that would not be responsible (hence I say responsible, not possible).
Even a ground station will not be able to pull/reset a circuit breaker, for example. Or detect a rapid change of weather or circumstances.
He will always be "behind the aircraft", especially in times when he is really needed. So again, its not responsible. Possible though, but not safe.
Thats a very... good question. No.
Neither did the pilots that were on that famous test flight of the Airbus that flew into the forest.
If I read back, I find no solutions for those problems I just mentioned. But i'm more then interested to hear some suggestions. Apart from more computers, covered by maybe even more computers, controlled by a guy in a control station.
But then we come back to start again, don't we?
Terrorism is a treat, but I believe it is not as big as you make it look like. How many aircraft have been hijacked since 9/11?
Taking pilots out of the cockpit is in any way not the solution. You could still shoot it out of the sky, bring a bomb on board, nuke the control centers.
So that point is rather unvalid.
As you stated in your earlier comments, the goal would be complete automation.
I believe I just stated only a very few things why that would not be responsible (hence I say responsible, not possible).
Even a ground station will not be able to pull/reset a circuit breaker, for example. Or detect a rapid change of weather or circumstances.
He will always be "behind the aircraft", especially in times when he is really needed. So again, its not responsible. Possible though, but not safe.
Thats a very... good question. No.
Neither did the pilots that were on that famous test flight of the Airbus that flew into the forest.
If I read back, I find no solutions for those problems I just mentioned. But i'm more then interested to hear some suggestions. Apart from more computers, covered by maybe even more computers, controlled by a guy in a control station.
But then we come back to start again, don't we?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reply
No worries, rayfill apoligies accepted. Thankyou.
Please tell your terrorist thoughts that you have just posted to me to all the loved ones that lost their family, friends & partners on 911. I'm sure they would all be so thrilled to hear.
911 never needed to happen & possibly could have been prevented with pilotless commercial aircraft.
You still have not read back through all the past posts on this thread as nearly all you have covered once again has already been mentioned & covered & solutions put in place. Its all automation rayfill.
Automation has been covered over & over again on this thread. Pitot tubes are heated so the chance of icing up is very rare. Has happened but once again very rare & needs a multitude of rare weather conditions to all allign at the same time to cause this.
Why would you have circuit breakers ???? thats old school & not needed. You only need multiple redundant avionic boxes with software to run/control/monitor & self fix all systems.
Just look at the MAT (Maintenance Access Terminal) on B777 aircraft. You can look up or do just about anything form their. Soon it will be able to interrigate itself & auto fix any defects.
Do you see any circut breakers on your computer/laptop or tablet. NO you dont need them.
Chock Chucker
Please tell your terrorist thoughts that you have just posted to me to all the loved ones that lost their family, friends & partners on 911. I'm sure they would all be so thrilled to hear.
911 never needed to happen & possibly could have been prevented with pilotless commercial aircraft.
You still have not read back through all the past posts on this thread as nearly all you have covered once again has already been mentioned & covered & solutions put in place. Its all automation rayfill.
Automation has been covered over & over again on this thread. Pitot tubes are heated so the chance of icing up is very rare. Has happened but once again very rare & needs a multitude of rare weather conditions to all allign at the same time to cause this.
Why would you have circuit breakers ???? thats old school & not needed. You only need multiple redundant avionic boxes with software to run/control/monitor & self fix all systems.
Just look at the MAT (Maintenance Access Terminal) on B777 aircraft. You can look up or do just about anything form their. Soon it will be able to interrigate itself & auto fix any defects.
Do you see any circut breakers on your computer/laptop or tablet. NO you dont need them.
Chock Chucker
Last edited by Chock Chucker; 27th Apr 2013 at 14:04.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: earth
Posts: 1,341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Times change yes. But many things stay the same. With any luck the same day the first unpiloted 7Q7 goes to work, with you in the back, you can rest easy knowing that when you return from your holiday you won't need to go to work, as the Q9001 Auto Component
Replacement Service Unit has just been installed and now takes care of all routine and heavy maintenance functions. No need to worry though, the computer that will take care of issuing your welfare payments should be just fine, no need to technical support any more.
Replacement Service Unit has just been installed and now takes care of all routine and heavy maintenance functions. No need to worry though, the computer that will take care of issuing your welfare payments should be just fine, no need to technical support any more.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: earth
Posts: 1,341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey we all get paid to do a job, it is quite pathetic to make a childish argument because your job is threatened or because you are perceived as you would like to see the end of a craft.
I have seen this debate over and over again, I have posted factual points that show progression towards unmanned passenger flight in the future. I welcome anyone (HMM HMM, none up to the task yet) to discount them.
On a positive note I can not see a reason why manned recreational flight will ever end.
I have seen this debate over and over again, I have posted factual points that show progression towards unmanned passenger flight in the future. I welcome anyone (HMM HMM, none up to the task yet) to discount them.
On a positive note I can not see a reason why manned recreational flight will ever end.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: earth
Posts: 1,341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ray
Even a ground station will not be able to pull/reset a circuit breaker, for example. Or detect a rapid change of weather or circumstances.
He will always be "behind the aircraft", especially in times when he is really needed. So again, its not responsible. Possible though, but not safe.
He will always be "behind the aircraft", especially in times when he is really needed. So again, its not responsible. Possible though, but not safe.
I have flown in aircraft with monochrome WXR displays, made more work for the pilot, today we have auto stab, colour density, vertical profile and predictive and reactive windshear. There has been progression and it will again continue. It will happen when it is safe and reliable enough to an acceptable margin.
Last edited by grounded27; 27th Apr 2013 at 14:46.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Polymer Records
Posts: 597
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chock Chucker,
Top thread, really enjoyed the comedy nothing wrong with a bit of light relief on prune.
Wasn't the first fully automated flight, where there was no input from the pilot from start of take off roll to brakes on after flight back in the 1950s? Why have airlines been so slow to adopt this "futuristic" technology? Is it because they haven't watched enough 1980s cartoons?
As has been said before, with all current (and planned future) Airbus and Boeing products being multi crew, with development, production, delivery and economic lifespan, I would suggest oil will run out before we see fully automated airliners making any impact on the industry.
But hey, never say never. I'm still hoping for my own personal jetpack!
Top thread, really enjoyed the comedy
nothing wrong with a bit of light relief on prune.Wasn't the first fully automated flight, where there was no input from the pilot from start of take off roll to brakes on after flight back in the 1950s? Why have airlines been so slow to adopt this "futuristic" technology? Is it because they haven't watched enough 1980s cartoons?
As has been said before, with all current (and planned future) Airbus and Boeing products being multi crew, with development, production, delivery and economic lifespan, I would suggest oil will run out before we see fully automated airliners making any impact on the industry.
But hey, never say never. I'm still hoping for my own personal jetpack!
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: In transit
Age: 70
Posts: 3,052
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I cannot believe ..........you have never heard of the Jetsons Cartoon.
Just look at cabin photos of Qantas & some other airlines A380 & you will see the self service food & drink facilities. Get up out of your own seat & serve yourself. It has reduced the number of cabin crew per aircraft in such aircraft types.
I hope you know who the Wright Brothers are. You really need to globalise & educate yourself Capetonian.
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Australia
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think what we really need here is automated maintenance systems, maintenance is a really big cost for airlines and if the maintenance operations were carried out by robots instead of human, there would be no mistakes and nothing would go wrong just like autopilots on planes never go wrong (see: Qantas Flight 72 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia).
The cause of many aircraft crashes could have been averted if there was a computer carrying out the maintenance and doing it properly unlike human maintenance workers because machines never break and humans are useless.
To name a few:
Nigeria Airways Flight 2120 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Continental Express Flight 2574 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Alaska Airlines Flight 261 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
American Airlines Flight 191 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
British Airways Flight 5390 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
China Airlines Flight 611 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Japan Airlines Flight 123 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Mexicana Flight 940 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I sure as hell never want to get on a plane that is maintained by a person because the leading cause of plane crashes caused by maintenance error is from maintenance personnel!
The cause of many aircraft crashes could have been averted if there was a computer carrying out the maintenance and doing it properly unlike human maintenance workers because machines never break and humans are useless.
To name a few:
Nigeria Airways Flight 2120 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Continental Express Flight 2574 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Alaska Airlines Flight 261 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
American Airlines Flight 191 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
British Airways Flight 5390 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
China Airlines Flight 611 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Japan Airlines Flight 123 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Mexicana Flight 940 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I sure as hell never want to get on a plane that is maintained by a person because the leading cause of plane crashes caused by maintenance error is from maintenance personnel!
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: earth
Posts: 1,341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First off the topic is not automated maintenance but fully automated flight. This is getting foolish, the last 3 posts though targeted at CC are extremely immature.
No one has argued my factual statements to the eventual commercial UAV.
Jseward if you wish to persist in this nonsense I am sure I could double down on pilot error failures with enough google time.
Can anyone (since you pick a bone) show a modern form of automated maintenance? Thought not! Not to say it is impossible in the future HAHE EG: the Q9001 fictional device.
I view this as a VALID possible, probably inevitable future.
Please stop the foolish banter and place your input based on fact... Do not disgrace me. I am an AIRMAN. I am PRO Aviation. I miss the days of being the flight mech that looked back at the ENG panel as he set thrust to make sure all else was in working order. I am now focused on avionics and see the possibilities.
Please speak with the professional regard I have for all Airmen.
No one has argued my factual statements to the eventual commercial UAV.
Jseward if you wish to persist in this nonsense I am sure I could double down on pilot error failures with enough google time.
Can anyone (since you pick a bone) show a modern form of automated maintenance? Thought not! Not to say it is impossible in the future HAHE EG: the Q9001 fictional device.
I view this as a VALID possible, probably inevitable future.
Please stop the foolish banter and place your input based on fact... Do not disgrace me. I am an AIRMAN. I am PRO Aviation. I miss the days of being the flight mech that looked back at the ENG panel as he set thrust to make sure all else was in working order. I am now focused on avionics and see the possibilities.
Please speak with the professional regard I have for all Airmen.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Polymer Records
Posts: 597
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Grounded27,
Chock chucker has posted views of making pilots obsolete on a pilots forum. He's obviously a troll looking a bite.
The technology is there for fully automated flight, but is not used, nor is it proposed to be used by the big 2 airframes for the foreseeable future. As he says, never say never, but with regard the rest of the working career of all reading this, it's a pointless discussion.
That really ought to be the end of it.
Chock chucker has posted views of making pilots obsolete on a pilots forum. He's obviously a troll looking a bite.
The technology is there for fully automated flight, but is not used, nor is it proposed to be used by the big 2 airframes for the foreseeable future. As he says, never say never, but with regard the rest of the working career of all reading this, it's a pointless discussion.
That really ought to be the end of it.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reply
Thanks grounded27,
You know your stuff & seems like you & i are on the same wave lenght.
Dont worry to much about the immature doomsdayers, it will never happen posts hear. I have been dealing with them for the past week or so since i first originated this pilotless commercial aircraft thread.
Doesnt matter how many references you put forward to them with automation in avaiation & in general life some still come back hear to post it will never happen posts & the "what if's", what if this happens & what if that happens.
Imagine if the Wright Brothers heard about future aviation with self service check-in, self service food & beverage facilities on aircraft that can carry 600 or so passengers half way around the world. Auto pilots & auto land, HUD's, shall i continue or stop now ????? I think back in the days the Wright Brothers may have fallen flat on their backs in that paddoc where their first flight took place & maybe laughed & giggled & maybe said i dont know about that.
Further automation will continue in aviation & also in general public & it cant be to far off before pilotless commercial airlines transition into our skies.
Chock Chucker
You know your stuff & seems like you & i are on the same wave lenght.
Dont worry to much about the immature doomsdayers, it will never happen posts hear. I have been dealing with them for the past week or so since i first originated this pilotless commercial aircraft thread.
Doesnt matter how many references you put forward to them with automation in avaiation & in general life some still come back hear to post it will never happen posts & the "what if's", what if this happens & what if that happens.
Imagine if the Wright Brothers heard about future aviation with self service check-in, self service food & beverage facilities on aircraft that can carry 600 or so passengers half way around the world. Auto pilots & auto land, HUD's, shall i continue or stop now ????? I think back in the days the Wright Brothers may have fallen flat on their backs in that paddoc where their first flight took place & maybe laughed & giggled & maybe said i dont know about that.
Further automation will continue in aviation & also in general public & it cant be to far off before pilotless commercial airlines transition into our skies.
Chock Chucker
Last edited by Chock Chucker; 28th Apr 2013 at 05:44.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reply
Artie Fufkin,
I have mentioned on numerous posts on this thread that i am a Licensed Aircraft Engineer & i too stand to loose my job in the future with further automation in the aviation industry as it continues. Why then would you think i'm a TROLL looking for a bite. Thats a very ignorant comment to make.
I have covered in earlier posts on this thread pilots, flight engineers, aircraft engineers, cabin crew, check-in staff & more.
I have also mentioned that pilots may be required to monitor/control & fix any flight abnomalities from a ground station. How does that make pilots obsolete as per your past post.
I have also mentioned that if pilotless commercial aircraft were in our skies & controlled via multiple ground stations on pre-set flight courses then 911 possibly would not have occured. I'm thinking SAFETY, SAFETY, SAFETY. Please read back through my past posts on this thread in regards to 911.
Yes the technologies are in place for fully automated flight however we will still need to c/out vigourous testing & further developments & so on before approval by FAA & EASA & the likes are granted for pilotless commercial aircraft carrying cargo or PAX.
Chock Chucker
I have mentioned on numerous posts on this thread that i am a Licensed Aircraft Engineer & i too stand to loose my job in the future with further automation in the aviation industry as it continues. Why then would you think i'm a TROLL looking for a bite. Thats a very ignorant comment to make.
I have covered in earlier posts on this thread pilots, flight engineers, aircraft engineers, cabin crew, check-in staff & more.
I have also mentioned that pilots may be required to monitor/control & fix any flight abnomalities from a ground station. How does that make pilots obsolete as per your past post.
I have also mentioned that if pilotless commercial aircraft were in our skies & controlled via multiple ground stations on pre-set flight courses then 911 possibly would not have occured. I'm thinking SAFETY, SAFETY, SAFETY. Please read back through my past posts on this thread in regards to 911.
Yes the technologies are in place for fully automated flight however we will still need to c/out vigourous testing & further developments & so on before approval by FAA & EASA & the likes are granted for pilotless commercial aircraft carrying cargo or PAX.
Chock Chucker
Last edited by Chock Chucker; 28th Apr 2013 at 06:11.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Polymer Records
Posts: 597
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Safety, safety, safety?
What would happen to a fully automated, pilotless aircraft that flies through a flock of birds, knocking out both engines at low level, in the middle of a major city like New York?
What would happen if the thrust commanded of the engines on a 777, close to Heathrow, didn't materialise due to a design flaw? What decisions would an autopilot make? Continue to command more thrust? Or come up with a inventive, intelligent, life saving solution?
Classic Man vs Machinery arguments. The argument has been comprehensively won by an interaction of the two. Do you engineers do CRM courses?
What would happen to a fully automated, pilotless aircraft that flies through a flock of birds, knocking out both engines at low level, in the middle of a major city like New York?
What would happen if the thrust commanded of the engines on a 777, close to Heathrow, didn't materialise due to a design flaw? What decisions would an autopilot make? Continue to command more thrust? Or come up with a inventive, intelligent, life saving solution?
Classic Man vs Machinery arguments. The argument has been comprehensively won by an interaction of the two. Do you engineers do CRM courses?
Last edited by Artie Fufkin; 28th Apr 2013 at 19:54.
Stop encouraging it!
If it can't feed it will find another bridge to hide under.
DO NOT FEED THE TROLL!!
Posted from Pprune.org App for Android
If it can't feed it will find another bridge to hide under.
DO NOT FEED THE TROLL!!
Posted from Pprune.org App for Android
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Australia
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Once planes become fully automated then the leading cause of crashes will be computer failure instead of Pilot error.
It could be safer or more dangerous we won't know until we do it but then is it worth the risk to try?
Once we start going down this automate everything path where do we stop? Because I'm quite sure that not everyone wants to be an artist or chef.
It could be safer or more dangerous we won't know until we do it but then is it worth the risk to try?
Once we start going down this automate everything path where do we stop? Because I'm quite sure that not everyone wants to be an artist or chef.
OK, I will bite,I have read this thread with much interest!
Chock Chucker, I believe your assertion to be flawed on a number of counts, but he main one being NEED.
just because something is POSSIBLE, it doesnt make it PROBABLE.
Von Braun launched the first practical liquid fuelled rockets in 1942, but it was 1957 before the USSR put a satellite in orbit, and then only for political reasons, and it was still another 12 years before Neil Armstrong walked on the Moon, and even then because the Cold War was at its height. If there was a NEED, there would have been bases on the Moon by about 1975, but here we are in 2013, and the only permanent presence we have in space is about 300 miles up on the ISS.
Chuck Yeager went supersonic in October 1947, and supersonic transports became possible in 1968 with the first flight of the Tu-144, and later with Concorde, which became operational in 1976 until 2003. Now we have no SSTs flying anywhere....why? no longer a viable NEED!
Economics drives everything in Aviation these days, the bean counter is King!
is there a NEED for pilotless airliners? Pilot error? why would a ground based "pilot" be any less likely to make an error than one or two in a cockpit on board?Could a ground based pilot have made the right decision to the A320 that ditched in the Hudson River, or would they have got the Sioux City United Airlines DC-10 to a survivable crash landing?
Weight saving? lets say 2 pilots weighing 120 kilos each...avionic weight might save around 100 kilos on them, so not much of a payload saving weight!
Economics? now I accept that pilots are well paid! But what are you going to pay the ground based Pilot? minimum wage? those guys might sit on there backsides a lot of the time, but its too late to wish you had a crew onboard when something goes wrong!
the current price of JET A1 is what makes or breaks an airline these days, not the pilots salary!
If there were such savings to be made, then you can bet your retirement pension on either Boeing or Airbus to be at least discussing such a concept as pilotless airliners with the major players by now...but as far as i know, no such discussions are taking place....its unlikely that even if an airline said yes to such a proposal, that any such aircraft would be carrying passengers any time before 2030 at the earliest...
Remotely Piloted Vehicles (RPVs) have been flown operationally by the Military for over 40 years, the USAF were using them in Vietnam! Yet nobody has even suggested they were used to carry people until you mentioned it a few days ago...ask yourself why this is!
Military RPVs are used to save a humans life in difficult situations, and also can remain on station for much longer than an expensive manned fighter...
Civil air transport is a world away from these criteria, even before factoring in such mundane things as health and safety!
In short, if there was a valid case for it, some Accountant in an office somewhere would be making the right noises.....the silence is deafening!
Chock Chucker, I believe your assertion to be flawed on a number of counts, but he main one being NEED.
just because something is POSSIBLE, it doesnt make it PROBABLE.
Von Braun launched the first practical liquid fuelled rockets in 1942, but it was 1957 before the USSR put a satellite in orbit, and then only for political reasons, and it was still another 12 years before Neil Armstrong walked on the Moon, and even then because the Cold War was at its height. If there was a NEED, there would have been bases on the Moon by about 1975, but here we are in 2013, and the only permanent presence we have in space is about 300 miles up on the ISS.
Chuck Yeager went supersonic in October 1947, and supersonic transports became possible in 1968 with the first flight of the Tu-144, and later with Concorde, which became operational in 1976 until 2003. Now we have no SSTs flying anywhere....why? no longer a viable NEED!
Economics drives everything in Aviation these days, the bean counter is King!
is there a NEED for pilotless airliners? Pilot error? why would a ground based "pilot" be any less likely to make an error than one or two in a cockpit on board?Could a ground based pilot have made the right decision to the A320 that ditched in the Hudson River, or would they have got the Sioux City United Airlines DC-10 to a survivable crash landing?
Weight saving? lets say 2 pilots weighing 120 kilos each...avionic weight might save around 100 kilos on them, so not much of a payload saving weight!
Economics? now I accept that pilots are well paid! But what are you going to pay the ground based Pilot? minimum wage? those guys might sit on there backsides a lot of the time, but its too late to wish you had a crew onboard when something goes wrong!
the current price of JET A1 is what makes or breaks an airline these days, not the pilots salary!
If there were such savings to be made, then you can bet your retirement pension on either Boeing or Airbus to be at least discussing such a concept as pilotless airliners with the major players by now...but as far as i know, no such discussions are taking place....its unlikely that even if an airline said yes to such a proposal, that any such aircraft would be carrying passengers any time before 2030 at the earliest...
Remotely Piloted Vehicles (RPVs) have been flown operationally by the Military for over 40 years, the USAF were using them in Vietnam! Yet nobody has even suggested they were used to carry people until you mentioned it a few days ago...ask yourself why this is!
Military RPVs are used to save a humans life in difficult situations, and also can remain on station for much longer than an expensive manned fighter...
Civil air transport is a world away from these criteria, even before factoring in such mundane things as health and safety!
In short, if there was a valid case for it, some Accountant in an office somewhere would be making the right noises.....the silence is deafening!
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: earth
Posts: 1,341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Artie
Safety, safety, safety?
What would happen to a fully automated, pilotless aircraft that flies through a flock of birds, knocking out both engines at low level, in the middle of a major city like New York?
What would happen if the thrust commanded of the engines on a 777, close to Heathrow, didn't materialise due to a design flaw? What decisions would an autopilot make? Continue to command more thrust? Or come up with a inventive, intelligent, life saving solution?
Classic Man vs Machinery arguments. The argument has been comprehensively won by an interaction of the two. Do you engineers do CRM courses?
What would happen to a fully automated, pilotless aircraft that flies through a flock of birds, knocking out both engines at low level, in the middle of a major city like New York?
What would happen if the thrust commanded of the engines on a 777, close to Heathrow, didn't materialise due to a design flaw? What decisions would an autopilot make? Continue to command more thrust? Or come up with a inventive, intelligent, life saving solution?
Classic Man vs Machinery arguments. The argument has been comprehensively won by an interaction of the two. Do you engineers do CRM courses?
All adverse scenarios are studied and I am sure will be applied, automation will be updated as the unforeseen (like it always has) gives us something to learn from.
I am sorry, no intent to jab at pilots but I feel you are foolish not to look at history and realize the only thing certain about the future is change. Take the trend aviation has been on and apply it reasonably to the future. Like I had mentioned above, the USA has cleared UAV's for class B airspace and is dumping money into building ADS-B sites. The world does not want verbal communication between aircraft and ground FANS. THE WRITING IS ON THE WALL Artie, all you have to do is read it. Sure hope you have no plans to encourage your children or grandchildren to become pilots.