Before making those sweeping statements, I take you have interviewed ALL passengers at ALL airports globally? Or is this just a fantasy based on your poll of you and your mates down the pub?

I am not aware by the way of self service food and drink machines on aircraft - this may just be something I've not come across and maybe it does exist. Anyone?

What you really want is a platform for your views, not an open discussion, because anyone who disagrees with you is either not of interest, or posting silly comments, whereas yours, based on some obscure cartoon, are of course not 'silly'.

Reply
 

Capetonian,

It was you that posted on my thread a few posts back & mentioned that you would not waste your time anymore & not enter into anymore post on this discussion. You also wished me all the best.

Then please follow your own word & make no futrther posts on this thread.

I cannot believe you have never heard of self service food & drink facilities on new airline aircraft. Just like you claim to 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. Soon enough cabin crew will be phazed out also.

I hope you know who the Wright Brothers are. You really need to globalise & educate yourself Capetonian.

Chock Chucker :ok:

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:ok:

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:sad:

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.

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 :ok:

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?

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 :ok:

What do we do when the Q9001 fails, ahh the super Q90001 will fix it.

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.

Ray
 

The DC-10 was developed with remote control circuit breakers. Modern aircraft make an automatic attempt at resetting systems that fail... Progression will continue.

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.

Chock Chucker,

Top thread, really enjoyed the comedy :ok: 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!

And your point is?

If you say so, I wasn't aware, maybe someone will confirm that this is fact rather than hypothesis.

The odds are that I am a lot more 'globalised' and educated than you are, but I'll leave you to your fantasy.

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!

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.

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.

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 :ok:

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 :ok:

Reply
 

Couldnt agree more imperial shifter.

Chock Chucker :ok:

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?

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