Psychologists, computers, algorithms and flying skills.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: @exRAF_Al
Posts: 3,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Psychologists, computers, algorithms and flying skills.
Long been recognised among the 'operators'. Unfortunately, the accountants push for more automation based on the assumption that needing 'less skills' in the operators = lower salary bills = bigger profits.
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Erewhon
Posts: 474
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Talking with a guy from the Institute of Aviation Medicine in the late 80s (whilst on a flight safety course), he said we were heading down the wrong path.
He said humans monitoring computers is not only illogical (if understandable), it's dangerous. Humans get bored and inattentive, machines don't.
Sure enough that's where we're going and, cynically, it's hard to disagree with Sandy Parts' opinion.
Bean counters rule once more . . . e.g. German Wings A320 couldn't have happened with a three-man flight deck (3rd pilot or FE), but not there to satisfy profits
He said humans monitoring computers is not only illogical (if understandable), it's dangerous. Humans get bored and inattentive, machines don't.
Sure enough that's where we're going and, cynically, it's hard to disagree with Sandy Parts' opinion.
Bean counters rule once more . . . e.g. German Wings A320 couldn't have happened with a three-man flight deck (3rd pilot or FE), but not there to satisfy profits
Last edited by Brian W May; 11th Oct 2016 at 13:53. Reason: Sandy Parts , not Places . . . doh!!
One factor that contributed towards the Air France crash was the Airbus sidestick controllers. The one pilot gets little, if no, feedback as to what the other pilot is doing. I believe that is why Boeing still use conventional control columns.
Oh dear, here we go again. If you'll head over to Tech Log, we have a half dozen threads on the AB/B sidestick/yoke noise-a-thon. Let's not import it to the Mil Av forum, shall we?
