UBS Comments on Pilotless Planes
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Wallisellen, Switzerland
Age: 75
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
UBS Comments on Pilotless Planes
Ahh! But has the world produced a salesperson that can sell tickets for these flights.
The technology has been available for some time but no one seems to be interested in being the first to try.
The technology has been available for some time but no one seems to be interested in being the first to try.
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 913
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fireflybob has probably hit the nail. Liability. There is an interesting discussion going on in the insurance world about the ramifications of driverless cars. At the moment we as humans are insured against the mistakes we (or others) may make on the road. Driverless cars will transfer that liability to the car manufacturer. I suspect airlines will happily offload the transgressions of their pilots onto Boeing and Airbus. Whether Boeing and Airbus will accept the liability probably explains the lack of pilotless planes around.
Taking pilots out of the cockpit could save airlines billions. But would anyone buy a ticket?
I don't think either constitutes shock news.
By the time they can replace pilots there will be so few people left in work that there will be no demand for air travel so its not something to worry about.
But one could have a single pilot on board and a back up on the ground which some might go for but then there are still a lot of costs left compared with removing all human crew ON THE PLANE.
Aircraft could be remotely controlled and even if fully automated would still need lots of data fed in by airline ops departments and that intervention could always be a legal escape route for manufacturers. The cost of providing a warranty to the airline that the plane would seldom go wrong and if it did it would be supported by the supplier would be huge and of course that would be passed on from supplier to airline so many of the savings would actually never occur being transferred from column A to column B.
As for those fine people in the City they are simultaneous the lifeblood and poison in the veins of society at the same time and as their work is increasingly data based they are close to replacement by algorithm than pilots are
But one could have a single pilot on board and a back up on the ground which some might go for but then there are still a lot of costs left compared with removing all human crew ON THE PLANE.
Aircraft could be remotely controlled and even if fully automated would still need lots of data fed in by airline ops departments and that intervention could always be a legal escape route for manufacturers. The cost of providing a warranty to the airline that the plane would seldom go wrong and if it did it would be supported by the supplier would be huge and of course that would be passed on from supplier to airline so many of the savings would actually never occur being transferred from column A to column B.
As for those fine people in the City they are simultaneous the lifeblood and poison in the veins of society at the same time and as their work is increasingly data based they are close to replacement by algorithm than pilots are
Join Date: Apr 1998
Location: Mesopotamos
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I only trust computers when everything is working well. To build one that still functions properly when everything isn't working well can be very expensive.
Last month our FO fluffed the approach to ATH on a windy day, so bouncy and unstable was the approach with large pitch, roll and thrust adjustments which entered into over-controlling territory. Take 2 was driven by someone else obviously still with lots of rock-and-roll but this time our more experienced American greased the 777 in at the last few feet.
A few days ago we had similar conditions in MEL at night with lots of gusting wind, a different style of approach this time with plenty of quick wing levelling corrections, it got a bit wayward on shorts but came back with an eventual very soft touchdown which I think was just luck.
Until you can teach a computer to sail a small boat in similar windy conditions and moor it then and only then may I reconsider my stance on this matter.
Last month our FO fluffed the approach to ATH on a windy day, so bouncy and unstable was the approach with large pitch, roll and thrust adjustments which entered into over-controlling territory. Take 2 was driven by someone else obviously still with lots of rock-and-roll but this time our more experienced American greased the 777 in at the last few feet.
A few days ago we had similar conditions in MEL at night with lots of gusting wind, a different style of approach this time with plenty of quick wing levelling corrections, it got a bit wayward on shorts but came back with an eventual very soft touchdown which I think was just luck.
Until you can teach a computer to sail a small boat in similar windy conditions and moor it then and only then may I reconsider my stance on this matter.
cattletruck
Agree, still a long way to go but ...
Aircraft have been flight tested, including landing, using only their engines instead of flight controls (think JAL 123, UA 232) and PIO (pilot induced oscillation) in the space shuttle was removed when the computers flew it.
Agree, still a long way to go but ...
Aircraft have been flight tested, including landing, using only their engines instead of flight controls (think JAL 123, UA 232) and PIO (pilot induced oscillation) in the space shuttle was removed when the computers flew it.
