Our kids — future Career
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Melbourne
Age: 68
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pity you can’t have passengers on the flight deck anymore. I’d like to have an AI or Automated Aircraft advocate along for a 4 day domestic pattern in my work environment.
Last edited by George Glass; 18th Oct 2019 at 04:44.
Atlas,
just a thought. Freight won’t complain if there is no one up the front or even if there is only pilot during period of evaluation with some form of ground based back up. If there is an accident, unless there are human victims in another aircraft or on the ground, there probably wouldn’t be that much media coverage compared to wiping out 300 pax. Management would love it.
just a thought. Freight won’t complain if there is no one up the front or even if there is only pilot during period of evaluation with some form of ground based back up. If there is an accident, unless there are human victims in another aircraft or on the ground, there probably wouldn’t be that much media coverage compared to wiping out 300 pax. Management would love it.
Pegase Driver
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 73
Posts: 3,669
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ian W :
That is probably the best advice .
The future pilots will not be hand flying but managing systems in a complex environment . The integration of Big Data and AI will bring new possibilities, and those are not designed for humans to interfere with.
Training for those new jobs will be tough, and the qualities required to follow that training successfully are different of those needed to hand fly.
An interesting , and probably well paid job it will be , but a very different one from the one you currently have , and not much to do with the one we have enjoyed until 25 years ago.
Pittsspecialguy : a final advice based on experience ; (3 kids and 5 grand kids
let them choose themselves what they want to be and support them in achieving that., wherever their choice is . If your daughter wants to fly , go for it, do not break her dreams based on other people predictions that may or may not happen..
I would recommend that young children get an initial education in the STEM subjects, "know your enemy" study AI, computing and telecommunications. Understand what computing Cloud services are and play with them (you may not realize it but you and I are using Cloud services now). Do the study at a university that has both STEM, engineering and flying courses there are several scattered around the US from Florida to the Dakotas. Students can graduate with ratings on twins and a 1st degree/masters in a STEM subject. This is the best of both worlds as someone said earlier students with a spread of expertise become far more employable.
The future pilots will not be hand flying but managing systems in a complex environment . The integration of Big Data and AI will bring new possibilities, and those are not designed for humans to interfere with.
Training for those new jobs will be tough, and the qualities required to follow that training successfully are different of those needed to hand fly.
An interesting , and probably well paid job it will be , but a very different one from the one you currently have , and not much to do with the one we have enjoyed until 25 years ago.
Pittsspecialguy : a final advice based on experience ; (3 kids and 5 grand kids
let them choose themselves what they want to be and support them in achieving that., wherever their choice is . If your daughter wants to fly , go for it, do not break her dreams based on other people predictions that may or may not happen..
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: titan
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=Turbine70;10597169]Respectfully your description isn't AI.
AI isn't programmed for the task, it is programmed to learn about it.
I think if you read my post I do mention about the ability to learn, but that's exactly my point, current AI can only 'learn' what it's been programed to learn. The bank voice recognition example you give is programmed to ONLY learn and interpret voices, probably only in one language. It can't learn anything else and would struggle with people who have speech impediments. It won't even attempt to, or even know about, the possibility of translation if someone speaks a different language to it, it just won't work unless it hears the correct language. Hardly intelligent. Whereas take a human in comparison. They will instantly recognise another language and although they may not be able to understand it, can very quickly make a learned decision to get a translation or Indeed find another way to make it understandable. That's why I believe AI is a fantasy, it'll never be real intelligence that can learn anything outside the parameters it's been programed with. Should be called artificial programming rather than artificial intelligence.
AI isn't programmed for the task, it is programmed to learn about it.
I think if you read my post I do mention about the ability to learn, but that's exactly my point, current AI can only 'learn' what it's been programed to learn. The bank voice recognition example you give is programmed to ONLY learn and interpret voices, probably only in one language. It can't learn anything else and would struggle with people who have speech impediments. It won't even attempt to, or even know about, the possibility of translation if someone speaks a different language to it, it just won't work unless it hears the correct language. Hardly intelligent. Whereas take a human in comparison. They will instantly recognise another language and although they may not be able to understand it, can very quickly make a learned decision to get a translation or Indeed find another way to make it understandable. That's why I believe AI is a fantasy, it'll never be real intelligence that can learn anything outside the parameters it's been programed with. Should be called artificial programming rather than artificial intelligence.
My guess is the future of human control in aviation is akin to drone flying. Human's piloting aircraft remotely from the ground if required, but a relatively small team of human pilots managing a large fleet of aircraft that are for the most part fully automated in all phases of flight. The drone pilots would only take over remote control of aircraft in cases of emergency, assuming of course, the emergency isn't in the remote pilot connection...
Whatever the case, modern airline flying isn't flying anymore, it is knowledge and monitoring of complex systems. That is not to devalue the profession, but the role has been changing for years and will change more in the future.
Whatever the case, modern airline flying isn't flying anymore, it is knowledge and monitoring of complex systems. That is not to devalue the profession, but the role has been changing for years and will change more in the future.
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is a great career but full of uncertainties. Be prepared to be more 'wide-minded' (rather than narrow-focused). In the beginning that means looking and thinking outside rather than through the blinkers of an instrument panel. Later in life it means a broad approach to job opportunities, such as where a regional turbo-prop job can be seen as a good way of gaining experience for your later career and broadening your future options rather than "I must get that A320 job" and narrowing your future options. Also, watch out for that 'blinker' and 'shackle' of seniority that could (would?) seriously narrow your options if/when things go wrong in your later career. But I look back with enjoyment at my own career, I am thoroughly enjoying it now and I am enjoying my part-time position where I help new starters on their first steps towards it.
AI will be designed to assist, not to take over. And if you have learnt to fly rather than just to 'operate' you will be more in control of that AI rather than have it 'control' you. I think that we are a long, long, long way off any AI pulling off what Sullenberger did.
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Northern Europe
Age: 45
Posts: 152
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Modern and future jets are/will be every bit as easy to crash as the older ones.
I, for one, will never set foot on an pilotless airliner - or in a driverless care for that matter, though I will admit that if they continue to put minimally qualified pilots into some aircraft I might be better off in one!
I, for one, will never set foot on an pilotless airliner - or in a driverless care for that matter, though I will admit that if they continue to put minimally qualified pilots into some aircraft I might be better off in one!
I find it amazing that the OP doesn’t plan on his daughter going to University. Without a 4 year degree, she could be Chuck Yeager and she’ll have an uphill battle to get hired in my opinion.
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=avtur007;10597384]
Understood.
Look maybe this seems like semantics but in my view it really isn't.
The voice AI wasn't programmed to learn voices. The AI isn't programmed about voices. The programming is in providing it access to voices. The opportunity to listen to them.
I'll be a monkey's uncle if training AI to fly a plane isn't far simpler than training a human to fly a plane during the OP's daughter's career.
In my life look at a similar transition. From rotary dial to watching videos on a smartphone, in a similar period. The same smartphone that knows where you are and can switch the heat on half an hour before you get home. Try that with a rotary dial phone.
Understanding voice is no mean feat.
"Alexa, tell me a joke."
"OK google, find me a gas station"
"Hey Siri, how many beans make five?"
That was sci-fi in 1980.
AI pilots are sci-fi in 2019.
Respectfully your description isn't AI.
AI isn't programmed for the task, it is programmed to learn about it.
I think if you read my post I do mention about the ability to learn, but that's exactly my point, current AI can only 'learn' what it's been programed to learn. The bank voice recognition example you give is programmed to ONLY learn and interpret voices, probably only in one language. It can't learn anything else and would struggle with people who have speech impediments. It won't even attempt to, or even know about, the possibility of translation if someone speaks a different language to it, it just won't work unless it hears the correct language. Hardly intelligent. Whereas take a human in comparison. They will instantly recognise another language and although they may not be able to understand it, can very quickly make a learned decision to get a translation or Indeed find another way to make it understandable. That's why I believe AI is a fantasy, it'll never be real intelligence that can learn anything outside the parameters it's been programed with. Should be called artificial programming rather than artificial intelligence.
AI isn't programmed for the task, it is programmed to learn about it.
I think if you read my post I do mention about the ability to learn, but that's exactly my point, current AI can only 'learn' what it's been programed to learn. The bank voice recognition example you give is programmed to ONLY learn and interpret voices, probably only in one language. It can't learn anything else and would struggle with people who have speech impediments. It won't even attempt to, or even know about, the possibility of translation if someone speaks a different language to it, it just won't work unless it hears the correct language. Hardly intelligent. Whereas take a human in comparison. They will instantly recognise another language and although they may not be able to understand it, can very quickly make a learned decision to get a translation or Indeed find another way to make it understandable. That's why I believe AI is a fantasy, it'll never be real intelligence that can learn anything outside the parameters it's been programed with. Should be called artificial programming rather than artificial intelligence.
Look maybe this seems like semantics but in my view it really isn't.
The voice AI wasn't programmed to learn voices. The AI isn't programmed about voices. The programming is in providing it access to voices. The opportunity to listen to them.
I'll be a monkey's uncle if training AI to fly a plane isn't far simpler than training a human to fly a plane during the OP's daughter's career.
In my life look at a similar transition. From rotary dial to watching videos on a smartphone, in a similar period. The same smartphone that knows where you are and can switch the heat on half an hour before you get home. Try that with a rotary dial phone.
Understanding voice is no mean feat.
"Alexa, tell me a joke."
"OK google, find me a gas station"
"Hey Siri, how many beans make five?"
That was sci-fi in 1980.
AI pilots are sci-fi in 2019.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
in the U.S., depending upon the regional airline you go to, you can advance to a major airline without a college degree.
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Uk
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To be fair, if you have a degree your probably over qualified.
Can you do the three times table and absorb a lot of pages of stuff ? Good you are in.
I’d rather they focused on level 6+ English than maths
Can you do the three times table and absorb a lot of pages of stuff ? Good you are in.
I’d rather they focused on level 6+ English than maths
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: In a house
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Recently in Toulouse a TRE mentioned that one of the main areas they are focused on in Airbus is single pilot ops for all of their newer products. They said they aim for single pilot ops instead of no pilots because the public are not ready for it yet!
I assume they are referring to a generational issue where older people do not trust technology. The same TRE was saying that single pilot ops may work until the older generation now days are gone and we are only left with people staring at mobile phones before they try go fully autonomous.
I also have a kid who was thinking of going flying, I just took them with me for a week in the jumpseat to see what the life is like. I'm guessing the reality of the job doesn't match the romantic portrayal of flying jobs in the movies!
I assume they are referring to a generational issue where older people do not trust technology. The same TRE was saying that single pilot ops may work until the older generation now days are gone and we are only left with people staring at mobile phones before they try go fully autonomous.
I also have a kid who was thinking of going flying, I just took them with me for a week in the jumpseat to see what the life is like. I'm guessing the reality of the job doesn't match the romantic portrayal of flying jobs in the movies!
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=Turbine70;10601091]
Understood.
Look maybe this seems like semantics but in my view it really isn't.
The voice AI wasn't programmed to learn voices. The AI isn't programmed about voices. The programming is in providing it access to voices. The opportunity to listen to them.
I'll be a monkey's uncle if training AI to fly a plane isn't far simpler than training a human to fly a plane during the OP's daughter's career.
In my life look at a similar transition. From rotary dial to watching videos on a smartphone, in a similar period. The same smartphone that knows where you are and can switch the heat on half an hour before you get home. Try that with a rotary dial phone.
Understanding voice is no mean feat.
"Alexa, tell me a joke."
"OK google, find me a gas station"
"Hey Siri, how many beans make five?"
That was sci-fi in 1980.
AI pilots are sci-fi in 2019.
I went to a talk about a year ago by one of the leading researchers in AI in the UK (worked in the Alan Turing Institute). AI/genetic algorithms are very good at learning from a very controlled set of inputs and inferring the correct/optimum response. Examples of that now include a number of pieces of research which shows that AI analysis of medical imaging to be as good as, if not better than health professionals.
But AI has limitations. A further piece of research set out to see if AI could identify wolves from German Shepherd dogs. After feeding the algorithms thousands images of both and it generating its own identification rules, it ultimately based its decision on how much white was in the image because more images of wolves were fed into it where the wolves were in a snowy environment. Not good if you expect your robotic shepherd to protect your flock!
If aircraft were always 100% operational, with all comms/navigational systems active and in benign environments, AI would probably be the safer option. But the challenge to make AI safe for the almost infinite set of conditions that a pilot may be faced with, that is a very high bar indeed. For freight aircraft I can see it happening, but for passenger flights its a different matter. Even if statistically it were safer, we humans aren't always rational beings and we prefer a couple of warm bodies up front to save the day when things go pear-shaped.
Understood.
Look maybe this seems like semantics but in my view it really isn't.
The voice AI wasn't programmed to learn voices. The AI isn't programmed about voices. The programming is in providing it access to voices. The opportunity to listen to them.
I'll be a monkey's uncle if training AI to fly a plane isn't far simpler than training a human to fly a plane during the OP's daughter's career.
In my life look at a similar transition. From rotary dial to watching videos on a smartphone, in a similar period. The same smartphone that knows where you are and can switch the heat on half an hour before you get home. Try that with a rotary dial phone.
Understanding voice is no mean feat.
"Alexa, tell me a joke."
"OK google, find me a gas station"
"Hey Siri, how many beans make five?"
That was sci-fi in 1980.
AI pilots are sci-fi in 2019.
But AI has limitations. A further piece of research set out to see if AI could identify wolves from German Shepherd dogs. After feeding the algorithms thousands images of both and it generating its own identification rules, it ultimately based its decision on how much white was in the image because more images of wolves were fed into it where the wolves were in a snowy environment. Not good if you expect your robotic shepherd to protect your flock!
If aircraft were always 100% operational, with all comms/navigational systems active and in benign environments, AI would probably be the safer option. But the challenge to make AI safe for the almost infinite set of conditions that a pilot may be faced with, that is a very high bar indeed. For freight aircraft I can see it happening, but for passenger flights its a different matter. Even if statistically it were safer, we humans aren't always rational beings and we prefer a couple of warm bodies up front to save the day when things go pear-shaped.
Join Date: Feb 1999
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: titan
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Automatic
I agree fully that civilian aircraft will fly pilotless and maybe with paying passengers and it'll probably start to happen in the next 20 years, but it won't be AI doing the flying, it'll be a ground based human pilot remotely controlling it with real pilots up there watching and ready to take over for the first 20 years or so, until we gain trust that it can be done fully remotely with 100% fail safe. Eventually a sophisticated well programmed (hopefully!) computer will do it with human oversight from the ground and will be called something fancy but is essentially autopilot controlled from below.
We will never trust AI to differentiate between a wolf and domestic dog or even really learn how and get it right everytime, but that demonstrates nicely the severe lack of actual real time artificial intelligence that we have achieved so far that is of any real use.
Fossil fuel use and the drive to eliminate them is a bigger concern for pilots and the future of aviation.
We will never trust AI to differentiate between a wolf and domestic dog or even really learn how and get it right everytime, but that demonstrates nicely the severe lack of actual real time artificial intelligence that we have achieved so far that is of any real use.
Fossil fuel use and the drive to eliminate them is a bigger concern for pilots and the future of aviation.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Botswana
Posts: 887
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree fully that civilian aircraft will fly pilotless and maybe with paying passengers and it'll probably start to happen in the next 20 years, but it won't be AI doing the flying, it'll be a ground based human pilot remotely controlling it with real pilots up there watching and ready to take over for the first 20 years or so, until we gain trust that it can be done fully remotely with 100% fail safe. Eventually a sophisticated well programmed (hopefully!) computer will do it with human oversight from the ground and will be called something fancy but is essentially autopilot controlled from below.
We will never trust AI to differentiate between a wolf and domestic dog or even really learn how and get it right everytime, but that demonstrates nicely the severe lack of actual real time artificial intelligence that we have achieved so far that is of any real use.
Fossil fuel use and the drive to eliminate them is a bigger concern for pilots and the future of aviation.
We will never trust AI to differentiate between a wolf and domestic dog or even really learn how and get it right everytime, but that demonstrates nicely the severe lack of actual real time artificial intelligence that we have achieved so far that is of any real use.
Fossil fuel use and the drive to eliminate them is a bigger concern for pilots and the future of aviation.