Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Airbus + Cathay working on Single Pilot during Cruise with A350

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Airbus + Cathay working on Single Pilot during Cruise with A350

Old 5th Sep 2021, 07:39
  #181 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: SV Marie Celeste
Posts: 655
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
When you say "todays tech" you mean that fabulous tech in your mind that hasn't been invented yet? difficult to provide examples of that right now.

calypso is offline  
Old 5th Sep 2021, 08:46
  #182 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Tring, UK
Posts: 1,867
Received 12 Likes on 8 Posts
I have no doubt that fully autonomous passenger aircraft will be a reality at some time in the future. However, anything involving AI is going to need a fundamental re-think of all the certification processes as we will be replacing systems that have been engineered, tested and sometimes formally proven, with inscrutable black boxes. The “any day now” self-driving car of the last decade shows how non-trivial these kind of problems are, and that’s in something that can just stop if it can’t work out what’s going on and doesn’t have the huge potential for collateral damage that an airliner has...
FullWings is online now  
Old 5th Sep 2021, 16:34
  #183 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Runcorn,Cheshire,England
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
FlightDetent

on my last flight on a two week old 321NEO (possibly one of the modest modern tech aircraft in the sky) my colleague picked up due to SOPs that I had forgotten to set QNH on the PFD. We were about to conduct an RNAV approach so if this hadn’t been picked up, the aircraft won’t auto set QNH, and consequently all the constraints on the STAR and the final approach path would have been dangerously below profile. Now granted, you could programme an auto GPWS pull up that an autonomous aircraft would be able to perform but how would it set the QNH or even know the QNH?
tech will be very good at mitigating but not at thinking ahead and making decisions that will avoid the need to mitigate.
3Greens is offline  
Old 5th Sep 2021, 21:35
  #184 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 6,013
Received 537 Likes on 247 Posts
In your brave new world of autonomous aircraft with no pilots on board who is going to take on the responsibilities currently demanded of the PIC?
Australia CAR extract

(2) A pilot in command of an aircraft is responsible for:

(a) the start, continuation, diversion and end of a flight by the aircraft; and
(b) the operation and safety of the aircraft during flight time; and
(c) the safety of persons and cargo carried on the aircraft; and
(d) the conduct and safety of members of the crew on the aircraft.

(3) The pilot in command shall have final authority as to the disposition of the aircraft while he or she is in command and for the maintenance of discipline by all persons on board.
megan is offline  
Old 6th Sep 2021, 09:27
  #185 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Netherlands
Age: 46
Posts: 369
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Where does it say the PIC should be on board and cannot be PIC of multiple aircraft at the same time?
Also, d is not applicable with no one on board, so it will definitely work with cargo only operations.
procede is offline  
Old 6th Sep 2021, 09:33
  #186 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Netherlands
Age: 46
Posts: 369
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
3Greens

Would ATC not have also warned you about this? I thought Mode-S includes altimeter settings.
procede is offline  
Old 6th Sep 2021, 11:40
  #187 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 2,569
Received 185 Likes on 109 Posts
Just seems to me that in the history of commercial airliner flying since Ernest Gann's "Fate is the Hunter" days, and after analysis of scores of accidents; the authorities, airlines and manufacturers gradually worked out how to fly safely.

But in recent years accidents - involving standard manoeuvres - seem to be on the increase because airlines appear to be reducing that safety layer by reducing pilots' and engineers' rest, training and testing. And some manufacturers have produced compromised aircraft modifications - all in the pursuit of ever cheaper passenger seat costs. As I say, who really benefits?

And now we are talking about single-pilot operations. We seem to be going backwards, safety-wise.
Uplinker is offline  
Old 6th Sep 2021, 14:30
  #188 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,110
Received 79 Likes on 47 Posts
We seem to move back from redundancy. Not the way to go.
Less Hair is offline  
Old 6th Sep 2021, 15:44
  #189 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Seattle
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes on 5 Posts
I am amused by the illogical assertion that a two week old 321 is “modern” having first flown as the 320 in what… 1988? That’s what, 33 years ago? Designed and built for a two human crew environment.

It’s almost like saying a freshly rebuilt warbird is state of the art fighter tech because it was finished and flown first this year.
BoeingDriver99 is offline  
Old 6th Sep 2021, 22:21
  #190 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Runcorn,Cheshire,England
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
BoeingDriver99

I guess the change from
the Original 320 to a 321 NEO is lost on you then hey. They are vastly differant

procede

mode s transmits selected Altitude. It does not transit the pressure setting set on the PFDs by the pilots.
3Greens is offline  
Old 7th Sep 2021, 04:00
  #191 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Seattle
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes on 5 Posts
Enlighten me. The 321 NEO is more efficient and has been tweaked incrementally over time. But it’s based on 1980s design philosophy and regulations. Name three differences between a 2021 NEO and the 1988 A320 that have an impact on this discussion?

BoeingDriver99 is offline  
Old 7th Sep 2021, 04:14
  #192 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: IRS NAV ONLY
Posts: 1,230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
3Greens

Can you even preselect QNH on this state of the art aircraft?
FlyingStone is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2021, 09:06
  #193 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: 500 miles from Chaikhosi, Yogistan
Posts: 4,312
Received 153 Likes on 70 Posts
3 greens.

Have a read of the 321 TCDS and let us know what underlying FAR the 321 NEO is certificated under.
compressor stall is online now  
Old 10th Sep 2021, 09:13
  #194 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,110
Received 79 Likes on 47 Posts
If only one pilot is left in the flight deck wouldn't we need like a camera link to the flight crew rest and system and nav/weather displays in the back to give the second guy the immediate big picture? What happens with a broken windscreen, cockpit fires and such?
Even AF447 with a full crew left not enough time for the captain to regain situational awareness/control after he had to be called back from the crewrest.

I think it is generally wrong to use a cockpit layout made for two with only one person at work.
Less Hair is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2021, 11:44
  #195 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Seoul/Gold Coast.....
Posts: 385
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
What happens if Left/Right seat PF has a subtle incapacitation while their cohort is in crew rest?
zlin77 is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2021, 12:15
  #196 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Lemonia. Best Greek in the world
Posts: 1,759
Received 6 Likes on 3 Posts
I suspect that plane drivers might do a little more than Stan from On the Buses. Plus, given the issues with autonomous driving of cars etc in 2D, one suspects that 3 D might be a little more difficult.
Ancient Observer is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2021, 13:34
  #197 (permalink)  
Pegase Driver
 
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 74
Posts: 3,718
Received 10 Likes on 6 Posts
BoeingDriver99 : I think 3greens mean cockpit automation rather than aircraft design , but I let him or her reply .

I will make myself the devil's advocate here . We had these heated discussions a few times before internet existed : first in the early 70s when the Navigator was replaced by the Inertial platforms and in the 80s where Airbus removed the FE from the A310.

For me as ATC the number of incidents I saw in my career caused by crews that would not had happened if the automation was switched on and/or had been followed is quite remarkable. I include EGPWS alerts here . Of course the number of incidents caused by faulty automation and prevented by crews is not recorded in the same way.

One remark however : we had and still have a very high number of TCAS incidents caused by crews not reacting or following TCAS RAs correctly . But none involving the A380 and 350s. why? because they have the RAs linked to the FD and those are flown automatically. One of the most tragic collision in recent time, Ueberlingen would not have happened if automation had been available.
But as I said ,am the devil's advocate here, I prefer and support the 4 eyes principle , both in the air and on the ground (ATC)

given the issues with autonomous driving of cars etc in 2D, one suspects that 3 D might be a little more difficult.
not really as the drone industry clearly demonstrates, but we are not talking about autonomous flight here , just reducing the number of the crew.
ATC Watcher is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2021, 18:11
  #198 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 69
Posts: 4,510
Received 275 Likes on 132 Posts
zlin77

The driver assist features have systems that monitor the driver to make sure they are still paying attention - and if they are not alerts them and disconnects.
It should be relatively easy to incorporate some sort of system that monitors the PF for signs of subtle incapacitation - and if sensed would alert the resting pilot that they better get back to the flight deck ASAP.

The automotive automation is leaning heavily on what's been learned from aviation automation/pilot interactions. As automotive automation advances and overtakes aviation (which it will), that should become a two way street.
tdracer is online now  
Old 11th Sep 2021, 02:26
  #199 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 83
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Good points ATC Watcher thank you. As just a lowly private pilot and self loading freight I don't think I would ever board a long distance commercial flight with one pilot in the front, no matter what the level of "electronic assistance" was available. I'm ok with solo bush piloting, solo short helicopter trips etc, but with GermanWings and now of course the anniversary of 09/11 coming up a solo pilot on a typical commercial flight is just inviting terrorism.
averow is offline  
Old 11th Sep 2021, 05:40
  #200 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,110
Received 79 Likes on 47 Posts
More than one of everything is needed for redundancy. From airliner engines to hydraulic systems to pilots. Going from three to two pilots might be okay somehow but below two is not enough anymore.
Using a cockpit environment made for two pilots with only one pilot in the room is just dangerous. If a single pilot environment is wanted for some reason the entire cockpit must be made for it and certified from the beginning. I can't imagine to see that happen in an airliner. Realistic failure scenarios have to include electrical failures, physical damage and fires with no automation and no datalinks left. This is when you need more than one pilot. In the cockpit not just on the plane. We have seen with the first lion MAX event and with Qantas A380 how much better some enhanced crew could handle unexpected events.

Saving costs by just cutting layers of redundancy would be a quite a paradigm change in aviation.
Less Hair is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.