|
You knew it was only a matter of time...
Article from Forbes.com, 27May13
Would You Fly On An Airliner With Just One Pilot? A big new European research programme has begun to look at the possibility of a single-pilot flight deck for commercial operations. The project is called ACROSS (‘Advanced Cockpit for Reduction of StreSs and workload’). Funded by the European Commission and others to the tune of €30 million, it brings together a consortium of 35 industry and research partners, including heavy hitters like Thales, Airbus and Boeing. It is a response to two apparently contradictory pressures. On the one hand, crew performance is a major limitation in air transport safety. In other words, pilot error causes a lot of crashes. On the other hand, airlines would like to reduce pilot costs. For example, instead of sending four pilots on a long-haul flight, they could send just two; one flying and one ‘in reserve’. The traditional answer to pilot error has been to have two pilots monitoring one another according to agreed standard operating procedures and crew resource management techniques. The ACROSS project is looking to replace the second pilot (at least temporarily) with automated systems. In particular, it will investigate advanced avionics to allow pilots to cope with peak workloads and deal with crew incapacitation. It’s a common joke among pilots that 99% of the time they’re massively overpaid. The job is easy and routine, especially with today’s highly automated cockpits. But 1% of the time, you can’t pay them enough because of an emergency, bad weather or other critical situation. This is where it really helps to have two pilots and so these are the areas where Across needs to deliver. In the first instance, the project is looking at allowing single pilot operation to give crew members a chance to rest or to help a single remaining pilot land the plane in case her co-pilot is incapacitated. Beyond that, the roadmap is clearly towards single-pilot operations. As a private pilot operating non-commercial flights, I fly single-pilot all the time. I’m based near London so busy airspace is the norm for me and I regularly fly into Amsterdam Schiphol, which is a very high workload airport. But I don’t have to do it at night or in bad weather if I don’t want to. And I do it at my own risk. However, when I’m not in the pilot’s seat, my personal preference would be for two very well-trained crew members but I’d also like them to have the latest and best avionics. There’s no doubt that TCAS and TAWS (two recent avionics innovations) have reduced the number of mid-air collisions and avoidable crashes over the last two decades. What if we can achieve the same improve again with better avionics? So I welcome this initiative. But is the travelling public ready for single pilot commercial operations? How would you react if you knew your plane had a super-advanced autopilot and the very latest safety systems but just one pilot? What if the ticket price was cheaper? |
Good questions.
I think that the answer is "not yet" not "never." |
Or how about no pilots ? (Not yet, not never)
Pilotless Flight Trial in UK Shared Airspace Successful ''Pilotless'' Flight Trial |
As a private pilot operating non-commercial flights Typical journo article - this sort of thing is decades away - far too many variables and there is the big issue of whether passengers would be happy with only one pilot up the sharp end. I suppose the only bonus is that the media would still be able to bandy about the term "pilot error" in the event of an accident. |
this sort of thing is decades away Embraer reveals vision for single pilot airliners |
A single pilot airliner doing a circling approach for a runway on an island surrounded by terrain with questionable ATC on a dark and dirty night.....yeah good luck with that.
|
Regrettably it is all about statistics. It has long been established that there is an 'acceptable' level of loss of life in the transportation world, and I assume that as long as the systems can produce a level of loss of life below that bar with one or no 'pilots', it will happen some day. When the crash does happen, the outrage of posters on aviation forums and the media will be a torrent, but eventually the flood will subside and it will become 'history'.
Mind you, reading some of the aviation incident/accident reports of late, I wonder if we are actually better off with 'flesh' in the cockpit:sad: |
A great many airlines run successful P2F schemes, utilising the ,up until recently, un-tapped right seat in the flight deck. So apart filling column inches, the journalists seem to be 10 years behind the game.
Infact if I were a P2F airline, I would be asking to increase the number of seats in the flight deck, thus increasing my revenue possibilities with more than one P2F candidate per flight. With FBW and a little joystick, this would be quite easy to achieve technically and lower seat prices for the SLF. :eek: |
When Toyota can build a car that will never need a 'Recall', when BEKO can build a washing Machine that doesn't catch fire, when Microsoft can make a computer that doesn't crash and when Tom-Tom can make a GPS that doesn't send you down non-existent roads....maybe then I'd think about getting on a single crew long-haul airliner. In other words, never.
For goodness' sake, we can't even invent a toaster that can do 2 slices of bread with equal browning on both sides! |
For goodness' sake, we can't even invent a toaster that can do 2 slices of bread with equal browning on both sides! http://objectwiki.sciencemuseum.org....ds_toaster.jpg Worth noting that these were purely electro-mechanical (bi-metallic strip timer ensuring a succession of consistently toasted slices). Not a trace of fly-by-wire, maybe there's a lesson to be learnt there. :O |
Like it or not it has to be said that a large proportion of accidents involve humans making the wrong decision, or no decision at all (Bali anyone?)
Similarly systems make errors (often due to an incorrect set of assumptions) the question is at what point do additional systems reduce the error & risk below that of the current two pilot operation? Given the steady advances in computing power it will definitely happen one day and we will look back on the idea that the 'plane had the OPTION of descending below decision altitude with no runway visible with absolute disbelief I was never a great supporter of the idea of three pilots or two pilots and an FE were absolutely necessary but I certainly was very worried about ETOPS in twins Technology moves the goal posts I'm afraid and we'd better realise it and start planning - |
Single pilot uh?
Can the hi-tech prevent a heart attack? no, so 2 pilots seems to be the minimum...just in case. What about no pilots at all? who´s gonna be blamed in case of an accident.... Keep calm guys....thing will be the same in the future.....oh wait...just lower salaries. |
As I said, the Right Seat of an Airliner is the biggest revenue generator of all the seats onboard. Why would you remove it? youngsters are paying €30,000 to sit in it, therefore it is revenue positive at €33.33 euros an hour. (if 900 hours are flown and there is never ending number of candidates). Rather than a cost to the business if a qualified co-pilot is employed, with taxes and social security costs, only if this was mandatory would there be a requirement to engineer the aeroplane fir single pilot operations.
|
The title of the article is a bit misleading. What will happen sooner than later I was told is allowing one pilot to do the cruise,while the other is resting on long haul flights, thus eliminating the need to carry reserve crews .
Once technology is mature to do this, you can guess where that will lead. On the other hand having heard Capt Richard de Crespigny account of the QF A380 emergency dealing in SIN 3 years ago, I am glad they were so many in the cockpit then. |
Two pilots are a good idea for take off and landing
At all other times they are just trying to keep each other from falling asleep and not always successfully. |
The airbus mentality was always that the pilots should let the autopilot 'take the strain' whenever possible. As the computers took all votes from flying surfaces to the pilot input and then democratically (in a French way) allocated the control surfaces, in whatever magical way it did, to what the computers considered best the A/P is considered king.
Now picture a dark :mad: night approach into Berlin. We elected to keep the A/P in for the approach as it would 'aid SA' in good trainers parlance. So, imagine our surprise when the A/P flew through a squall line (no option, the line was over 150 miles long), rolled to 65 degrees AOB and automatically activated the A/P disconnect as we rapidly passed various limits! Luckily we were already in the process of overriding the A/P as it rapidly rolled past 45 degrees so the disconnect was inevitable. Now take away the second pair of eyes or even the first pair of eyes and allow the software engineers to dictate what is or isn't acceptable. Frightening. Remember, with protections Airbus shouldn't exceed 30 AOB. I'm approaching the end of my flying career and I don't envy those who take what was once a profession forward as a 'job'. Personally I won't be getting on an aircraft with <2 pilots (even if the child of the magenta line in the RHS has paid more for their seat than I have for mine! :E:{) |
I thought single pilot ops into Schiphol were not allowed. I have done it myself back in the 80's and after the fact with a review of the rules and regs seemed to remember either I shouldn't have or would not be able to in the future.
It was some time ago so the above might be :mad:. |
And thats why you always need 2!
God, on I night LCA I'm lucky if I can stay awake in the descent, let alone the cruise. A single pilot would need one of those bits of kit that sense if you are nodding of in your car, except connect to 240v. I'm sure this idea will appeal to certain segments of the LoCo management:mad: |
quote :
I thought single pilot ops into Schiphol were not allowed. maybe things changed recently, but looking at their AIP on line , I see VFR are still allowed and no mention of single pilots ops, not even in IFR. check here : EHAM |
Three's a crowd?
Heathrow Harry, "Quote:- "I was never a great supporter of the idea of three pilots or two pilots and an FE were absolutely necessary ...."
Absolutely correct, one Pilot and one Flight Engineer was sufficient. ;) Standing by! |
As I said, the Right Seat of an Airliner is the biggest revenue generator of all the seats onboard. Why would you remove it? Plus you have to think about the motivations of the beancounters who are looking at cost reductions in the long run. Also they generally don't like pilots or unions. |
Dog Trainers?
It's a great opportunity for dog trainers.
The dog occupies the rhs and bites the pilot when he falls asleep. |
I thought todays 3rd Level Airliners had First Officers who had to PAY to fly in the right seat.!!!!!!Anyway
Effing Computers do NOT have Mortgages,Wifes(Or Mistresses!),Children,Grandchildren or a firmly developed yellow streak down their back from years and years of flying experience,that gives the Experienced Captain a sixth sense Anticipation that not only will keep him alive ,but the rest of the crew and passengers.Just imagine another AF447 scenario with a fully automated non human flight deck.When I did an Airbus 320 sim check with Caledonian in the mid 90s,the Interview Board asked me what else I would like to have in the cockpit?I told them I really wanted a BIG red lever that said "I have control",not squiggly wires in natural law,or whatever they called basic aeroplane computer flying!!!! |
Pilot and the Dog
I was told many years ago that the cockpit of the future would consist of one Pilot and a Dog. The Pilot would be there to reassure the passengers and feed the Dog, the Dog would be there to bite the Pilot if he tried to touch anything.:E
|
1. Modern glass-cockpit jets are flown single-pilot now - witness the Citation Ultra or CJ.
However.... 2. Single pilot ops requires a VERY competent, talented, experienced captain. So... where are we going to train future captains, if not in the right seat? As I've said for years here at PPrune, I'll start worrying when the freight trains running by my house reduce their crew complement - currently two... |
DaveReidUK (post number 10).
I forwarded your message to Boeing. They've replied that the 787 battery system has proven to be more than capable of toasting Bread, Muffins and even a Kelloggs Pop Tart. Carbon Fibre has proven to be marginally less successful but the new stainless steel box will gentle radiate enough heat to toast a slice of Kingsmill Nutty Brown at a range of 5 feet (and is also rated for frying a slice for breakfast should the need arise.) With 2 crew it should be possible to get the FO to slap the bread down, race back to the flightdeck, make a radio call, perform a fuel check and still be back in time to prevent the same sort of light scorching shown in those NTSB photos. |
FE rtd wrote:-
"Heathrow Harry, "Quote:- "I was never a great supporter of the idea of three pilots or two pilots and an FE were absolutely necessary ...." Absolutely correct, one Pilot and one Flight Engineer was sufficient. http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/sr...lies/wink2.gif Standing by! " Every FE I know/knew always thought that the pilots were only there to make announcements and walk about about the cabin impressing the ignorant SLF with their gleaming teeth and perfect haircuts |
"that gives the Experienced Captain a sixth sense Anticipation that not only will keep him alive"
unfortunately it also gives him the sense that he can do the impossible - if it were not so why do so many experienced pilots commit dreadful errors? I bet that aircrew today are as good airmen as they were 50 years ago - but the accident rate is way down - because of the increased use of technology. The drive to add technology, which is relatively predictable, and replace humans, who are not always predictable, will eventually lead to 1 pilot operations - maybe in 20 years ............. possibly the 737 replacement ...... |
I'll start worrying when the freight trains running by my house reduce their crew complement - currently two... |
Obviously designing an airliner to be flown single pilot would be pretty easy - that tech already exists and the loss of safety that entailed from a human factors point of view could be mitigated to a certain extent by more innovative flight deck and avionics design.
However presumably in order for the travelling public to accept single pilot operations there would have to be a system whereby a computer or human monitored a number of flights and was ready to take over in the event of one of the pilots being incapacitated. An actual viable monitoring system like that could be used in real airline service is probably still a long way off. The system would also have to be able to react very quickly in the event of something happening to the pilot at a critical moment like take off or landing - perhaps that problem could be surmounted by making all take offs and landings automatic. Just having a single pilot airliner with no back up at all is not something the travelling public would accept...I would have thought. |
if I understand correctly the research proposes that on long haul the sleeping pilot is woken up and asked to help out when things get interesting. Isn't that sort of what happened to AF447 only there was already two up front.
|
I'm surprised AF447 is used as an example, as it would not have crashed if there had not been a second officer on board pulling the stick backwards when the AP disengaged...
|
Just out of interest - What would a system do, on its own, if the cowling came off of one of the engines?
|
Aaah - this old chestnut. Just a skim through www.avherald.com and you could easily see the lives that could potentially be lost should the flight deck complement be reduced from what it is today. As for those who dream about pilotless flight decks - dream on! Just in the last few years, thousands of lives would have been lost without human intervention from those 'on the spot'.
Yes - the industry DOES factor in cost of safety/improvements etc versus cost of lives. That has certainly been the case for many years. And yes - there is a good amount of human error. But at the end of the day, these same humans save more lives that they cost. I could never say the same for today's aircraft computers. |
I'll start worrying when the freight trains running by my house reduce their crew complement - currently two... |
The Docklands light railway is connected quite firmly to the ground and doesn't do 500mph. The potential for catastrophic loss of life is pretty much zero, given that, in my experience, it struggles to exceed 25 mph.
It seems fairly strange to me that in an age where the technology is being either doubled or tripled in redundancy, we seem to have an endless fascination with halving or removing any human involvement in the process. |
Please please dont compare air to rail.
I teach train drivers....Uk rail is a single driver operation. If anything happens to the driver....the train stops; there is sufficient protection built into signalling systems to maintain train separation. Lets be honest, we are not far away from ground controllers 'tapping' into an aircraft to bring it back home if pilot incapacitation occurs, but as previous posters have mentioned there are way too many variables up there!! :cool: |
It has an inevitablility about it but is likely to be used in Freight sector first.
It will happen but is a generation away i.e best part of 25 years before it becomes common. |
I teach train drivers....Uk rail is a single driver operation. If anything happens to the driver....the train stops; there is sufficient protection built into signalling systems to maintain train separation. |
Single Pilot? Why not?
As long as the pilot has at least two hearts and two brains, all with automatic functional changeover on failure of one system and independent blood supply which has been tested for contamination on a regular basis.
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 02:56. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.