Pilotless Aircraft
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Ireland
Age: 26
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pilotless Aircraft
Yes I know this has been mentioned before but I can't see any real evidence of it happening in the near or even distant future.Personally I wouldn't fly on a fully automated aircraft and doubt others would either.Is it even possible not only from a technological standpoint but would unions let it happen?
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: earth
Posts: 1,341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is a thread going in Freight Dogs right now.
http://www.pprune.org/freight-dogs/495545-drones.html
It will happen, when is the variable. Most likely big brother fisrt then comercially Freight (Fred Smith wants them bad), then PAX. I think it will be a long time comeing, by the time they are introduced into the commercial world they will be trusted and liked by the flying public.
http://www.pprune.org/freight-dogs/495545-drones.html
It will happen, when is the variable. Most likely big brother fisrt then comercially Freight (Fred Smith wants them bad), then PAX. I think it will be a long time comeing, by the time they are introduced into the commercial world they will be trusted and liked by the flying public.
Driverless cars are happening and quickly! Big section in WSJ on the subject, including driverless HGV. It will happen, does anybody mind getting in driverless subways?
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A few points, if I may.
1. The current technology is REMOTE piloted, not unpiloted. And since both freight and passengers want to get from A to B quickly and need pressurization/environmental systems, the benefit of placing the pilot at the end of a data link is rather small.
2. The UAV accident rate is horrendous. I have read estimates of it being 30 times that for similar mannd aircraft doing similar missions. The hard numbers are not public, which says something right there.
3. It is difficult to get insurance for single pilot biz jet operations, why would the insurance companies suddenly be willing to go to -0- pilots in a commercial operation?
4. There are people who benefit from hyping this subject, and it makes for a good story.
1. The current technology is REMOTE piloted, not unpiloted. And since both freight and passengers want to get from A to B quickly and need pressurization/environmental systems, the benefit of placing the pilot at the end of a data link is rather small.
2. The UAV accident rate is horrendous. I have read estimates of it being 30 times that for similar mannd aircraft doing similar missions. The hard numbers are not public, which says something right there.
3. It is difficult to get insurance for single pilot biz jet operations, why would the insurance companies suddenly be willing to go to -0- pilots in a commercial operation?
4. There are people who benefit from hyping this subject, and it makes for a good story.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Nearer home than before!
Posts: 524
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Won't happen.
Here's why;
Let's say you have 30 identical airliners on the ramp. One day one of them crashes....report ,etc, news story, loads of threads on here and at the end of the day Pilot Error. Meanwhile, the other 29 keep on flying, because it's always the pilots' fault, isn't it?
Step forward the future.
30 identical airliners, all drones. One crashes, hmm.
What will the passengers say, oh it's all right, that one was on version9.2.1 and the rest are now on ROS 9.3 so it's ok to fly. Yea, right......
That's what we're there for...sign for it, take the blame for it.
Here's why;
Let's say you have 30 identical airliners on the ramp. One day one of them crashes....report ,etc, news story, loads of threads on here and at the end of the day Pilot Error. Meanwhile, the other 29 keep on flying, because it's always the pilots' fault, isn't it?
Step forward the future.
30 identical airliners, all drones. One crashes, hmm.
What will the passengers say, oh it's all right, that one was on version9.2.1 and the rest are now on ROS 9.3 so it's ok to fly. Yea, right......
That's what we're there for...sign for it, take the blame for it.
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Grassy Valley
Posts: 2,074
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Drug testing industry would never relinquish its hold on the publics' fear.
The Unions would never relinquish their stranglehold on your paychecks.
The airframer would never relinquish its claim to the scapegoat (see above).
The airline would never pay the high cost of "no pilot". Pilots work cheaper.
Until the word "pilotless" changes its definition, there is no such condition. Even AI flight is piloted.
What you think you are sayng is not accurate, what you are discussing is "uncommanded" flight. And that cannot happen, ever, it is physically impossible.
Only the innumerates and not too bright bean counters consider it.
The Unions would never relinquish their stranglehold on your paychecks.
The airframer would never relinquish its claim to the scapegoat (see above).
The airline would never pay the high cost of "no pilot". Pilots work cheaper.
Until the word "pilotless" changes its definition, there is no such condition. Even AI flight is piloted.
What you think you are sayng is not accurate, what you are discussing is "uncommanded" flight. And that cannot happen, ever, it is physically impossible.
Only the innumerates and not too bright bean counters consider it.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: earth
Posts: 1,341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What you think you are sayng is not accurate, what you are discussing is "uncommanded" flight. And that cannot happen, ever, it is physically impossible.
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Grassy Valley
Posts: 2,074
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi grounded27
Amazing? The first takeoff to landing pilotless flight happened in 1954...
My point is the nomenclature is misleading. Nothing about this is new, though systems have gotten wildly more capable.
SYSTEMS.... Someone will program the mission, always, just like in 1954.
The fidelity and dependability will be amazing, but the flight is commanded. The devil is waiting in the lav, smoking a cigarette, waiting for an abnormal.
Amazing? The first takeoff to landing pilotless flight happened in 1954...
My point is the nomenclature is misleading. Nothing about this is new, though systems have gotten wildly more capable.
SYSTEMS.... Someone will program the mission, always, just like in 1954.
The fidelity and dependability will be amazing, but the flight is commanded. The devil is waiting in the lav, smoking a cigarette, waiting for an abnormal.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: earth
Posts: 1,341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My point is the nomenclature is misleading. Nothing about this is new, though systems have gotten wildly more capable.
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Grassy Valley
Posts: 2,074
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So long as my point is made, fine.
No professional handler on the airframe? Sure, and police have been using RC a/c to snoop for twenty years...
Did you know that controls can be deflected by a pilot who moves nothing, merely "thinks" an input? The signals in a particular mapped area of his brain signal the solenoid, with wiring or wirelessly.
fMRI, mapped discretionary inputs.
But still, a pilot. Buck Rogers.
No professional handler on the airframe? Sure, and police have been using RC a/c to snoop for twenty years...
Did you know that controls can be deflected by a pilot who moves nothing, merely "thinks" an input? The signals in a particular mapped area of his brain signal the solenoid, with wiring or wirelessly.
fMRI, mapped discretionary inputs.
But still, a pilot. Buck Rogers.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 889
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When society changes its attitude to automation, I think it will happen. But certainly not in my professional life, probably not in my physical lifetime.
What I mean by attitude to automation is this: we have all sorts of automation right now in many vehicles, but all of it is designed to supplement and complement the human commander (except automatic trains, which are slow and ultra-short-range). One day I think that automation will be designed to replace the human driver, first optionally, then by default, then as a rule. One day, it seems likely that most vehicles on the road will be fully automatic - human input optional.
So, when car insurance requires the owner agrees to waive coverage if a human had control at the time of the accident (like DUI now), what will society think of pilotless aircraft? It may still be unacceptable, but the conversation will be a lot different to today's conversation.
What I mean by attitude to automation is this: we have all sorts of automation right now in many vehicles, but all of it is designed to supplement and complement the human commander (except automatic trains, which are slow and ultra-short-range). One day I think that automation will be designed to replace the human driver, first optionally, then by default, then as a rule. One day, it seems likely that most vehicles on the road will be fully automatic - human input optional.
So, when car insurance requires the owner agrees to waive coverage if a human had control at the time of the accident (like DUI now), what will society think of pilotless aircraft? It may still be unacceptable, but the conversation will be a lot different to today's conversation.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IN FOCUS: K-MAX variant offers glimpse of pilotless future
If you can get a helicopter to do it, then airline flying is easy.
There are many military UAVs now that are flown by mouse click on a map.
It is merely a passenger perception issue.
That is, however, a very big issue.
If you can get a helicopter to do it, then airline flying is easy.
There are many military UAVs now that are flown by mouse click on a map.
It is merely a passenger perception issue.
That is, however, a very big issue.
Last edited by Tourist; 26th Sep 2012 at 08:17.
If you can get a helicopter to do it, then airline flying is easy.
For example:
1. Boarding been so slow the APU burn has reduced the fuel in tanks to under that required on the flight plan by 100 kg - Do you go with the loaded fuel anyway, using the various bits of wriggle room available in the regulations or will the computer simply say "no" and demand the bowser is brought back for a top up?
2. ATC offering an alternative T/O runway or intersection to one that's been flight planned and "programed", ( What do you reckon HAL, stick with the plan or reprogram? )
3. The medical emergency on a winter's night over the north Atlantic at 30 degrees west - do you divert to x rather than y? Distance to x is marginally less than distance to y, but x has a single icy runway and wind that's just on limits, y takes 5 more minutes to get to but it has excellent medical facilities just off the airport, it's runways are dry and the wind is calm ( Are you listening HAL? ..HAL?... "I'm sorry David...
)?etc,etc, etc others will have better examples.
Given the state of Artificial Intelligence at the moment and the lack of a "HAL" (and look what happened there) at the very least you'll need at least one individual sat in a room devoted to following a single flight and also a 100% reliable datalink......I'd suggest it's going to be cheaper and more reliable to have at least one decision maker onboard TFN.
Last edited by wiggy; 26th Sep 2012 at 09:55.
I really cant see it happening, especially for PAX carring aircraft. Divide the cost of the pilot over the amount of passngers they have flown per year and you roughly get the price per ticket of having them up front. It would work out at a low figure (getting lower) and the amount of people put off flying without them would probably cost more.
Then there is the technical issue, automated trains, cars etc. can just default to stop if there is a problem, aircraft can't. There would need to be some way of issuing commands to the computer flying the aircraft, either from ATC or the airline. Who would do this? Then you get the situation where some 16 year old hacker in his bedroom has taken control of an A380 and is performing loops over his house. Imagine a 9/11 scenario where some terrorist group has taken control of a whole fleet of aircraft?
The freighters would also be at risk of this too, countries would not need to build missiles anymore, just recruit computer science graduates.
Then there is the technical issue, automated trains, cars etc. can just default to stop if there is a problem, aircraft can't. There would need to be some way of issuing commands to the computer flying the aircraft, either from ATC or the airline. Who would do this? Then you get the situation where some 16 year old hacker in his bedroom has taken control of an A380 and is performing loops over his house. Imagine a 9/11 scenario where some terrorist group has taken control of a whole fleet of aircraft?
The freighters would also be at risk of this too, countries would not need to build missiles anymore, just recruit computer science graduates.