Pilotless airliner.
 

http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles...transport.html

This doesnt ring too good in my ears :eek: .

What do you think guys, will this happen in the near future? I hope not.

Happy landings :)

/David

If they install vending machines they can get rid of the CC as well:E

MP

They can't even get unmanned trains (I mean 'trains', not little transit cars) working properly and reliably. There is not even a machine that can vacuum my floor satisfactorily, or even collect up the washing up and clean it. I shouldn't worry. Give it another generation, not this one. Humans may be subject to 'human error' occasionally, but they can also rescue a situation that no robot brain could solve. this generation is not yet ready to trust its precious existence to computers. It's a comin' (but not for quite a long while yet!)!

Does needle nose actually help?

Concorde and Tu-144 have needle noses. In cruise (and even then there are cockpit windows); they lower noses for landings and takeoffs. Boeing 2707 planned needle nose as well - moving nose. Boeing wanted to install cameras and screens in 2707 cockpit to replace views hindered by needle nose, but this was not allowed.

For a high subsonic airliner, what would an optimized nose be like?

I persoanly can't see it happen in most cases, and I persoanly wouldn't want to fly on a plane with no flight crew.

However, I COULD see a non-pilot (or certainly a 1 pilot) plane doing domestic flights (lets take the UK as an example)
I could see something like an A319 or A320 doing say LHR-MAN or LHR-NCL, since they don't go over any oceans or seas (so are over land at most times), they don't cruise at above 30,000ft, probably don't go at maximum crusing speed (although I could be wrong), don't go into a different countries airspace, the flights are relativly short and don't carry a huge number of passengers or cargo.
And so the airlines could perhaps push something like that, however, once you get into long-haul routes and flying over vast oceans and seas, it's a completely different story.

wrightbrothers

Pilotless airliners with/without needle noses
 

(a) You still need pilots (earning pilot salaries) on the ground, although you could save on hotel bills

(b) The testing and certifiaction would cost unimaginable amounts of money.

(c) The first airline to try it would have to give away tickets to get anyone on the aircraft.

(d) The first pilotless airliner to crash would also be the last.

1 pilot planes indeed do domestic flights now. Always have done. The trouble is, they have limited passenger loads and weights.

There was a time when shorthaul mainline narrowbodies had to have flight engineers. DC-9 was designed to be just small enough to be able to fly with pilots only.

But then the limits were pushed: at first 737 was designed to be flyable by two pilots, then after some time Airbus 300 and 310 and Boeing 767, finally MD-11 and Boeing 747-400...

Shouldn´t someone build increasingly bigger solo pilot commuter planes until there is no such thing as first officer?
Flying over vast oceans and seas, there is little conflicting traffic and it is on well-known and predictable routes. Therefore, couldn´t a pilot take off, fly out of the traffic on land and, once safely on a clear track, leave the cockpit for toilet break, meal, crew rest etc, so that cockpit would be unattended until the pilot returns for arrival and landing?

Pilotless aircraft.
 

Bit of a shoparound for insurance I suspect!!
Capt Ronweb.

I know!

We get on board, taxy out, line up, take off, open the door, wave goodbye to the pax, hit the silk!:ok:

Float back down (steerable ram-air 'chutes) and land in the carpark of the Holiday Inn.

Autoland at the other end. Computer can do the rest. They are so reliable these days. :ooh: Have you tried to get on BA.com yet today?

I see none is concerned with the weather..well,a fully automated airplane entering a cb would change your feeling about flying for ever,I bet on it.
Design one to circumnavigate a cb?..well,sometimes even modifying wx antena tilt with 1 deg will change the picture a lot,not talking about wind,embeded cb,squall lines..etc..
:} ...not so soon,I guess...even on Star wars they had pilots,sometimes helped by R2,though

In days of yore, when real discs were still the means of puchasing recorded music, the following was in vogue:

"Ladies and Gentlemen welcome to filght xxxx to yyyy. We are now at 27000 feet in the cruise and you may be interested to learn that you have all participated in the making of history. This is because you are the first passengers on the first ever commercial flight where the aircraft is being controlled totally automatically. In fact there is no pilot whatsoever on board. There is however no need to worry as all systems have been extremely carefully tested and there is no possibility whatsoever that anything can possibly go wrong.....tsk......go wrong ....tsk....go wrong....tsk.....go wrong.....tsk....go wrong (e.t.c)"

P.P.

There is a project being run by a certain chap at a very well known and aerospace-friendly UK university looking at passenger acceptance of pilotless aircraft. The figures indicate that (a) passengers are less concerned about this than one might think, and, (b) the acceptance rate increases year on year. It's a proper academic study with good criteria.

Boeing's 737 testbed flew for many years with a flight deck in the cabin, from which takeoffs, flights, and landings were conducted. The forward flight deck was always manned, and had override switches. History doesn't tell us (or me, at any rate) how often they were used!

Pilotless airliners have long been the Engineers and airline management's favourite wet dream. It simply won't happen anytime soon at least as carrying pax is concerned. Cargo maybe. In fact pilotless cargo airliners do make sense as such and maybe after many years of faultless service. Pilotless passenger airliners, may, just maybe acceptable to farepaying passengers.

But I doubt it very much. As any pilot knows, in any given day there are dozens of decisions to be made as regards fuel, weather, payload, diversions, passenger issues like, illness, drunkeness etc.

In fact if you consider it, there would have to be someone on board to make decisions and alter the course of the flight if neccessary and deal with emergencies. One of the cabin crew perhaps, would have a little station and in between dishing out over priced coffee and scratch cards. (Mr O'Leary of course would be first in the queue for pilotless aircraft), where they could communicate with the ground or alter the course or destination of the aircraft. For this they would need a certain amount of extra training and even an appreciation of what flying an aircraft is all about. Naturally they would receive extra pay for this and their station could be at the front of the aircraft where the flight deck used to be. There might even be more than one trained person on each aircraft in case something happened. Perhaps the little station at the front of the aircraft might have a couple of small windows for the operators to see out just in case. Although operator is a pretty poor title for this job. I know, we could call them pilots. Yes, indeed pilots because that is what they are.

You can't get rid of the pilot from airliners. It won't happen. There always has to be someone on board to make decisions. That person will be a pilot. The aircraft may well be heavily automated and even semi autonomous but you will always need someone to monitor the systems and to make decisions when problems arise. The job may well be heavily diluted from what we know it now but it will always exist.

Well, as a controls engineer you wouldn't get me on one even with free tickets, a bucket of diamonds and as much gold as I could eat.

And let's hope Airbus aren't awarded the contract....:uhoh:

ah shouldn't worry to much the oil will have run out and the ice caps melted long before they ever convince pax onboard anything without a flight crew...sure who would they complain to eh..:}

No chance! Hopefully.
 

It could ever only work ILS to ILS anyway, there's more to it than just the a/c technology.
And if they're controlled from the ground they'd have to secure the carrier frequencies or one wouldn't even need to get onboard.
There seem to be so many problems, some of them almost certainly irresolvable. I'm in my early 20's and wonder if in 40 years I'll be more worried. Were young engineers worried in the 60's?

Ok, so lets just look away from the big airport/vast ocean/quite nice weather scenario for a moment and take a glance at the little airport in the mountains with a non-precision approach.

You're taking a 757 size aircraft in there. It's snowing and the wind at 3000ft is 45knots across the procedure axis with a bit of a tail component and with some shear at about a thousand feet, but on the ground it's within limits for the equivalent of medium braking action on the runway. The Airport is a bit third-world and the PAPIs are just a tad out of alignment but the regular guys/gals know this and make the necessary adjustment. There's a hill 1 mile left of the C/L at about 3 miles out and if the wind's about 30-50 deg off the C/L at more than about 15kts there's usually a hellova downdraft with some real cobblestone turbulence for about 200ft then you tend to balloon up again, but you know this and are ready for the increase and then decrease in thrust.

Once you've landed, if you use autobrake 4, you'll make the turnoff if the weight is around 80 tonnes but not higher, so you need to know that the turning circle at the end isn't snow-cleared at the edges so you have to go round it with extreme care using not too fast and not too slow a speed, but with a quite low steering angle if you want the nosewheel to actually point you in the right direction and not take you off into the local suburb.

Parking is a b*gger, because the terminal area isn't cleared at all but the 'follow me' guy is usually pretty good, but there is a new guy there (the one with the beard) that you've got to watch because he's a hint enthusiastic with his bats sometimes and he'll have your wing in that fuel tanker if you don't watch out. Oh, and they need to know just when to start de-icing.

OK, OK - you get the picture ... a day in the life eh? So.. tell me, if the system is planned to only have general aviation/military aircraft with actual pilots, just how do you write a computer programme to encompass all the implications of the above? Now, I'm not saying it can't be done ... as Arthur C Clarke fans will attest "any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic" ....but I'll bet you it'll cost more than, what was it? 525 million? Yeah, right.;)

Tell me where 1/3 is on the number line and I'll trust a computer.

Here are a few situations for the passengers and inexperienced pilots reading this:
1. Fuel decision. Will be made by someone who will not be flying the aircraft.
2. Overflown countries would presumeably have the right to land the aircraft ?? Well, yes they have already but -
pilot talks way out of it and continues.
3. Cb avoidance already mentioned - let's look at turbulence, volcanic ash, icing etc. If avoidance requires entry to another country over which the flight does not have clearance what happens?
Pilot talks way out of it and continues.
4. Country refuses entry clearance.
Pilot talks way out of it and continues.
5. Have you any idea what it's like to fly across, e.g., Burma or The Congo?
6. In an international operation there are many, many situations where ONLY the man on the spot can resolve the problem because judgement and the manipulation of human nature are part of the operation. Little lies & crates of beer are used even by big airlines.
7. Who's going to be the Pilot in Command? The biggest passenger?

It ain't going to happen.


Edited to say: Well explained, Earthmover. Most of us don't realise how many variables are involved in our profession because we just do it and prefer bull****ting in the bar to analysing :)

Something I'm surprised nobody else has mentioned... the EU that is going to put in place this all-powerful unified control system is the same one that hasn't managed to get all national systems across Europe to be merged or brought under any kind of uniform control...?

This sounds like a kind of what Americans call "pork"... a jolly good way to get lots of Euros out of the Commission for interesting research.

n5296s