Embraer and the future one-pilot flightdeck
 

Embraer is the first to break cover on an issue they're all talking about. The trouble is it raises almost as many problems as the pilotless version.

Here's what they're daring to think: Embraer reveals vision for single-pilot airliners

Welll..This day will come for sure...First one pilot ..than the other.....

Even the very modern trains still have a pilot there , so I think it will take a bit longer in aviation.

People and statistics use to mention the number of airplanes we pilots put down , but nobody mention the number of accidents didn`t took place because a pilot was there.

That would be pretty boring on longer flights with nobody to talk to up front. Call me a pessimist but I can hardly see it working. My major issue is pilot incapacitation which does happens every now and then, particularly gastro which can happen eating any sort of dodgy food at any port.

Roughly what percentage of the running cost of a small - medium airliner is attributable to each pilot ?

And what's it going to do when the single pilot becomes incapacitated?

Oh, of course. It'll land itself, without any further pilot input. With 100% reliability.

Simples. :hmm:

Airlines are not going to give up pay to fly schemes that easy.

Looks like the inevitable is being taken seriously by aircraft manufacturers and operators sooner than I thought.

The begining of the end of an entire profession. Kinda sad really. I hope Embraer and the others fail miserably in their endeavours.:(

I've no doubt a single, highly experienced pilot could handle a largely automated airliner by himself perfectly safely, and that the problems associated with incapacitation could be dealt with.

The question to me would be, how does a pilot GET to be experienced, if aircraft are crewed with only one pilot???

Seemingly, Embraer has taken a page out of Michael O'Leary's book; any publicity is good publicity.

Realistically, until the day a machine passes the Turing's test, there would be significant and utterly unacceptable (by aviation authorities, that is) redundancy loss by reducing flight deck crew to one.

When the day comes, we'll have much bigger issues to worry about than single-pilot airliners.

Looking at train operators in the US of A, you'll find that the long distance freight and passenger trains have two engineers up front.

Besides single-pilot being a certification issue I can also see insurance companies raising an eyebrow or two. Not sure how the traveling public will react with a single pilot up front.

Why are we so obsessed to replace humans with machines, anyway?

Hiring single pilot captains makes sense...with one UAV pilot on the ground to monitor a fleet of airliners...

Less avionics up front, smaller cockpits...in fact why not just stuff the lone captain in the nose of the plane, lying on his stomach, and use the cockpit for 'super first class passengers'

If they hire midgets, they can cram a pilot into a little seat in the nose...cut a little plexi glass window out for him...he won't eat much, nor need much as he is used to Circus wages....

Wait!!!
 

"Allowing single-crew operation of airliners would provide substantial savings for airlines and help to alleviate forecast pilot shortages once the industry returns to sustained growth."

The first part should really read: "The CEOs/Chairman can get a bigger bonus allowing single-crew operation...". I can't believe we're talking pilot shortage again!!! :ugh:

Virtual SLF
 

With the advances in technology such as videoconferencing , we could eventually do away with the passengers as well. ;)

Embraer looking at Single Pilot Operations
 

Bit of an interesting one....will it happen?

Embraer is preparing for the possible introduction of airliners designed for single-pilot operation by as early as 2020, following the roll-out of next-generation air traffic management systems in Europe and the USA.
Vice-president for airline market intelligence Luiz Sergio Chiessi says the Brazilian manufacturer is looking to provide "single-pilot capability, at least" in the 2020-25 timeframe.
He cautions, however, that much work needs to be done to persuade the travelling public, regulatory authorities and unions that the concept is feasible.
"It's very difficult to predict that this is going to happen, but I believe that we will have to provide capability for eventual implementation into the real world," says Chiessi.
Embraer is the first airliner manufacturer to publicly acknowledge it is in the early stages of studying single-pilot airliners.



"Airlines are not coming to us with the idea - this is more a vision that we have. We believe that it is technically possible, but we don't know if it is going to be accepted by the public and the authrorities," says Chiessi.
"We believe that by 2020-25 the technology will be available, mainly due to the evolution of the air traffic management systems: NextGen in the USA and SESAR in Europe. We believe that the functions that will come with these new ATM systems will create the possibility of single-pilot [airline operations].
"We haven't moved that far in terms of how to implement the concept. This is more a vision of the future than something that was fully analysed in terms of bits and bytes."
Allowing single-crew operation of airliners would provide substantial savings for airlines and help to alleviate forecast pilot shortages once the industry returns to sustained growth.
Some lower-end business jets such as Embraer's Phenom family are already certificated in certain states for single-pilot operation under Part 91 rules, but customers sometimes demand a two-pilot crew even if it is not required.
"With the electronics you can make a lot of the [cockpit] functions automatic," says Chiessi. "If you take the checklist of a conventional aircraft, for every 10 items you have, there are one or two on the Phenom. Every other action is being taken care of by the electronics."

" Every other action is being taken care of by the electronics."

That's the bit that puts me off, as SLF.

Face it...a modern jet, say 757, could really be flown by one pilot.

but you lose the second pair of eyes. the redundancy in case of pilot incapacitation is lost.

and why not change to a one engine plane. ?????

I recall when the local subway system, known as BART was introduced. Completely automatic...no train operator was to be required.

and it didn't work out that way...and they put a driver in each train.

As in the news on here today about the flight attendant co-piloting due to the FO having a stomach bug. You can see the headlines if the single pilot idea was to happen...

Cabin Crew Captains 757

That role may be actually worth the huge Old School BA Cabin Crew wages that somehow they are still striking about :S

There has been enough news stories over the years of pilots having heart attacks, falling unconcious etc to render this concept completely useless in my opinion.

You don't only have to convince the public/authorities that flying with only one pilot is acceptable, you have to convince them that flying with no pilot whatsoever is also acceptable.

Not just Part 91, Embraer's Phenom 100/300 aircraft can be certified for single pilot operation under Part 135 (pax on demand). I know because I am operating one and have the authorization. Whether single pilot operations are a good idea or not is another question but the Feds seem happy enough with the idea, at least as far as on demand charter operations in single pilot type aircraft are concerned.

At least one cause of accidents will be avoided: bad CRM.:rolleyes:

Most long haulers have a relief pilot or second officer anyway and I think a reserve pilot will likely be retained notwithstanding single pilot ops, probably due to requirements by the insurance industry, before we even get to the regulators or the public.

One wonders what they're smoking down in Brazil these days.

Someone's taking the piss.

Hope the pilot doesn't need to go for one.

Well , this just means that the cessna is getting a little bit bigger.

Well I guess there are many areas that they could cut redundancy. Why not scrap the second engine on twins? After all, today's engines don't fail, right?

How could anybody be stupid enough to suggest getting rid of the 2 cockpit crew? Airliners are always operated with the basis of having backups. When you get rid of the second pilot you loose half of your brain power. Hoe many little mistakes are made here and there that are caught by a second set of eyes.

This stupid idea will exponentially increase every type of accident out there. Plugging in performance numbers for takeoff? Maintaing situational awareness in mountainous terrain? Finding your way around increasingly complex airports without inadvertently crossing an active runway? Forget to set the flaps for TO? A lot of these mistakes have shown that technology has its limitations, as well as humans.

I hope the flying public is willing to accept a dramatic rise in aircraft accidents. I certainly will not get my ass on a airliner with only one pilot. :yuk:

rationalize away the SLF would be much more economical. No plane food, no drinks, hardly an airplane at all moving, no crew... dear management, can you see your dollar signs in your eyes ? All the profits straight into your pockets !

Wanted to patent my idea but had to realize that a certain baby branson in the UK has prior art....

The truth is that the airline industry faces extreme cost pressures when compared to other forms of transportation e.g. rail simply because most people are not willing to pay any more than the absolute minimum for their flights, and market forces are driving the airline industry to the bottom. Even Fedex doesn't face this kind of competitive pressure.

Flying is so safe these days that the travelling public don't actually care about safety anymore, all they care about is price. This is why we are hearing about pay toilets and "standing" seats. People are more than willing to pay peanuts and let monkeys sit in the cockpit. :yuk:

The same thing has been said about F/Es, 200hr pay to fly cadets and ETOPS. It's the beancounters who run the airlines and pilots ultimately have to depend on them for employment. Complain to the govt about safety if you want to, but in this free market deregulation environment they won't bat an eyelid unless planes start falling out of the sky en masse. Have a look at the Colgan crash, how much did the findings improve T&Cs within the industry? Almost none.

If the governments certify it, the beancounters would buy it, the unions would be powerless (Look how well Ansett's 3-man 767 worked out) and the pilots would be out of a job.

Toilets
 

So what happens if the pilot needs the toilet? will he just leave the plane to fly itself? do you really trust that? i sure as hell don't.

And anyway i agree with the many other posters that having one pilot would be bad for the economy by taking away jobs, moral of crews on long flights and the safety on board the aircraft.

so i say single pilot aircrafts have no place in aviation because pc's make errors and there are many more errors on a PC than in a human mind

If the pilot can't go to the toilet then the toilet will need to go to the pilot.

Embraer would have more luck selling the idea to the airlines if they suggested doing away with the pilot and keeping the co-pilot. Since co-pilots get paid less the airlines would save more money.

You would make a much better argument if you could give logical reasons to dispute the redundancy of a pilot by replacing one with automation and or a ground based emergency pilot to operate the aircraft as a UAV.

There is no redundant replacement that is economic out there for an engine other than another engine. If pilots could operate less with less expence, greater efficiency and less maintenance, I am sure this would be the logical path for the bean counters to persue.