how long

[leftoftrack]

http://www.avweb.com/aviation-n ... ment/

500 takeoffs or landings without pilots

[RRJetPilot]

Until the first accident. Might work for cargo, but maybe in 100 years with passengers.

[Rockie]

Does it think?

[leftoftrack]

after the first accident did we stop flying all together? or did we analyze it and correct it. during the faze in of this technology, do you think that 1 pilot in the cockpit to monitor systems and step in if necessary. and then talk to the engineering team as to why he stepped in would make sense?

[RRJetPilot]

after the first accident did we stop flying all together? or did we analyze it and correct it. during the faze in of this technology, do you think that 1 pilot in the cockpit to monitor systems and step in if necessary. and then talk to the engineering team as to why he stepped in would make sense?

If you have ever piloted a commercial aircraft, (I have flown both Airbus and Boeing), you would know how often a pilot needs to make decisions and intervene in many areas of the operation. And if you had that experience you wouldn't need to post questions like that. Wont happen for a VERY long time. You and I will be dead by then.

But one pilot possibly in our lifetime I would agree with that. If the unions would let it. Doubt it. Well maybe ACPA.

[TrilliumFlt]

You don't have to convince those of us who understand the possibility of, you have to convince those who buy the tickets that a "pilotless" airplane is a good idea

['97 Tercel]

But one pilot possibly in our lifetime I would agree with that. If the unions would let it. Doubt it. Well maybe ACPA.

[trey kule]

Rockie asked

“Does it think?”

No.
It was designed to replace you in the cockpit.

[trey kule]

I am old enough to remember when the 747s arrived, and everyone was saying it would end the 747s career if two ever collided.
Well, they did.
And about 50 years later still flying.

Will full automation, or remotely piloted aircraft have accidents?
Of course they will.

But in the grand scheme of things they just might prove to have fewer accidents than pilots do now.

People post how pilots make all these life threatening saves. Never mention the “oopsies”. That got people killed due to pilot error. I I think TCs latest safety vid quoted 80%. Lots of room for AI to improve on that.

[Commonwealth]

How many interventions leading to safe outcomes are reported? Nearly zero in my estimation. The human machine works so well most do not even know it is running.

[trey kule]

So you ask a question, that is unanswerable, and from that you can conclude exactly what?

If you read the posts here you might get the impression that every flight is saved by a super pilot, just do’in their job.

After 45 years in the business, i can estimate just like you, and say...it aint so when it comes to modern aircraft needing pilot intervention very often.
On the other hand, we do have stats for the human error side of things. And one has to look only at a couple of the poster board accidents like air france to conclude that a simple autopilot would have done a better job.
AI do not skip checklist items. They do not go to work tired.(or worse). They do not try to salvage an approach. Or try to land with a wicked tailwind.

AI will evolve and I think continue to improve. Human performance will not.

All I am really trying to point out Is to step away from doggedly defending your position for a moment, and look at the big picture outside personal experience.

I am long retired and have no dog in this fight, but to ignore the progress in AI is to bury your head in the sand

[porcsord]

Clarke's Three Laws:

1) When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.

2) The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible.

3) Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

It will happen, and if you're in your 40's or 50's it will probably happen in your lifetime. First it will just get rid of the First Officers. Then it will get rid of the Captains. I suggest reading either Age of the Spiritual Machine or The Singularity is Near by Ray Kurzweil. For those who say "a computer can't make a decision", that is currently true, however should a genuine A.I be created, I think that will be the end of pilots... and countless other jobs. I would say that will be the defining moment of the next Era in human civilization. The crazy thing about this one, is it will happen incredibly fast once A.I is created, because the A.I will be able to recreate itself faster and better than we could. I for one welcome our new robot overlords.

PS

[Meatservo]

Rockie asked

“Does it think?”

No.
It was designed to replace you in the cockpit.

Maybe intended as a humorous comment, but not without a grain of truth. There are airlines in Canada right now flying with first officers in the right seat of large turbojet aircraft who have 250 hours of single-engine Cessna time, an IATRA written, and enough simulator time to teach them which buttons to press on the FMS and MCP in order to make the plane fly from one airport to another. These people will be captains sooner than many of us would find believable, with a couple thousand hours of pressing buttons on the FMS and MCP to make the plane fly from one airport to another- or at least would have been if not for the COVID plague- and really, what's the point in preserving their jobs. They're already pre-programmed. Why not replace the pre-programmed meat-servos with ones that don't complain, get tired, or quit?

[porcsord]

Meat, you advocating replacing meatservos?

[Rockie]

Pilots intervene in the automation all the time. What do you think HDG, FLCH, V/S, A/T disconnect and the A/P disconnect buttons are for? Have you ever changed the performance or navigation programming in the FMS at any point in a flight after you pushed off the gate? That’s intervention too. You “intervene”constantly you just don’t realize it, and anyone who doesn’t fly these airplanes couldn’t possibly know.

That doesn’t even begin to count the times a pilot makes any kind of decision having nothing to do with actually controlling the aircraft from before they get on to after they step off the plane. Every time you make up your mind on something you do it using skills computers don’t have, and won’t until true AI is invented. You also use emotions in your decision making which AI will never have that saves lives everyday. Things like hesitancy, that creepy feeling up the back of your neck based on experience and a healthy survival instinct.

One thing people also never remember or mention talking about transitioning first to single pilots on transport aircraft...who’s going to train them?

[garfield]

Single pilot on a modern heavy jet sure, it's actually less workload than flying a Navajo SPIFR.

Pilotess? When that will happen nobody's gonna work anymore. Only psychologists! Well..even them can be replaced by a very good A.I.

[Zaibatsu]

Most of the manual inputs are there because of legacy requirements, slow moving bureaucracy, the relatively low cost of manned operation (for now), and the unpredictability of the human condition.

I mean, look at how hard it is for humans to descend via the STAR??

[Rockie]

Single pilot on a modern heavy jet sure, it's actually less workload than flying a Navajo SPIFR.

I've never flown a Navajo SPIFR but I have flown fast jets including really old ones with scattershot instrument panels, black ball attitude indicators, antiquated navigation radios and of course no autopilot SPIFR, and can say with some authority that your statement is sometimes true but usually false. It all has to do with task saturation and workload which, if you've flown transport category jets you know can be very, very busy. Improper workload management is one of the primary causes of errors.

From a practical standpoint of single pilot transport category aircraft...who is going to train that pilot and how?

Who monitors that pilot for errors?

If there's a problem what comes first, flying the plane or dealing with the problem?

[fishface]

Single pilot on a modern heavy jet sure, it's actually less workload than flying a Navajo SPIFR.

I've never flown a Navajo SPIFR but I have flown fast jets including really old ones with scattershot instrument panels, black ball attitude indicators, antiquated navigation radios and of course no autopilot SPIFR, and can say with some authority that your statement is sometimes true but usually false.

That’s why he used the term modern.

I mean, look at how hard it is for humans to descend via the STAR??

True, but they (FAA and NAVCanada, where “descend via” is really the only places it’s a thing) have over-complicated it themselves. I do remember when descend via rolled out....dear lord.
Anyway, Europe has got their shit together (as usual) and they have to not only clear your for a STAR but also that clearance does not allow you to descend. You will still be given descent clearance by ATC but since you’ve been cleared for the arrival you are expected to comply with the vertical profile. I’m sure YOU know this but I just feel it’s necessary because once again they don’t over complicate things and it’s just so smooth over there.

[Rockie]

Well, 35+ years of flying successively modern and complex airplanes as well lends a certain credibility to making comparisons to new/old, single pilot/multi crew.