future for pilots?
Grandpa Aerotart
Bula an SO is a cheap FTL extender and nothing more than that...my airline uses two captains, others use two SFOs.
Please point to the piece of electronic wizardry, not already fitted, that can do that.
Please point to the piece of electronic wizardry, not already fitted, that can do that.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wherever the work is!
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pilotless recon drones fair enough, they cant kill anyone except those unlucky enough to be underneath them when windows locks up.
But airliners that carry hundreds off pax need at least one person onboard trained to cancel the spyware popups
If they GD was really keen on cost cutting he could install MS FlightSim on his planes and have some nerdy 14 year old with bad acne can sit and 'play' all the way from MML to HKG for no more than KFC or Maccas would pay
Ive never been able to master the keyboard controls for it, or even been able to bank at a constant rate on it, yet ive seen ppl who know the FMC inside out who cant even do a 1 in 60 or a fuel calculation on the fly in the air
Saves on training i guess 
Turbz
But airliners that carry hundreds off pax need at least one person onboard trained to cancel the spyware popups
If they GD was really keen on cost cutting he could install MS FlightSim on his planes and have some nerdy 14 year old with bad acne can sit and 'play' all the way from MML to HKG for no more than KFC or Maccas would pay
Ive never been able to master the keyboard controls for it, or even been able to bank at a constant rate on it, yet ive seen ppl who know the FMC inside out who cant even do a 1 in 60 or a fuel calculation on the fly in the air
Saves on training i guess
Turbz
Unmanned Pax Flights??
G'day 'AIRSIC',
Not to mention.....
......."SESSION TIMEOUT".........
OOOOPPPSSS!!!!!!!
But, not to worry chaps and chapesses, help is on the way......
I hear that nuumeroous people from places, (like Singapore), are soon to be coming to our fine shores to train as
......P I L O T S......
Why?
Because it is CHEAPER HERE, and, THEY CAN!!! (Daddy pays??)
So, OUR pilots of the future may be like budgies around a waterhole at sunset in the outback............cheep cheep cheep!!!!!!
Who NEEDS an 'expensive' computer????
Let's face it.....In the fullness of time.....will ASBK be there? And, wot of YMMB? YPJT?? ABAF?? Shopping Malls Housing Estates???
Our POLITICIANS DON'T APPEAR TO CARE...SO FAR!!!
Not to mention.....
......."SESSION TIMEOUT".........
OOOOPPPSSS!!!!!!!
But, not to worry chaps and chapesses, help is on the way......
I hear that nuumeroous people from places, (like Singapore), are soon to be coming to our fine shores to train as
......P I L O T S......
Why?
Because it is CHEAPER HERE, and, THEY CAN!!! (Daddy pays??)
So, OUR pilots of the future may be like budgies around a waterhole at sunset in the outback............cheep cheep cheep!!!!!!
Who NEEDS an 'expensive' computer????
Let's face it.....In the fullness of time.....will ASBK be there? And, wot of YMMB? YPJT?? ABAF?? Shopping Malls Housing Estates???
Our POLITICIANS DON'T APPEAR TO CARE...SO FAR!!!
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: The 51st State
Age: 60
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EITHER
By the time robots have taken over the jobs we'll all be out of work and therefore too poor to afford airline tickets!!
OR
Given that Airbus pilots can't override the computer they have already taken over!
By the time robots have taken over the jobs we'll all be out of work and therefore too poor to afford airline tickets!!
OR
Given that Airbus pilots can't override the computer they have already taken over!
Now I think its just a matter of time before automation replaces the SO. Is it really necessary to have to pilots operating the aircraft in the cruise?
TL
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: France
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just read an article about uncrewed flights and thought I'd check out what fellow ppruners had to say on the subject (there HAD to be a thread on this ...and obviously there is
)
I'm sure that there is currently no problem for trains/trams (i.e. any other means of transport on rails) to be completely automated however they are still manned. So why should it be different for a/c? Especially when flying is so much more complex than traintravel.
I think, as other have said before, that it will be a long time before the public is willing to enter a uncrewed a/c. And even MORE so should the "pilot" be controlling the aircraft from the ground ("What?I'm supposed to get on a plane that not even the pilot trusts?!")....
)I'm sure that there is currently no problem for trains/trams (i.e. any other means of transport on rails) to be completely automated however they are still manned. So why should it be different for a/c? Especially when flying is so much more complex than traintravel.
I think, as other have said before, that it will be a long time before the public is willing to enter a uncrewed a/c. And even MORE so should the "pilot" be controlling the aircraft from the ground ("What?I'm supposed to get on a plane that not even the pilot trusts?!")....
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: shivering in the cold dark shadow of my own magnificence.
Posts: 522
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For that matter why do we need Flight Attendants surely airlines could have drink dispensing machines etc.
...Then again, the idea of someone getting it on in an aircraft toilet with a drinks dispensing machine is just f
in sick.
...Then again, the idea of someone getting it on in an aircraft toilet with a drinks dispensing machine is just f
in sick.
For that matter why do we need Flight Attendants surely airlines could have drink dispensing machines etc.
I remember seeing a really crap movie on this very topic, a pissed of ex-employee hacks into the aircraft in flight and takes over. Hell of a lot easier then sending a suicide bomber to do the job, plus you get to use him again
While it is true that most accidents are in someway human error, it is also true that more accidents are prevented by flight crew then caused.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: back to the land of small pay and big bills
Age: 50
Posts: 1,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
its not the aircraft that I would worry about, its ATC. Whats gonna happen when they give the flying robot "circle to join downwind to let traffic backtracking on the active runway depart" instructions, as the flying PC passes over the Final Approach Fix..will the Intel chip have the cooling system to cope. (I know I didn't..especially when the instructor is busy pulling the #1 engine ...Oh well I guess the PC wouldn't do any worse than I did )
...Oh well I guess the PC wouldn't do any worse than I did )
AustralianMade
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Out in the weather!
Age: 54
Posts: 917
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not too long ago trains had at least two people up front, three if there was much shunting to be done, now 3000 tons of heavy metal travel from Brissy to MEL with only one occupant in the cab, 'technology' made it possible.
I wonder if we will see RPT flights with only one pilot and technology to take over and divert and land if/when the fertiliser hits the prop?
I bet a dollar that we do - sometime...
I wonder if we will see RPT flights with only one pilot and technology to take over and divert and land if/when the fertiliser hits the prop?
I bet a dollar that we do - sometime...
What about automation in another area - ATC.
I see technology reducing the reliance on ATC for sequencing, collision avoidance and terrain avoidance before pilots get replaced in the cockpit by remote control.
We already have technology like TCAS, this technology will see advances to further to help with "see" and avoid and also help with sequencing.
There has already been work done on using track offset and GNSS technology for enroute navagation allowing one route or corridor to be used in both directions enabling climb and descent.
The GPS terrain mapping technology can allow flight in IMC conditions below MSA. Look at the stuff developed by Chelton that is/was being used in the Capstone project in Alaska.
I see less people on the ground before we see less people in the air, even if it is just for marketing reasons, i.e. the PAX demanding human presence up front.
I see technology reducing the reliance on ATC for sequencing, collision avoidance and terrain avoidance before pilots get replaced in the cockpit by remote control.
We already have technology like TCAS, this technology will see advances to further to help with "see" and avoid and also help with sequencing.
There has already been work done on using track offset and GNSS technology for enroute navagation allowing one route or corridor to be used in both directions enabling climb and descent.
The GPS terrain mapping technology can allow flight in IMC conditions below MSA. Look at the stuff developed by Chelton that is/was being used in the Capstone project in Alaska.
I see less people on the ground before we see less people in the air, even if it is just for marketing reasons, i.e. the PAX demanding human presence up front.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Sydney, Australia
Age: 34
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote by ABX: Not too long ago trains had at least two people up front, three if there was much shunting to be done, now 3000 tons of heavy metal travel from Brissy to MEL with only one occupant in the cab, 'technology' made it possible.
Last I checked, Brisbane - Melbourne superfreighters still have two buggers up the front. A driver and a driver's assistant.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: In a galaxy far, far away.
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With the current state of the art in Artificial Intelligence (AI), I can't see it happening any time soon, although it will happen.
At the moment, the largest users of UAV technology are the military. These aircraft are by and large guided by human operators, effectively flight sim pilots, with an aircraft at the end of the signal. Where these aircraft will ultimately prove their strength is in their ability to exceed the limitations imposed on human pilots (eg. high acceleration and G forces, not having to write a letter to a grieving relative etc).
To some extent we are already seeing the use of AI in missile technology.
What they are not currently able to do with AI guided aircraft, is to "think" outside the paramaters they are programmed with. AI is unable to deal with situations that they have not been programmed to deal with.
Neural network technology can allow AI to "learn" from situations (to some degree). If an AI stuffs up an approach for example, it remembers what didn't work, and does better next time. If it leaves a smoking crater in the end of the runway, the data can be uploaded to another AI, which will not make the same mistake, and will learn from every subsequent mistake it makes as well.
So in theory, an AI could learn to fly a plane. It would depend on the technology advancing considerably.
Communication would be difficult, but once again, voice recognition technology is slowly advancing.
In reality, the biggest hurdle would be to persuade the punters that flying as a passenger under computer control is as safe, or safer, than flying under human control. Of course freight, coastwatching, survey work etc. would have less of a problem with this.
At this point, it is nowhere near safe enough, but one day, who knows?
People are fickle. As soon as enough people consider it safe enough, everybody else will follow, especially if they are able to save $1.50 in the process.
At the moment, the largest users of UAV technology are the military. These aircraft are by and large guided by human operators, effectively flight sim pilots, with an aircraft at the end of the signal. Where these aircraft will ultimately prove their strength is in their ability to exceed the limitations imposed on human pilots (eg. high acceleration and G forces, not having to write a letter to a grieving relative etc).
To some extent we are already seeing the use of AI in missile technology.
What they are not currently able to do with AI guided aircraft, is to "think" outside the paramaters they are programmed with. AI is unable to deal with situations that they have not been programmed to deal with.
Neural network technology can allow AI to "learn" from situations (to some degree). If an AI stuffs up an approach for example, it remembers what didn't work, and does better next time. If it leaves a smoking crater in the end of the runway, the data can be uploaded to another AI, which will not make the same mistake, and will learn from every subsequent mistake it makes as well.
So in theory, an AI could learn to fly a plane. It would depend on the technology advancing considerably.
Communication would be difficult, but once again, voice recognition technology is slowly advancing.
In reality, the biggest hurdle would be to persuade the punters that flying as a passenger under computer control is as safe, or safer, than flying under human control. Of course freight, coastwatching, survey work etc. would have less of a problem with this.
At this point, it is nowhere near safe enough, but one day, who knows?
People are fickle. As soon as enough people consider it safe enough, everybody else will follow, especially if they are able to save $1.50 in the process.
