Originally Posted by
Generic Pilot
Um.... wow.
Hundreds of BILLIONS of dollars huh?
Read up on nextgen.
Current systems would be woefully inadequate with a creative adaptable pilot on board (AI can't do that reliably). Do you use CPDLC much? When it hiccups you have to go to VHF, or even better HF voice. Or go NORDO.
Originally Posted by
Generic Pilot
Well, how do we explain this.....
You are thinking from an almost Mainframe point of view, like a smart infrastructure, dumb machine. Billion dollar system, cheap components on the UAV's.
The infrastructure doesn't need to be any smarter, it will need to be DIFFERENT... far more reliable and secure. Better and more satellites, better data protocols, better/more robust hardware, and hackproof (that last is a real doozy).
Originally Posted by
Generic Pilot
It's the opposite. Dumb infrastructure, smart UAV's.
Small UAV's like the ones that Amazon want to use, will use corridors that current commercial aviation flights don't use.
Works great for small drones, as long as people don't get sick of them buzzing around their neighborhood.
Originally Posted by
Generic Pilot
Using current infrastructure and variations of CPDLC and other comm standards along with see and avoid technology, converted freighters can safely operate in current environments. (this is for mid size UAV's)
It's not about handling routine cruise flight. It's about REPLACING the adaptability/flexibility of an onboard pilot to handle abnormal and unexpected situations. Automation can easily execute a flightplan in the FMS, it cannot do that other a lot of other stuff. Less reliance on the aircraft means more redundancy/control required from the ground.
And don't underestimate national security requirements... the entire system, end-to-end will have to be utterly hackproof (however you define that
). Today you'd need a skilled commando team to even have a shot at hijacking an airliner in flight. Automation with a security gap could mean HUNDREDS of planes all hijacked simultaneously. Automated airliners are all large airborne cruise missiles just waiting for some enterprising jihadi to access the guidance system.
Originally Posted by
Generic Pilot
The burden of technology does NOT sit upon the FAA and their infrastructure but sits on the manufacturer of UAV systems developers and integrations.
I'm quite experienced in large scale IT and comms systems. The real hurdles to automated airliners exist in multiple places:
Airframe Manufacturer: They have to build a vastly expensive revolutionary new product which cannot be certified until it is extensively proven.
Airlines: They'd probably try it out if handed a turnkey product. But they will likely NOT collaborate on development any time soon:
a) Their shareholders want ROI next quarter, not next century.
b) They have to consider their CURRENT pilot shortage. If they start talking up unmanned (or single pilot) airliners right NOW, their entry-level civilian pool will dry up. That's the wolf closest to their door.
Government: Must spend vast sums on infrastructure, Must also create a regulatory process for certification. But there's a huge chicken-or-egg problem there. Hard for government (with VERY limited resources) to even begin to define certification requirements for anything related to autonomous AI. Without some idea of the certification path, private sector will be loathe to invest in something with that long-term of a horizon. Small cargo drones have a fairly clear path to certification, it's OK if they crash a lot, just need to minimize risk to people under them.
Originally Posted by
Generic Pilot
You have old world thinking which is being routed out by big money. Amazon, Google, Uber own their politicians who push changes from the opposite direction. Wag the dog if you will.
Accepted by society is another odd way of putting it. If the general population gets their stuff in short order, they will accept it.
Anywho, I'm really trying to convince the old timers, you'll be retired before it effects you. What I AM saying is for the younger pilots to be a bit more flexible in their career paths.
All the tech companies made it big by providing new services which didn't exist before. Replacing human airline pilots would reduce costs but it's not a game-changer in any respect. So why is anyone going to rush it at vast risk and expense to themselves?
I think it will have to evolve slowly over time. At some point they may have airliners with onboard computers "shadowing" the human pilots and collecting data about human vs. AI performance. If that goes well for a very long time, then maybe they can eliminate pilots. But SOMEBODY is going to have to invest a LOT of money over a VERY long time horizon to make it happen.