Originally Posted by
Supermoto
Ok, my definition of "large" was relative to small UAVs. It is the Global Hawk, a pretty big jet. But tell me, what about this technology prohibits it from applying to freighters like the 767 etc... The Air Force has flown everything from fighters to Boeing aircraft without any humans aboard, just not in the NAS. The technology is there. It's surprising to me that people don't know this.
Google Boeing 720 remote piloted Edwards AFB
Global Hawk is pretty big. Like you, I shared airspace with UAS for years. There are lots of us here. I have personally watched them fail and bust across boundaries, disrupt stacks of assets working a particular task, etc. I have personally watched manned assets do the same thing, though. So I don't assume UAS or automation is inherently worse; it's inherently different. Crews have strengths and weakness (fatigue and cabin environmental factors, for example) and automation has strengths and weaknesses (Iranian capture of an RQ-170 for example).
I was really trying to speak about liability, economics and politics more than technology, though. That's why I point out that trains still have conductors even though automated trains may be more reliable. If we aren't willing to chance automated trains the limiting factor is law and politics rather than technology. I didn't make my point very well, though.