Originally Posted by
rickair7777
ForgotToBid,
I'm going to apologize if I got a little bit too spirited yesterday, I was multi-tasking and my other other task did in fact have my BP up. Coincidentally it involved UAS and associated difficulties (high side, so not going to elaborate).
Fair enough Rick, good on you.
Originally Posted by
rickair7777
The reason I think I was concerned with winning the argument (as opposed to just airing my opinion and leaving it at that) is because I really do believe that the changes required to regulation, technology, and infrastructure are too broad, complex, and costly to happen within our working careers. I literally overheard some pilots in our crew room talking about unmanned airlines (the embrear thing I think) and they actually sounded scared. I think this whole concept is unrealistic in the near/mid-term so it REALLY frustrates me to see pilots worried about it. We have enough blankity-blank things to worry about in this industry as it is, I just really hate to see folks worked up over something which is not going to affect them. Their grandkids might have something to worry about...
I understand. The reason I bring it up is because in Aviation Week for instance you have an article about a pilot shortage in this decade and more or less in the decades to come next to an article about Sikorsky developing a Black Hawk that could go being flown as a UAV, okay but it seems like that's in vogue in the military anyways, but they eye catcher is that they could also be flown with 1 pilot or if you want 2.
That's coupled with the single pilot ops thing Embraer is developing plus what evidently the FedEx pilots are discussing on their thread (have to find it) about FedEx looking into single pilot ops made me want to have a rather open ended discussion about it.
So do I have an agenda? Yes. To talk about what could happen to our ultra long haul high paying wb staffing needs if technology matures just a little more and to talk about one negative unintended consequence of the possible of a pilot shortage if it ever goes from myth to reality. Many think pilot shortage = leverage and greater pay especially on the low end, or it could go in a different direction that is not what we'd want.
For the record, this isn't happening for a decade or so and I don't think no pilot airliners is going to happen and when I say single pilot ops I'm not thinking about a UAV style landing system but an FMS based one where the plane is put in position via dispatch downlink to the FMS to land and stop itself.
I think the technology would allow one or a few airliners to fly zero pilot but yes the cost to do that with a fleet of 600-700 jets is prohibitive and more so the public reception wouldn't allow it. Nobody wants to be on a pilotless airplane, not that I know of and that I think will always be the deal killer but I'll never say never to the technology make it possible.
Originally Posted by
rickair7777
My perspective on this is based on airline line experience on one hand, and systems engineering and military experience on the other. I have been at least marginally involved in UAVs for a decade and have worked on a consulting basis with some of the people who made the current military UAV boom happen. Someone with 121 but no UAV experience is going to automatically make a LOT of assumptions and take for granted a lot about UAV reliability and redundancy...but it just ain't so. Someone with UAV but no 121 experience is not going to understand all of the requirements and issues associated with 121 ops.
listening...
Originally Posted by
rickair7777
But the current regs do allow single-pilot risk with 91/135, and you occasionally see the downside to that. The probable cause on this is not out yet, but the SLC controllers were saying that the guy sounded incapacitated on the radio prior to the crash:
WPR09MA159
Sad. There is a down side to single pilot ops for sure. Especially if you consider that sometimes the people sitting in a CJ2 by themselves are wealthy, not experience pilots and not young - as in more likely to have medical issues.
Hold that thought because I'm going to play devil's advocate...
Originally Posted by
rickair7777
121 Single pilot ops would require one of three things...
1. The airplane fly itself with the same redundancy as having a spare pilot onboard. The currently installed equipment can't do that, but the technology certainly exists for "routine" flight ops. But beyond that it get's expensive, and AI doesn't exist which can do some of things a human mind can. Abnormals is where things get hard for automation...interpreting data from the Wx radar, ATC radar reports, and PIREPs to decide how to best navigate Wx. That is an art, not a science, and if you aren't an artist you either have to RTB or risk illuminating the "WING OFF" warning light.
. Also recognizing and reacting to flight control failures is hard to program for (pull, turn, and lock...)
Unlikely they'd bother with a plane that could do that, but still hold that thought...
Originally Posted by
rickair7777
2. The airplane be able to be remotely controlled from the ground. But the problem is that NO comm link to a MOVING platform is 100%, or even 99%, reliable. You Pred guys don't have to be told that. So this takes us right back to #1. Or maybe we could improve comms by launching 100 additional COMSATs dedicated to airline ops...at $2 Billion PER satellite
3. The FAA (and the rest of the world) change their standards to allow reduced safety. Probably not going to happen.
The best you could hope for is that the FAA do an analysis and determine that single-pilot with UAV-style (that is to say unreliable) automated backup is equivalent in safety to two pilots. But since I have never heard of a two pilot incapacitation in modern airline ops, I doubt the math would work out.
Then you have the Mx hassles...you probably need EVERYTHING on the airplane working to be 100%, so any little writeup would be grounding. For those of you not familiar with airline ops, some simple Mx functions at outstations are performed by the pilots...it can take hours to get contract Mx to show up.
Anyway, I just don't want airline pilots worrying about this unnecessarily. There has been at least case of an organization being created to allegedly advocate unmanned airliners for the sole purpose of scaring a major European pilot group during a labor conflict. When it happens for real, there will plenty of warning.
I agree doesn't sound likely but what if this is the solution and I'm going to base this loosely on the A320.
Say there is a single pilot A320 modified for single pilot ops. Let me give you a scenario, pilot dies en route. Per the SP system, the pilot has to periodically acknowledge that he's still awake and alive by pressing a I'm Here button. Pilot doesn't respond, a protocol is then followed with lights, bells, horns, flight attendant is notified by the plane and is asked to call and dispatch and ATC are in the loop that the pilot isn't responding. Pilot is still dead. Dispatch or the FA unlocks the door, walks in, pilot is dead, nothing to be done. No pilot in the back.
Now the airplane isn't handed off to a guy with a joy stick and a camera link but rather control is given to dispatch who can interact with the FMS and navigate the plane to an airport, it shoots an RNP approach and it autolands and stops on the runway.
Or another, if the pilot is landing in Jackson Hole and has the AP off and doesn't seem to be keeping the airplane within the safe confines of the arrival or approach, because he's assumed room temperature. AP turns back on and executes a climb out, goes and holds and a protocol again is followed to which dispatch talks to the FMS and the plane lands all on AP.
Now what happens if there is NO COMM or some MEL item or it's just an unsafe area to be single pilot, then you require 2. Not to unlike international ops, which says you can't leave with certain yet normal domestic type MELs and you just live with that. As with that black hawk, 0 pilots, 1 pilot or 2, take your pick.
What I'm seeing really is a situation where pilots monitor APs while flying SP. As in 1000' AP on until 1000' above the runway unless the AP lands. Not cool but we're getting really really close to that on the MD88 at Delta already. So that's what I think is coming. Its just a thought.
Is that plausible?
Originally Posted by
Scoop
Hey guys,
The time to start worrying about this is when the company starts trying to make contractual changes to our current crew augment and ULH policies.
The technology could hit the street tomorrow, but DAL couldn't pursue it because of our contract, and we all know how sacrosanct our contract is.
Scoop
Or an LOA that says big pay raise for ULH categories... oh but...