The Future Of Artificial Intelligence
11-21-2018, 09:55 AM
#201
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,231
Originally Posted by Name User
Do you know why that automation was even present to begin with (however improperly implemented)? Because pilots stall airplanes.
No pilots, no need for that system. Chicken and the egg kinda thing.
No pilots, no need for that system. Chicken and the egg kinda thing.
My UAV bud tells me the horror stories of how the software engineer types do updates to code overnight but then neglect to let the operators know because it's over there head. Seems we've reached that point as well.
11-21-2018, 10:22 AM
#202
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2012
Posts: 128
Originally Posted by Name User
The automation forbids flying the airplane into the ground in the same way you can't stall an Airbus.
Set an altitude below the EGPWS floor for that area and it stops. No matter what you do. "I can't let you do that, Dave".
And don't say shut the engines down. Without abnormal indications the computer won't let you do that, either.
Jeez you guys are so last century thinkers.
Think about how a drone works. You turn it on, without ever operating one. It knows where it is. You tell it to go to xyz, it takes off, flies, and returns and lands all on its own.
That is where we are headed. The technology exists. It works. The only thing stopping it is regulations.
How did that work out for the radio operator, navigator, or flight engineer?
Not to mention, if you think about it, your argument for having TWO pilots is because one might fly it into the ground.
IMO, that is a reason to have ZERO pilots. In the same line of thinking, since the vast majority of accidents these days are pilot error, that is also a reason to have ZERO pilots - it will improve safety.
Set an altitude below the EGPWS floor for that area and it stops. No matter what you do. "I can't let you do that, Dave".
And don't say shut the engines down. Without abnormal indications the computer won't let you do that, either.
Jeez you guys are so last century thinkers.
Think about how a drone works. You turn it on, without ever operating one. It knows where it is. You tell it to go to xyz, it takes off, flies, and returns and lands all on its own.
That is where we are headed. The technology exists. It works. The only thing stopping it is regulations.
How did that work out for the radio operator, navigator, or flight engineer?
Not to mention, if you think about it, your argument for having TWO pilots is because one might fly it into the ground.
IMO, that is a reason to have ZERO pilots. In the same line of thinking, since the vast majority of accidents these days are pilot error, that is also a reason to have ZERO pilots - it will improve safety.
11-21-2018, 11:16 AM
#203
Line Holder
Joined APC: Mar 2015
Posts: 94
Originally Posted by Bigapplepilot
And every soccer game is lost because a goalie missed a save. So we should get rid of goalies cause it’s goalie error. See the problem with the logic?
You don’t get it. We aren’t seeing it. He has the only correct answers whether we like it, or can prove otherwise.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
11-21-2018, 11:18 AM
#204
Line Holder
Joined APC: Mar 2015
Posts: 94
Originally Posted by Name User
You aren't getting it. And I don't want to discuss why on a public forum.
Learning from others mistakes (and your own) is very beneficial in our job.
Yes, it is disturbing. And it's coming.
Learning from others mistakes (and your own) is very beneficial in our job.
Yes, it is disturbing. And it's coming.
Feel free to PM me
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
11-21-2018, 11:50 AM
#205
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2014
Posts: 3,101
Originally Posted by trip
I thought it was because of the larger engines that have to sit farther forward and higher increased the instability of the design?
My UAV bud tells me the horror stories of how the software engineer types do updates to code overnight but then neglect to let the operators know because it's over there head. Seems we've reached that point as well.
My UAV bud tells me the horror stories of how the software engineer types do updates to code overnight but then neglect to let the operators know because it's over there head. Seems we've reached that point as well.
https://www.seattletimes.com/busines...ion-air-crash/
It's basically a stick pusher
11-21-2018, 11:51 AM
#206
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2014
Posts: 3,101
Originally Posted by Bigapplepilot
And every soccer game is lost because a goalie missed a save. So we should get rid of goalies cause it’s goalie error. See the problem with the logic?
11-21-2018, 12:11 PM
#207
Line Holder
Joined APC: Mar 2015
Posts: 94
Originally Posted by Name User
I don’t know which is more frightening. The design flaw or the fact the manufacturer believes it’s not important to tell the pilot what might happen in an extreme situation.
I can think of at least two instances of “this will change everything” tech. Both ate humble pie.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
11-21-2018, 12:49 PM
#208
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2012
Posts: 128
Originally Posted by Name User
That doesn't make any sense. In my example you would remove the players so no goal can be scored.
Keep in mind that an airline pilot is doing more than just managing the energy of an airplane. Everything from management decisions at the gate to get an airplane out on time, to handling a medical, interfacing with a ATC, a buildup necessitating aweather diversion that doesn’t appear on radar, being the company representative. Many of these issues aren’t technological and can’t be solved technologically.
Other issues...
Lowering the landing gear in case of a hydraulic fire, onboard fire(noticing fumes before the gauges do), preflight, deice, etc
And...we don’t have the infrastructure. Just try taxing a drone at JFK on a Friday at 5pm.
11-21-2018, 12:51 PM
#209
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2012
Posts: 128
Originally Posted by OldWeasel
You don’t get it. We aren’t seeing it. He has the only correct answers whether we like it, or can prove otherwise.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
11-21-2018, 01:09 PM
#210
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: 767A (Ret)
Posts: 6,248
Technical capability will be overruled by a near-term cost/benefit veto. (Near-term meaning: how soon the individuals who make the purchase decisions will realize a net personal gain from doing this). The price of redundancy sufficient to satisfy the lawyers is vastly greater than the anticipated return within their career horizons.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
