Oh ok. I'll see what I can find out about them.



Your standard for success is the military?!

You have no idea what I know.

 

I know that unmanned civilian cargo is not just a few years away!!! Unless you think a couple of drones delivering a small package is unmanned cargo. That will stop too as soon as someone is hurt by one out of control!

 

How do you know? Is it a feeling? in your bones?
You're using THE FORCE aren't you?

It's because you're a pilot and smarter than the experts?

I know, I know.... your friend is in the FAA, Right?

Search your "feelings", you know it to be true.

 

Actually it’s called a brain! I’ll pm you in 3 years to get your excuses for unmanned cargo not becoming a reality. What experts are claiming the above in your short time frame?

 

Well, when they set out to do something they generally get it done.

But the point wasn't about who's doing it successfully, the point was the ENTIRE ATC SYSTEM is utterly incapable of handling autonomous aircraft regardless of who the operator is. Re-engineering ATC would require decades of planning, politics, and vast amounts of money which congress may not see the political benefit of... why spend hundreds of billions just to eliminate 100,000 good union jobs?

I have all kinds of relevant technical education and experience, as well as public and private sector management and regulatory experience. The reason it's not happening has little to do with tech and everything to do with economics, government, politics, and social inertia.

It could happen within ten years IF society decided to accept certain unavoidable risk (some risk would be eliminated, but other, different risk would be introduced). Society/government/industry would have to embark on a massive manhattan project to coordinate, certify, and approve the simultaneous clean-slate development of new aircraft, ATC systems, and ground infrastructure... and pay for it. Guess what, there's no motivation for that. It would make a lot of money for some airline execs and shareholders, but no other benefit to society. Really it would just shift money from union employees to money-men.

If/when it happens, it will happen slowly and progressively. The required changes will need to get baked into the system as other things are updated naturally, they are not throwing out the current system and buying a whole new one just to automate some airliners.

 

It's called a brain.... ooooh… edgy!

What experts? The ones developing the program.

Um.... wow.
Hundreds of BILLIONS of dollars huh?

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.

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.

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)

The burden of technology does NOT sit upon the FAA and their infrastructure but sits on the manufacturer of UAV systems developers and integrations.

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.

A viable path today may not be viable in a few years time.

 

Wait you said a few years and unmanned cargo ops start and then you say us old timers will be retired? Which is it a few years as you originally said or many years as others have said. The unregulated airspace over your house is yours to a certain height. Do you think people are really going to let Amazon etc low level fly drones over their property all day and night?

 

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.


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).

Works great for small drones, as long as people don't get sick of them buzzing around their neighborhood.

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.

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.


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.

 

This was posted in the United board but should be here too..

https://liveandletsfly.boardingarea....ng-automation/

 

Based on how long it took the FAA to approve the use of iPads and how long it took for my Guard base to get a new arrival path (not even a published procedure), I'd expect pilotless aircraft sometime in the late 2100s.