Google and the removal of the pilot.
#51
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 286
Likes: 0
From: Guppy.
#53
#55
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2020
Posts: 428
Likes: 0
The discussion was about moving people. In that context, it will not happen in my lifetime, and I'm no where near retirement.
For all the reasons mentioned in this post, no matter what the price of the ticket, people will not get on a pilotless plane, passengers are not that stupid. Consider the variables that may or may not exist on current drones. Snow storms, Slick taxi ways, slick high speed turn offs, short runways (SNA,LGA,DCA) Deicing, and the thousands of variables that pilots take into consideration every day.
We agree to disagree.
For all the reasons mentioned in this post, no matter what the price of the ticket, people will not get on a pilotless plane, passengers are not that stupid. Consider the variables that may or may not exist on current drones. Snow storms, Slick taxi ways, slick high speed turn offs, short runways (SNA,LGA,DCA) Deicing, and the thousands of variables that pilots take into consideration every day.
We agree to disagree.
#56
Prime Minister/Moderator

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 44,888
Likes: 684
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
Not any time soon (sorry, paywall)...
https://www.wsj.com/articles/self-dr...d=hp_lead_pos9
Also anybody who touts the alleged safety of Tesla on autopilot is talking total garbage...
The Tesla is statistically pretty safe, but that's due to a SYSTEM of automation COMBINED with human supervision. Sound familiar? It should. Neither the tesla "autopilot" nor the human gets credit for the good numbers, it's a combination of the two (automation has better focus/alertness, human can respond to the unexpected which of course they didn't program the AI for).
Those stats don't hold up very well when the "driver" is napping in the back seat, surfing the net, drinking beer, etc. The system needs both components to be better than either.
Also while humans may screw up regularly they almost invariably try to mitigate the damage... they very rarely drive straight into a solid object at full speed with the pedal down and no swerving/braking. That's autopilot's usual fail mode, and it tends to be fatal.
If society really wants this, the road infrastructure needs to modified to be conducive to automation and obviously perfectly consistent. Probably need to embed steel markers in the road for mag sensors on the vehicle... optical sensors are too problematic in weather, unusual atmospheric conditions, a truck spills paint on the road, etc. The freeways could probably be practically modified (over a ver long time frame), but the rest of the non-highway infrastructure would be monumentally costly, maybe pick and chose some main arteries.
Personally I've resisted the temptation to buy a Tesla because it might be too easy to rely too much on the automation when I commute work. Especially early or late.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/self-dr...d=hp_lead_pos9
Also anybody who touts the alleged safety of Tesla on autopilot is talking total garbage...
The Tesla is statistically pretty safe, but that's due to a SYSTEM of automation COMBINED with human supervision. Sound familiar? It should. Neither the tesla "autopilot" nor the human gets credit for the good numbers, it's a combination of the two (automation has better focus/alertness, human can respond to the unexpected which of course they didn't program the AI for).
Those stats don't hold up very well when the "driver" is napping in the back seat, surfing the net, drinking beer, etc. The system needs both components to be better than either.
Also while humans may screw up regularly they almost invariably try to mitigate the damage... they very rarely drive straight into a solid object at full speed with the pedal down and no swerving/braking. That's autopilot's usual fail mode, and it tends to be fatal.
If society really wants this, the road infrastructure needs to modified to be conducive to automation and obviously perfectly consistent. Probably need to embed steel markers in the road for mag sensors on the vehicle... optical sensors are too problematic in weather, unusual atmospheric conditions, a truck spills paint on the road, etc. The freeways could probably be practically modified (over a ver long time frame), but the rest of the non-highway infrastructure would be monumentally costly, maybe pick and chose some main arteries.
Personally I've resisted the temptation to buy a Tesla because it might be too easy to rely too much on the automation when I commute work. Especially early or late.
#57
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2016
Posts: 774
Likes: 0
Hopefully ALPA can get some carbon emissions reduction involved to delay any new designs.
If there are billions available to build safe planes with no pilots, then there should be billions available to build planes with no carbon cost.
It would be compounding too because getting rid of pilots lowers fares increasing demand and creating more carbon pollution. ALPA can probably sell that.
If there are billions available to build safe planes with no pilots, then there should be billions available to build planes with no carbon cost.
It would be compounding too because getting rid of pilots lowers fares increasing demand and creating more carbon pollution. ALPA can probably sell that.
#59
Consider what it currently takes just to do a full autoland with rollout. Two or three autopilots. Increased checks and certifications on the MX side. Increased training on the crew side. Enhanced tolerances on the ground-based navaids. Critical areas cleared. Notifying the controllers who are also monitoring closely. Fully available/usable runway. I'm sure I'm missing a bunch more factors. And yet, crews have to intervene regularly (and immediately) to prevent undesired states/outcomes. To make these factors a minimum requirement for every landing at every airport seems a reach to me at this point.
#60
Banned
Joined: Dec 2016
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
From: Sitting
It's fun when we stand up to the Big Tech oligarchs who wish to run our lives.


