Two Pilot Long Haul Ops? Airbus & Cathay
06-16-2021, 05:03 PM
#11
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2015
Position: UNA
Posts: 4,416
Originally Posted by rickair7777
For single pilot, they need to automate that, if the cabin pressure drops and nobody does anything then descend to 10K/Grid MORA. Not hard to do, but will take time and money to certify and install.
Presumably such a scheme has an FA in the cockpit JS... otherwise you're just right back to germanwings.
Presumably such a scheme has an FA in the cockpit JS... otherwise you're just right back to germanwings.
also if the rest area could be linked to the cockpit, no need for a FA up there
06-16-2021, 05:06 PM
#12
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2015
Position: UNA
Posts: 4,416
Originally Posted by sailingfun
I am going to make a guess you have done few if any international long haul diverts. Two pilots are working their buts off and the first thing done after stabilizing the aircraft is calling up the relief pilot who becomes invaluable.
06-16-2021, 05:24 PM
#13
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,244
Originally Posted by Gone Flying
presumably if the plane can already do this with 1 button press, it could be automated
Originally Posted by Gone Flying
also if the rest area could be linked to the cockpit, no need for a FA up there
06-16-2021, 05:36 PM
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2009
Position: 787
Posts: 454
All of these are good practical reasons why single/reduced pilot ops are dangerous, but from a financial perspective, just remember we are not ‘that’ expensive. In my experience, buying hundreds of new $100m assets is not going to be ‘npv positive’ just because the marginal cost of carriage decreases, it’s probably not going to be enough to make up for that large of a capital outlay.
theae are just bar thoughts, so forgive me if someone has done a more thorough analysis.
theae are just bar thoughts, so forgive me if someone has done a more thorough analysis.
06-16-2021, 05:50 PM
#15
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2013
Position: 756 left...
Posts: 442
I hope ALPA puts this to rest immediately if not sooner. From what I’ve been reading this isn’t going over very well with crews and passengers alike.
hey Cathay if you want to save the money how about getting rid of a few v.p.s that came up with this cockamamie idea.
What could go wrong….
hey Cathay if you want to save the money how about getting rid of a few v.p.s that came up with this cockamamie idea.
What could go wrong….
06-16-2021, 06:50 PM
#16
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2017
Posts: 2,998
This is why I upgraded to Captain ASAP. F/O job may not be around much longer....kidding
I have seen brand new Airbuses do some pretty scary stuff!! You link 100+ computers together with all those software...Something is bound to go wrong.
I have seen brand new Airbuses do some pretty scary stuff!! You link 100+ computers together with all those software...Something is bound to go wrong.
06-16-2021, 07:32 PM
#17
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2012
Position: 1900D CA
Posts: 3,394
Not to try and cross threads here but: Sully and the Hudson landing probably is going to set back single pilot/ remote operations a decade.
The "Miracle on the Hudson" put our profession back into positive light for a long time. Say what you want about Sully, he is probably one of the best things to happen to us. As soon as this single pilot/ remote operation stuff gets talked about publicly, people will immediately refer to the Hudson landing as an example of why we need human pilots in the cockpit.
The "Miracle on the Hudson" put our profession back into positive light for a long time. Say what you want about Sully, he is probably one of the best things to happen to us. As soon as this single pilot/ remote operation stuff gets talked about publicly, people will immediately refer to the Hudson landing as an example of why we need human pilots in the cockpit.
06-16-2021, 08:38 PM
#18
New Hire
Joined APC: Jun 2021
Posts: 8
Originally Posted by Aero1900
Not to try and cross threads here but: Sully and the Hudson landing probably is going to set back single pilot/ remote operations a decade.
The "Miracle on the Hudson" put our profession back into positive light for a long time. Say what you want about Sully, he is probably one of the best things to happen to us. As soon as this single pilot/ remote operation stuff gets talked about publicly, people will immediately refer to the Hudson landing as an example of why we need human pilots in the cockpit.
The "Miracle on the Hudson" put our profession back into positive light for a long time. Say what you want about Sully, he is probably one of the best things to happen to us. As soon as this single pilot/ remote operation stuff gets talked about publicly, people will immediately refer to the Hudson landing as an example of why we need human pilots in the cockpit.
06-16-2021, 09:13 PM
#19
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2012
Position: 1900D CA
Posts: 3,394
Originally Posted by Cornholio69
If not that then perhaps that instance of the British 777 captain beatin his meat on a TATL crossing would dissuade single pilot ops. If airlines put cameras in the cockpit perhaps they could use the footage for a corporate onlyFans. Might be some promising additional revenue there.
06-16-2021, 10:18 PM
#20
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2013
Position: A320 Left seat
Posts: 2,580
Originally Posted by Aero1900
Thank you for your thoughtful contribution to the conversation
Yeah, I don’t know what the heck that was all about. And I agree with your previous post. Sully, Jeff, and Cactus 1549 (can’t remember the flight number) will definitely be a circumstance we can point to and say, what if....hundreds could have been killed if that dual engine flame out over a densely populated area would have been followed by a straight ahead decent at green dot until impact, or even flaps full/gear down until impact.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
