How do you think the Iranians "shot down" the UAV? It lost telemetry and wandered off on its own. We used to see that occasionally with the target drones at the Pacific Missle Test Center. Once I had to fly down to Ensenada to recover a BQM-34 that got a mind of its own.

 

That is true, but think about immediate savings (aka bonuses for leadership) once you take out say 10% (for starters) of pilots from your workforce. It looks fairly modest at the regionals, but think about taking out a cockpit cost of a double crewed 747 or 777, and not just pay, add the benefits, retirements, hotels etc.
GPS or ACARs or any new mods don't bring such immediate savings.

It will be amazing! And they will do a great job convincing the public that the fares will be reduced and give chance even for people on welfare to fly and see relatives. After all it is their right!

There are unmanned fighters being tested in the desert right now pulling 30 G's. It is only a matter of time for the military, then expect the inaugural drone flight (say SFO to some place in China) at a cargo airline controlled by dispatcher and a couple of dudes in the ground/tower for take off and landing. Then it will stop being a dream, it will become a “proven record” and it’s downhill from there.

It does sound crazy, but everything new sounds crazy for a while.

 

It wouldn't be immediate savings though. It would take YEARS to implement, with ENORMOUS start up costs. It's not like the FAA will just say "Ya bought UAV's? Great! Put em right out there!"

It's great that the military is testing unmanned fighters pulling 30G's. Will they fund the start up costs for the airlines? Will they pay for the changes to airspace, airports, facilities, and procedures? It's not so simple. It won't be immediate savings. There will be hundreds of hoops to jump through.

And GPS absolutely brings immediate savings. When your fleet is flying RNAV departures and arrivals, the fuel burn is greatly reduced by reduced ground tracks due to more accurate paths.

 

Trains still have engineers. We're a ways off.

 

Insurance Companies. Not gonna happen.

 

Another excellent point.

 

Someone here probably has the numbers for the Air Force's drone implementation. My understanding was that they have two "pilots" operating the drone and one supervising the operation. Or in other words, three times the staffing needed to operate a single seat fighter.

In about 10,000 hours there are only a couple of instances where I've needed to take action to avoid someone who has missed a clearance. There have probably been a few dozen instances of "why did the autopilot do that" and one complete electrical melt down that even took the emergency / standby busses down. Each of these were all in a days work for a pilot with average skills, but very likely catastrophic for a remotely piloted vehicle.

Further, much of Part 121 maintenance is running parts "on condition." They fly as long as they continue to operate normally. That means they get replaced when they fail. Without pilots, the maintenance standards for aircraft would have to be completely revamped.

My airline goes through the bother to separate their ETOPS and non ETOPS fleet. The savings justifies the maintenance to a separate standard which reduces operational flexibility. I'd guess that passenger rated drones would have to be a standard far beyond ETOPS.

And finally, technology has not necessarily made jets more reliable. Safer, sure. But I see more quirky behavior from newer avionics packages than those without all the bells and whistles.

JMHO.

 

Source? I think you're speculating, and should save it for the bar crowd when trying to impress the naive.

GJ

 

Plus just wait til the UAV's unionize and the senior ones become too expensive!

 

Bar,

Incorrect. There is a pilot, sensor operators (operates the Multi-Spectral Targeting System [MTS], and most often times an "Intel Specialist" attached to the crew.

With all due respect, you're assumptions of what would be "catastrophic" for a Remotely Piloted Vehicle (RPV) are unfounded and simply, incorrect. Is your speculation based on accident data, or rumor-mill? I "assume" the latter.

You are correct. (See, even a "jerk" can be nice every once in a while!) Part 121 maintenance standards will need to be revamped, and the FAA is currently wrapping their minds around UAV's in the NAS, and the entire "sense & avoid" concept. I know for a fact because I speak with them on a weekly basis, after launching the first UAV into the traffic pattern of KRDR on Oct. 10th.



My apologies for the limited information. I'm late for an appointment with the UAV, as I type this.

2000+ hours of UAV operation
Mission Control Element (MCE) & Launch/Recovery Element (LRE) Qual'd
Performed the first launch of an unmanned vehicle for the Air Guard in KRDR's Class D Airspace

Fly safe,

GJ