So I assume your UAV has a backup system in the form of a parachute or secondary power source that will let it land at a safe location following a power loss? You know, so it doesn't land on the head of some kid or go through someone's windshield...

Why land in the sea, dumb idea. It would be cheaper to by your own airport, used airframes and hire RJ drivers at 50%.

Well first of all, the worst possible case is that it takes out one of the farmers cows. I am resposible enough to not fly it where children play, or any one else for that matter. I fly it at a location reserved for such things, under rules and guidelines, backed up with insurance. It really limits what I can do, which is unfortunate for what the system is capable of. I like to fly it FPV or first person view, and really, the UAV autopilot was originally intended as a backup incase I lost the video feed. It will fly the airplane to a rally holding point where I can regain visual control and fly it as a conventional r/c airplane.
It will do perfect circles around a point in 25+ kt crosswinds, simply incredible.

Well first of all, you said the only hold-ups were regulators and economics, so I assume you mean in terms of commercial use, not "the place you fly at under controlled conditions". So if you are going to be using it commercially, you either use it in places where it can not pose a risk to people and property, or you have to have redundant systems that allow for a safe outcome during something like a power failure. I don't care about you losing the video feed (wait, you are flying it by line of sight or by video?), because if that's what you were using to determine attitude and altitude, you were already operating it illegally, I care about what happens when you lose power and it falls from the sky. Yes, I acknowledge there are "get me home" functions in case of lost communications, that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about how a pilot of an airplane can glide their airplane to a safe landing, or at the very least away from people and structures. With a quad-copter type device, it goes straight down. Not even a helicopter goes straight down, the pilot has the ability to select a landing spot and get it there, which is why we have minimum safe altitudes for aircraft, to ensure they have that ability. With no glide ability and no pilot to direct the UAS under a loss of power, it needs some other kind of system, like a ballistic parachute. You are right, the technology does already exist, it's just that people(businesses/companies, etc) are unwilling to use it unless forced.

We don't need to worry until cargo ships are retrofitted with a data-linked autopilot. Then, after a costly accident, the lawyers will suggest adding a "safety human" to satisfy the insurance company. Then OSHA will demand more humans to prevent fatigue. Then a bean counter will point out that trained crew members won't cost much more than safety monitors, and will save the cost of a data-linked autopilot. :rolleyes:

Discussing this with you is like talking to a liberal about guns... You clearly have zero experience with this subject, running the ignorant ALPA BS talking points that ignorant sheople pilots out there repeat who are affraid of drones. It is line of sight, because my "required spotter" has a constant line of sight of the airplane at all times. You see, I wear glasses for being near sighted. I can't wear my glasses under the goggles, so theres a moment where I need the airplane to fly itself should I have to regain visual.
Now, as far as this other crap you talk about, most engineers would say the hardest part is getting the damn airplane to fly itself, with properly tuned PID algorithms, EKF filtering, position prediction with GPS input, calibration of accelerometers, gyro's, and compasses. Lets not forget the barometer thats onboard too for maintaining altitude. Then theres all these other safety features like geo fences and terrain / obstacle clearances that are also built in. The "redundancy" is trivial, simply triplicate everything and have a discriminator that throws out the bad one out of three. Like I said, regulators and financial are the only road blocks. The engineers have all the hard stuff worked out already. It's going to happen.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.2de834826a38

Until safety/reliability matches piloted aircraft, it won't happen. Civilians are constantly losing control of theirs as well. It isn't as simple as you like to believe. If the airlines lost 24 aircraft in one year like the AF did, the industry would be set back decades in trying to regain the public's trust.

And what do you suppose is a much harder thing to achieve? Self driving cars or autonomous airliners?
I'd say the car... Once they have the car done, it's all over for us.

Took a quick shut eye last week heading to Cologne and looked over at the FO and he had drool puddling. Technically we were an unmanned drone. Maybe in 15 - 20 years.....not 2020 my friends.

Lordy.

Glad I don't fly with you.....