But why? Give me one good reason why a company would go for this? Please don't tell me it eliminates the pilot because you are still paying someone on the ground to operate this thing. Just because the technology exists doesn't mean it should be utilized. Minimum gains for a lot of risk. Enough of this.

You are in denial if you are comparing trains on predictable tracks/2-dimensional travel to airliners. You're also in denial if you think any sane passenger would get on a pilotless plane. Not going to happen and there are virtually zero sound arguments for it.

You seem to forget that pilots, nor pax, make these decisions.

:confused: so.... who's going to make the pax actually buy the ticket and walk onto the pilotless airplane?
Seems like they have a choice to me.

Or are you trying to imply that at some point in the future the only choice will be fly on the drone or use ground transpo. :rolleyes:
not in anyone's lifetime posting here.

If Management thinks that passengers will resist flying on unmanned aircraft, then passengers have already made the decision without saying a word. The conversion cost is too great for such a risky financial experiment.

Make no mistake, if airlines see a financial incentive they will absolutely do it, 100 years from now when the technology is safe and fielded for flying warm blooded pax. Right now there is no financial incentive and won't be for a very very long time.

Technology seems to increase at an exponential rate. All people need is positive experiences with self driving cars to feel comfortable on UAV's. I say 30 years from now, but honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if it was 15.

C130Driver: LALALALALALALALALALALALA!!!! I"M NOT LISTENING!!! LALALALALALALALALALALALA!!!

(also, it's about CARGO UAS)

Yet, freight trains still have an engineer and a conductor. When freight trains are unmanned, only then should cargo pilots be concerned. Even in that case, it would be at least a decade. Railway unions being stronger than pilot "unions", notwithstanding.

Do you know how long it takes to develop/certify a "regular" jet? Have you considered the business model of most cargo carriers? Are you even a pilot?

Most passenger jets take years (many as much as 10 years) to develop and certify. A UAS will take much longer. Thinking that something could potentially be flying in 15 years is, to put it nicely, generously optimistic.

Cargo carriers, with some exception, typically use retrofitted passenger aircraft to haul boxes around. To assume a cargo carrier is willing to invest in a brand new, unknown, unproven product with huge liability issues is not very realistic.

Everyone love to cite the fact that X% of crashes are due to pilot error. But any pilot can tell you (if you aren't one) that pilots are continuously preventing automation from crashing. How many times have you asked the autopilot what it's doing and overridden it? How is making the system more complicate (unmanned) suddenly going to make it safer? How can unmanned tech match the current safety rate in the industry? Accidents are very, very, very rare.