Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Pilot Lounge > Aviation Technology
Boeing studies pilotless planes as it ... >

Boeing studies pilotless planes as it ...

Search
Notices
Aviation Technology New, advanced, and future aviation technology discussion

Boeing studies pilotless planes as it ...

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 06-08-2017, 12:48 PM
  #21  
Gets Weekends Off
 
atpcliff's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2007
Position: Capt
Posts: 3,215
Default

Originally Posted by Kougarok View Post
How many public buses don't have a driver? Or trains other then the airport ones?
Trains are VERY easy to automate, compared to aircraft. Trucks are harder than trains. Elon Musk is committed to replacing truck drivers. It will save 2.5m? lives per year, if all trucks worldwide are automated. The efficiency gains will be very, very high.

This is a big reason why we need GBI (Guaranteed Basic Income). When almost no one has a job, due to automation/AI, people will need money to live on, and to buy stuff.
atpcliff is offline  
Old 06-08-2017, 12:50 PM
  #22  
The NeverEnding Story
 
BoilerUP's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2005
Posts: 7,512
Default

Originally Posted by atpcliff View Post
Trains are VERY easy to automate, compared to aircraft.
The environment trains operate in is much less dynamic than that aircraft operate in.

...and freight trains still have both a Conductor and an Engineer.
BoilerUP is offline  
Old 06-08-2017, 02:19 PM
  #23  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Aug 2009
Posts: 396
Default

Just because something is technologically feasible doesn't mean the economics will make sense. Just look at the Concorde. I bet every new pilot back in the late 60's/early 70's figured they'd be retiring on supersonic aircraft.
PW305 is offline  
Old 06-08-2017, 02:33 PM
  #24  
Prime Minister/Moderator
 
rickair7777's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,275
Default

Originally Posted by BoilerUP View Post
I'd take that bet.

Look at FAR 25 and the redundancies required in transport aircraft for...then square that with reducing redundancy from eliminating pilots.

Also consider the required reliability of infrastructure involved, both in airframes and ground equipment like datalink. How would MELs work?
This. The devil is in the details. We have not been on board to hand-fly the plane for a long time. We are onboard to make decisions and provide redundancy.

Can it be done today? Yes

Can it be done today with Equivalent Safety? No. The last 0.001% is the real hurdle, and that's where humans come in. We're flexible and creative, and AI isn't there yet.

Can it be done economically today? No. Too much required redundancy, and too many CANX flights due to WX, MX, computer flashes a code, etc. Frankly cheaper to just pay pilots to do it for the time being.

It will have to be a special-built airliner. Just because Boeing is studying it doesn't mean they're building it, or could build it.

Once you solve all of that, you have to get regulatory approval, and re-design the ATC system. That's 30 years and about a trillion dollars right there.

I understand this is scary if you're an liberal arts major, but anybody with a background in systems engineering, computer science, or even government knows this is a lot harder of a problem than it seems.

People are OK with fatal highway accidents. But they have very low tolerance for fatal airliner accidents (it's a control thing). They will have zero tolerance for fatal accidents involving unmanned airliners. The people who would build, approve, and operate such things know this. They will most likely not launch any half-assed experiments. Long ways to go.

Big ROI on automated trucks (millions of truck drivers).

Big ROI on self-driving cars (billions of drivers, who could make better use of their time watching jerry springer).

Not much ROI on eliminating airline pilots, orders of magnitude less (fewer than 100K airline pilots in the US). But the cost of replacing us is orders of magnitude higher than for automating cars & trucks.
rickair7777 is offline  
Old 06-08-2017, 03:52 PM
  #25  
Gets Weekends Off
 
SonicFlyer's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2017
Posts: 3,595
Default

Originally Posted by PW305 View Post
Just because something is technologically feasible doesn't mean the economics will make sense. Just look at the Concorde. I bet every new pilot back in the late 60's/early 70's figured they'd be retiring on supersonic aircraft.
Economics (and government) got in the way: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1QEj09Pe6k
SonicFlyer is offline  
Old 06-08-2017, 03:53 PM
  #26  
Gets Weekends Off
 
SonicFlyer's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2017
Posts: 3,595
Default

Originally Posted by atpcliff View Post
This is a big reason why we need GBI (Guaranteed Basic Income). When almost no one has a job, due to automation/AI, people will need money to live on, and to buy stuff.
Uh no... that's not how it works. I love Star Trek as much as the next nerd but their portrayal of economics is completely off.

Someone has to design the AI, the machines, build them, test them, install them, monitor them, and repair them. Those are all new jobs.
SonicFlyer is offline  
Old 06-08-2017, 04:26 PM
  #27  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Dec 2014
Posts: 532
Default

Originally Posted by SonicFlyer View Post
Economics (and government) got in the way: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1QEj09Pe6k
The inaccuracies in that video were too many to count.
Whiplash6 is offline  
Old 06-08-2017, 06:38 PM
  #28  
Gets Weekends Off
 
SeeDub's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: Finally Facing Forward
Posts: 216
Default

Originally Posted by BoilerUP View Post
I'd take that bet.

Look at FAR 25 and the redundancies required in transport aircraft for...then square that with reducing redundancy from eliminating pilots.

Also consider the required reliability of infrastructure involved, both in airframes and ground equipment like datalink. How would MELs work?
Me too, mainly for the same reason FedEx was still flying 727s up until several years ago.
SeeDub is offline  
Old 06-08-2017, 07:09 PM
  #29  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
Joined APC: Feb 2013
Posts: 1,339
Default

Originally Posted by 742Dash View Post
...
And it is a mistake to assume that technology will advance quickly. History shows it advancing in spasms, with periods of rapid advance followed by a dramatic slowing and sometimes even stagnation. Aviation itself being a prime example.
This happened on December 17, 1903!



So in 114 years we went from a 120' long hop across a remote field in North Carolina to transcontinental flights and space shuttles roaming the space.
I'd say history shows something vastly opposite to what you're describing.

I didn't start this thread because I believe 'the sky is falling' the way boiler implied. I simply think that young people contemplating aviation as their profession need to be aware of the possibility they'll be flying single-seat, long haul flights 25-35 years down the road with a monitoring pilot assisting from the ground.
Again, I didn't say tomorrow but yes, one day it'll become inevitable. ..and several decades later even this single-pilot job will become obsolete.

Maybe some of the former navigators and flight engineers would've selected a different career path had they been able to predict the rapid advancement of aircraft technology?

.

Last edited by whalesurfer; 06-08-2017 at 07:36 PM.
whalesurfer is offline  
Old 06-08-2017, 08:01 PM
  #30  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jul 2016
Posts: 463
Default

Originally Posted by Whiplash6 View Post
Sully waited 10 seconds to make a response and landed on a river.
And saved everyone on board. Don't tell me a computer could do that. The only way this will happen is if airlines are dumb enough to assume the immense risks with this. Wait till one of these kills 200 passengers in the middle of America. Cargo maybe, pax? More than a century away.
C130driver is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
BMEP100
United
109
01-19-2016 02:41 PM
edik
Major
1
04-28-2006 02:44 PM
Was That For Us?
Major
0
10-20-2005 09:55 PM
Sir James
Major
1
10-09-2005 06:08 PM
Freighter Captain
Cargo
0
09-14-2005 10:35 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices