What Single Pilot Looks Like
09-16-2019, 01:19 PM
#1
On Reserve
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jun 2019
Posts: 11
What Single Pilot Looks Like
It’s Wednesday. Gary shows up to the dispatch facility at 9am after a pleasant evening home and a good night’s sleep. Working a red-eye last weekend was rough, so the rest is welcome and he’s glad to be back on duty with a normal sleep schedule. Flying has been slightly more hectic since the FAA raised the maximum number of simultaneous Pilot on Ground (PoG) flights from four to five, but still not bad. His first flight is PM Express flight 42, departing JFK at 10:15am to Atlanta. Gary is about an hour early, which is the company’s required show time for a pilot’s first assigned flight of the day. In the case of the PoG position, however, he’ll be looking over his later flights in addition to Flight 42.
Preparation will include reviewing the day’s weather, pushing flight releases (generated by dispatch) to the Pilot on Board’s (PoB) EFB and aircraft, looking at MELs, fuel loads, etc. - everything an airline pilot does before flight, but from his desk with the coffee machine only a few steps away.
Samantha is arriving for work as well. She’s JFK-based and just took the Q10+ shuttle from Kew Gardens to operate Flight 42. Sam isn’t PoG qualified yet and is also a commuter, so has no desire to “fly the desk”. All of the company’s dispatch facilities are located in its hubs and, despite the pay bump, Sam would rather live where she wants, so only bids PoB trips despite having the requisite 1,500 hours in type to undertake PoG training. The FAA has decided that pilots should have an intimate familiarity with the aircraft in flight before taking on PoG duties, hence the flight hour requirements.
Sam also arrived at about 9am and plans to stop for coffee, and then head to the gate. While walking through the airport a chime sounds from her bag. She forgot to put her EFB on silent mode and correctly guesses that her PoG has just pushed the release to the device. No rush, though. There’s still plenty of time to get to the gate, and she saw on her schedule this morning that she’d be paired with Gary, who’s pretty easy going.
Upon reaching Gate 19, Sam sees that the gate agent hasn’t arrived yet. Not a problem. Face identification allows her to open the door and head down the jetway. The aircraft is powered down with jetway power connected and a timestamped “walk around slip” connected to the aircraft maintenance logbook. Since switching to single-pilot operations, most airlines now have maintenance perform the external preflight inspection to reduce workload, though some old school types still like to do it themselves. It’s hot, so Sam chooses to stay inside and power up the plane.
After doing so, she checks the weather and MELs (none today), and looks over the release, comparing the flight plan with what’s seen on the aircraft’s FMS. Everything was automatically pushed to the aircraft by Gary once he received notification that it was connected to the network. On the chat window of the Auxiliary Flight Display, Sam sees that Gary has logged in to the flight. They briefly exchange pleasantries and talk about the trip. The aircraft has a pull-out, full keyboard, which makes communication a cinch compared to the old, slow alphabetical FMS keyboards. Still, it was decided that the Dvorak keyboard would be used on aircraft over the common Qwerty layout to help prevent mistakes. Some pilots joke that the hardest part of flight training these days is learning the Dvorak layout. The clearance won’t be available for a bit, so sam gets up to top off her coffee and greet the passengers.
30 minutes before departure, Sam returns to the flight deck to see that the clearance has been received and accepted by Gary, who uploaded the changes to the FMS. There’s a small area of weather off the departure end of the runway, so vectors were given around the weather in lieu of the SID. “Vectors” is a dated term, though. In this case, a series of points were uploaded that will take the aircraft around the weather. These can be updated on the fly by ATC as conditions change and act as a sort of movable SID that departing aircraft can follow. When the times comes, Sam can always use manual heading, but the system works well and this probably won’t be necessary.
Two gates down, Gary is operating another flight that departs a few minutes after Flight 42. With a number of monitors in front of him, each flight has room for its own window. In fact, the FAA mandates that the flight information window (FIW) be displayed at all times for each aircraft in flight. On the ground, Gary can organize his flights with a tabbed setup, similar to your internet browser, but he usually just leaves the windows open. A column of chat windows connected to each PoB also remains open, which are color coded for phase of flight: Gate, Taxi, Takeoff, Climb, Cruise, Descent Approach, Landing Taxi - an added bit of situational awareness, accompanying the many other similarly purposed on-screen elements.
The FIW contains all flight parameters, displayed in the same manner that they’re seen on the aircraft, along with autopilot status, system screens, and EICAS/ECAM messages. Flight planning, descent and traffic management screens are also available to help with the “big picture”, along with front, rear and side-facing cameras. All of this is provided at extremely low latency thanks to full implementation of FANS-1/A.
Gary has numerous options with which to control the aircraft: Course changes can be made with simple point and click actions on a moving map, SIDs, STARs and approaches are available via a menu or can be typed directly into the FMS. A flight control panel similar to the aircraft’s is available for simple heading and altitude changes and, if absolutely necessary, Gary has a side stick available for manual control. Hand flying by the PoG is uncommon and usually only used in special emergency situations, yet Gary is proficient in manual remote flight thanks to the FAA requirement for monthly manually flown remote approaches, which can be simulated directly from his workstation.
Under normal operations, in-flight control is left to the PoB, with the PoG simply pushing changes to the the aircraft’s FMS to then be accepted by the PoB. On long flights of the type that once required augmented crewing, control is handed over to the PoG during PoB rest, which provides for almost a full night’s sleep on long overnight flights. Often, the PoG will change mid-flight on long international routes.
Sam sees that the aircraft’s cargo doors are being closed and that boarding is complete. She gets up quickly to use the restroom one last time and, upon returning, see that the passenger and bag information has been pushed to the EFB, which has also arrived on Gary’s computer. Each pilot reviews and approves the information before it’s sent to the FMS along with the associated performance data. If either disapproves, the other will be notified and they can communicate about the issue.
With doors closed, performance data calculated and boarding complete, the ramp controller receives notification that PM 42 is ready for push. This is also indicated by a green light on the self-park display at the gate. A push location is received and automatically loaded via CPDLC and, upon release of the parking brake, the auto-tug begins to move the aircraft. The process can be aborted at any time by the ramp controller, PoB or PoG. Below-wing supervisors patrol the area, but no wing walkers or push crew are necessary.
Fuel-saving autonomous taxi is in the works at JFK, however, return-to-base tracks for the auto-tugs have yet to be constructed there. These are narrow roads, usually installed parallel to taxiways and, sometimes, at new airports or during major overhauls, through tunnels, allowing the auto-tugs to quickly return to the ramp area. Normal taxiways can also be used by the tugs, though this method is less efficient due to aircraft traffic. JFK’s lack of RTB tracks makes it one of the most expensive major airports in the world, from a fuel burn standpoint, out of which to operate.
Today’s taxi is relatively short, so Sam starts both engines during push - a common occurrence these days thanks to the strong torque of the electric tugs. Meanwhile, Gary is again reviewing load and performance data, this time for his second flight, which is now getting ready to push.
After start, a “TO CONFIG” notification appears on the AFD. This is extinguished when Sam selects “TO” on the FMS Configuration page. Doing so automatically configures the aircraft trim and flap setting for takeoff. Flap lever movement isn’t necessary, as none exists, replaced by a row of buttons (two, actually, for redundancy) that illuminate to correspond to the current flap position.
When ready to taxi, Sam sends notification, again via CPDLC, to JFK Ground Control. From Ground, she receives full taxi instructions, displayed on MFD and EFB. Taxi occurs the “old fashioned” way, with the tiller and thrust. During taxi, the PoG will monitor the aircraft’s position, but the aircraft itself can provide warnings if straying from the designated taxi route. Updates to routing, runway crossing instructions, EDCT, departure sequence, etc. are all provided electronically without radio communication.
Nearing the runway, both pilots receive notification to monitor the tower radio frequency, however, Sam was already listening to tower. This is the only standard radio communication that still takes place during taxi. It’s done to provide maximum situational awareness for aircraft taking off and landing. Gary doesn’t listen, as it would interfere with his other flight, though he does have a better view of the surrounding traffic, Flight 42’s location and general situation. Holding short, the flight is eventually told to line up and wait and then cleared for takeoff. Moving the thrust levers to the ‘Auto’ detent, the engines come to life and the takeoff roll begins. A “beam” of sorts is projected down the runway, which the aircraft uses to maintain centerline.
“V1, rotate,” says the aircraft’s computer, at which point Sam adds back pressure to the side stick as the flight gradually slips the surly bonds. After takeoff, if the AP Inhibit button isn’t selected, the AP will automatically take over at 400 feet. Sam is now flying the aircraft “with the box”. As anticipated, slightly updated vectors arrive to navigate around the weather and are accepted by Sam. Similar to the taxi route, all ATC instructions in flight arrive electronically for Sam to accept or reject. The aircraft follows the designated path around a small storm cell before joining the filed SID. Manual heading mode is always available if needed, and if a number of aircraft are taking weather avoidance action ATC can update the provided flight path. No ATC notification is necessary when going off course, as each plane is a node in a network. The system will update the path of other aircraft, if necessary, to accommodate your choice. Still, it’s understood that operators will stay on course as much as possible.
On reaching the end of the SID, aircraft control is handed over to ATL to coordinate arrivals. It’s a busy day, so speed is immediately adjusted to Mach .73 for cruise. The PoG and PoB each have the ability to reject this change once it’s received, but changes provided by ATC during cruise are otherwise automatically accepted. Sam notices the change, takes no action and reviews the associated updates to flight time and fuel calculations. It’s still a relatively short flight and slower speed offers a more efficient fuel burn, so Sam isn’t too concerned about the change.
The route was forecast to be somewhat turbulent. On the ground, Gary is looking at real-time turbulence information shared via auto-PIREP from other aircraft along the route. He sends a chat message to Sam about the bumps, who had also been reviewing the weather. Gary can see that on screen that FL320 will be available in five minutes, allowing the aircraft to descend to a smoother altitude without contacting ATC. After a short time, he selects FL320, Sam is notified and accepts the change and the aircraft begins its descent at 1000 feet per minute.
En route, Same reviews the arrival procedures and spends a little time reading a book she brought along. At a glance, she can see any potential traffic conflicts long before they occur, and without the need for radio calls or off-course weather diversions there isn’t much to do during cruise. In fact, the FAA recommends that those in PoB position occupy themselves in cruise. The human mind can’t remain alert while sitting idly or staring at unchanging screens, and without another pilot to talk with, long flights locked in the flight deck can be difficult. Fortunately, Sam is never without her books, periodicals and notes from an online class she’s taking. Meanwhile, Gary is busy working his four other flights. This higher workload is why the PoG duties tend to be slightly higher paying, though some say the comfort of the office and shorter workday negate the justification for better compensation.
As Flight 42 nears the beginning of the STAR, Sam receives one more speed change from ATC. Another arrival must have gone off course, necessitating the change. This precise en route spacing allows the full STAR procedure to be flown without inefficient vectors or last-minute adjustments at low altitude. Like the departure, real-time changes can be made by ATC to direct the line of arriving aircraft around weather, or pull individual aircraft off course to improve spacing. Similar to cruise instructions, these adjustments occur automatically unless rejected by either crew member. ATC is, in part, guiding the plane.
At the calculated top-of-descent point, the aircraft’s thrust is reduced to idle as it gradually pitches down. No “descend via” clearance required. Procedurally, it’s simply understood that this will occur. Atlanta weather and landing data has already been pushed to the FMS and EFB, and reviewed by both pilots. The PoG and PoB chatted (via chat window) about potentially gusty winds while in cruise and decided on a reduced flap setting for landing. Finally, when all communication and setup related to the approach is determined to be complete, each pilot signals their agreement with a digital “signature”, officially ending the briefing.
Passing through FL180, Sam verifies that the aircraft’s altimeter setting has automatically changed to the local setting, and through 10,000 feet, the flight attendants will normally receive an automated chime. Today, however, the PoG communicated with them before the descent began about the possibility of turbulence on the descent and manually activated the chime early.
Up to this point, the aircraft has continued to descend via the STAR. One last opportunity for spacing adjustment is a change to the radius of the turn to final, which is an RNP-style descending turn. On the MFD, Sam sees a slight adjustment to this turn with a with a widened radius displayed via dotted line next to the current course. She accepts the change. For safety reasons, a change such as this can also be calculated and recommended by the aircraft’s computer in the unlikely event that ATC updates aren’t received. Standard spacing is 3.5 miles at all times, whether in visual or instrument conditions. Visual approaches are no longer a normal procedure for Part 121 operations, and with aircraft descending almost directly to the runway from cruise, a visual approach would add neither speed or efficiency.
RNP status of the GPS signal has been continuously monitored throughout the STAR. Below 10,000 feet, the signal is augmented by a ground-based system. Operation can continue on either system alone in the event of signal loss, but under normal conditions the two are used together. On reaching the initial approach fix, the PoB and PoG can assume that the aircraft has been cleared fro the approach, indicated by a lack of communication from ATC.
As PoG, it’s Garys’ responsibility to monitor the aircraft’s progress along with Sam while on approach. If it’s anticipated that more than one of his flights will be in this phase of flight at the same time, another PoG will take over. Today, all of his other flights are still in cruise.
Descent was calculated to allow the aircraft to slow and reach landing configuration by by the final configuration point (FCP) - a newly created fix designation. This process is also automated, with each step occurring on schedule, preceded by a configuration chime. As the landing gear is extended and final flap position selected at SCHEL, both pilots closely monitor the GPS status along with the flight instruments. Ceilings are a little low today at 500 feet AGL, but Sam and Gary can both see the runway and preceding aircraft on infrared. At this point in the approach, even if all GPS data is lost, the aircraft can stay on course using its array of LiDar, radar, ultrasound and cameras, similar to the sensors found on self-driving cars. Essentially, it’s “locked on” to its view of the runway environment. The loss of precision in this case is negligible, however, Sam might choose to manually land the aircraft if this were to occur. Today, no such action is necessary and PM 42 will commence with an auto-land, which is SOP for PM Express.
Nearing the runway, the aircraft transitions to Land Mode and is committed to landing. A manual go-around would be required at this point, which includes a brief hand-flown segment before the autopilot takes over again at 400 feet. No missed approach will be required and the aircraft continues to make an accurate, though somewhat firm, landing in the touchdown zone. Brakes are applied along with thrust reversers and spoilers to bring the aircraft to a controllable speed by the pre-selected taxiway.
Sam takes the tiller and makes a gradual right turn onto taxiway B11. Her taxi route is already displayed on the MFD. Another right on taxiway B brings the aircraft to an auto-tug hold short point, where the waiting tug moves from the RTB track to the front of the aircraft and quickly scoops up the nose wheel into its shallow bucket. While Sam is monitoring the tug, Gary starts the APU and, with a single click, executes the after landing configuration. Sam shuts down both engines for an efficient taxi once APU power becomes available.
The trip to the gate is uneventful. Not all aircraft are under the control of an auto-tug, but each is being coordinated by the same surface traffic management system. Sam monitors her progress all the way to the gate, where the aircraft is parked without the need for wing walkers or a marshaller. After the parking brake is set, Sam is prompted with a “Complete Flight?” message on the AFD. On responding in the affirmative, all final parking items are configured.
This aircraft is returning to JFK in 45 minutes. Rather than wait for its next departure, the PoG will be paired with another flight. Sam and Gary exchange a “so long” via chat and, and after spending some time saying goodbye to the passengers, Sam rushes into the terminal to quickly buy lunch before the next flight.
Preparation will include reviewing the day’s weather, pushing flight releases (generated by dispatch) to the Pilot on Board’s (PoB) EFB and aircraft, looking at MELs, fuel loads, etc. - everything an airline pilot does before flight, but from his desk with the coffee machine only a few steps away.
Samantha is arriving for work as well. She’s JFK-based and just took the Q10+ shuttle from Kew Gardens to operate Flight 42. Sam isn’t PoG qualified yet and is also a commuter, so has no desire to “fly the desk”. All of the company’s dispatch facilities are located in its hubs and, despite the pay bump, Sam would rather live where she wants, so only bids PoB trips despite having the requisite 1,500 hours in type to undertake PoG training. The FAA has decided that pilots should have an intimate familiarity with the aircraft in flight before taking on PoG duties, hence the flight hour requirements.
Sam also arrived at about 9am and plans to stop for coffee, and then head to the gate. While walking through the airport a chime sounds from her bag. She forgot to put her EFB on silent mode and correctly guesses that her PoG has just pushed the release to the device. No rush, though. There’s still plenty of time to get to the gate, and she saw on her schedule this morning that she’d be paired with Gary, who’s pretty easy going.
Upon reaching Gate 19, Sam sees that the gate agent hasn’t arrived yet. Not a problem. Face identification allows her to open the door and head down the jetway. The aircraft is powered down with jetway power connected and a timestamped “walk around slip” connected to the aircraft maintenance logbook. Since switching to single-pilot operations, most airlines now have maintenance perform the external preflight inspection to reduce workload, though some old school types still like to do it themselves. It’s hot, so Sam chooses to stay inside and power up the plane.
After doing so, she checks the weather and MELs (none today), and looks over the release, comparing the flight plan with what’s seen on the aircraft’s FMS. Everything was automatically pushed to the aircraft by Gary once he received notification that it was connected to the network. On the chat window of the Auxiliary Flight Display, Sam sees that Gary has logged in to the flight. They briefly exchange pleasantries and talk about the trip. The aircraft has a pull-out, full keyboard, which makes communication a cinch compared to the old, slow alphabetical FMS keyboards. Still, it was decided that the Dvorak keyboard would be used on aircraft over the common Qwerty layout to help prevent mistakes. Some pilots joke that the hardest part of flight training these days is learning the Dvorak layout. The clearance won’t be available for a bit, so sam gets up to top off her coffee and greet the passengers.
30 minutes before departure, Sam returns to the flight deck to see that the clearance has been received and accepted by Gary, who uploaded the changes to the FMS. There’s a small area of weather off the departure end of the runway, so vectors were given around the weather in lieu of the SID. “Vectors” is a dated term, though. In this case, a series of points were uploaded that will take the aircraft around the weather. These can be updated on the fly by ATC as conditions change and act as a sort of movable SID that departing aircraft can follow. When the times comes, Sam can always use manual heading, but the system works well and this probably won’t be necessary.
Two gates down, Gary is operating another flight that departs a few minutes after Flight 42. With a number of monitors in front of him, each flight has room for its own window. In fact, the FAA mandates that the flight information window (FIW) be displayed at all times for each aircraft in flight. On the ground, Gary can organize his flights with a tabbed setup, similar to your internet browser, but he usually just leaves the windows open. A column of chat windows connected to each PoB also remains open, which are color coded for phase of flight: Gate, Taxi, Takeoff, Climb, Cruise, Descent Approach, Landing Taxi - an added bit of situational awareness, accompanying the many other similarly purposed on-screen elements.
The FIW contains all flight parameters, displayed in the same manner that they’re seen on the aircraft, along with autopilot status, system screens, and EICAS/ECAM messages. Flight planning, descent and traffic management screens are also available to help with the “big picture”, along with front, rear and side-facing cameras. All of this is provided at extremely low latency thanks to full implementation of FANS-1/A.
Gary has numerous options with which to control the aircraft: Course changes can be made with simple point and click actions on a moving map, SIDs, STARs and approaches are available via a menu or can be typed directly into the FMS. A flight control panel similar to the aircraft’s is available for simple heading and altitude changes and, if absolutely necessary, Gary has a side stick available for manual control. Hand flying by the PoG is uncommon and usually only used in special emergency situations, yet Gary is proficient in manual remote flight thanks to the FAA requirement for monthly manually flown remote approaches, which can be simulated directly from his workstation.
Under normal operations, in-flight control is left to the PoB, with the PoG simply pushing changes to the the aircraft’s FMS to then be accepted by the PoB. On long flights of the type that once required augmented crewing, control is handed over to the PoG during PoB rest, which provides for almost a full night’s sleep on long overnight flights. Often, the PoG will change mid-flight on long international routes.
Sam sees that the aircraft’s cargo doors are being closed and that boarding is complete. She gets up quickly to use the restroom one last time and, upon returning, see that the passenger and bag information has been pushed to the EFB, which has also arrived on Gary’s computer. Each pilot reviews and approves the information before it’s sent to the FMS along with the associated performance data. If either disapproves, the other will be notified and they can communicate about the issue.
With doors closed, performance data calculated and boarding complete, the ramp controller receives notification that PM 42 is ready for push. This is also indicated by a green light on the self-park display at the gate. A push location is received and automatically loaded via CPDLC and, upon release of the parking brake, the auto-tug begins to move the aircraft. The process can be aborted at any time by the ramp controller, PoB or PoG. Below-wing supervisors patrol the area, but no wing walkers or push crew are necessary.
Fuel-saving autonomous taxi is in the works at JFK, however, return-to-base tracks for the auto-tugs have yet to be constructed there. These are narrow roads, usually installed parallel to taxiways and, sometimes, at new airports or during major overhauls, through tunnels, allowing the auto-tugs to quickly return to the ramp area. Normal taxiways can also be used by the tugs, though this method is less efficient due to aircraft traffic. JFK’s lack of RTB tracks makes it one of the most expensive major airports in the world, from a fuel burn standpoint, out of which to operate.
Today’s taxi is relatively short, so Sam starts both engines during push - a common occurrence these days thanks to the strong torque of the electric tugs. Meanwhile, Gary is again reviewing load and performance data, this time for his second flight, which is now getting ready to push.
After start, a “TO CONFIG” notification appears on the AFD. This is extinguished when Sam selects “TO” on the FMS Configuration page. Doing so automatically configures the aircraft trim and flap setting for takeoff. Flap lever movement isn’t necessary, as none exists, replaced by a row of buttons (two, actually, for redundancy) that illuminate to correspond to the current flap position.
When ready to taxi, Sam sends notification, again via CPDLC, to JFK Ground Control. From Ground, she receives full taxi instructions, displayed on MFD and EFB. Taxi occurs the “old fashioned” way, with the tiller and thrust. During taxi, the PoG will monitor the aircraft’s position, but the aircraft itself can provide warnings if straying from the designated taxi route. Updates to routing, runway crossing instructions, EDCT, departure sequence, etc. are all provided electronically without radio communication.
Nearing the runway, both pilots receive notification to monitor the tower radio frequency, however, Sam was already listening to tower. This is the only standard radio communication that still takes place during taxi. It’s done to provide maximum situational awareness for aircraft taking off and landing. Gary doesn’t listen, as it would interfere with his other flight, though he does have a better view of the surrounding traffic, Flight 42’s location and general situation. Holding short, the flight is eventually told to line up and wait and then cleared for takeoff. Moving the thrust levers to the ‘Auto’ detent, the engines come to life and the takeoff roll begins. A “beam” of sorts is projected down the runway, which the aircraft uses to maintain centerline.
“V1, rotate,” says the aircraft’s computer, at which point Sam adds back pressure to the side stick as the flight gradually slips the surly bonds. After takeoff, if the AP Inhibit button isn’t selected, the AP will automatically take over at 400 feet. Sam is now flying the aircraft “with the box”. As anticipated, slightly updated vectors arrive to navigate around the weather and are accepted by Sam. Similar to the taxi route, all ATC instructions in flight arrive electronically for Sam to accept or reject. The aircraft follows the designated path around a small storm cell before joining the filed SID. Manual heading mode is always available if needed, and if a number of aircraft are taking weather avoidance action ATC can update the provided flight path. No ATC notification is necessary when going off course, as each plane is a node in a network. The system will update the path of other aircraft, if necessary, to accommodate your choice. Still, it’s understood that operators will stay on course as much as possible.
On reaching the end of the SID, aircraft control is handed over to ATL to coordinate arrivals. It’s a busy day, so speed is immediately adjusted to Mach .73 for cruise. The PoG and PoB each have the ability to reject this change once it’s received, but changes provided by ATC during cruise are otherwise automatically accepted. Sam notices the change, takes no action and reviews the associated updates to flight time and fuel calculations. It’s still a relatively short flight and slower speed offers a more efficient fuel burn, so Sam isn’t too concerned about the change.
The route was forecast to be somewhat turbulent. On the ground, Gary is looking at real-time turbulence information shared via auto-PIREP from other aircraft along the route. He sends a chat message to Sam about the bumps, who had also been reviewing the weather. Gary can see that on screen that FL320 will be available in five minutes, allowing the aircraft to descend to a smoother altitude without contacting ATC. After a short time, he selects FL320, Sam is notified and accepts the change and the aircraft begins its descent at 1000 feet per minute.
En route, Same reviews the arrival procedures and spends a little time reading a book she brought along. At a glance, she can see any potential traffic conflicts long before they occur, and without the need for radio calls or off-course weather diversions there isn’t much to do during cruise. In fact, the FAA recommends that those in PoB position occupy themselves in cruise. The human mind can’t remain alert while sitting idly or staring at unchanging screens, and without another pilot to talk with, long flights locked in the flight deck can be difficult. Fortunately, Sam is never without her books, periodicals and notes from an online class she’s taking. Meanwhile, Gary is busy working his four other flights. This higher workload is why the PoG duties tend to be slightly higher paying, though some say the comfort of the office and shorter workday negate the justification for better compensation.
As Flight 42 nears the beginning of the STAR, Sam receives one more speed change from ATC. Another arrival must have gone off course, necessitating the change. This precise en route spacing allows the full STAR procedure to be flown without inefficient vectors or last-minute adjustments at low altitude. Like the departure, real-time changes can be made by ATC to direct the line of arriving aircraft around weather, or pull individual aircraft off course to improve spacing. Similar to cruise instructions, these adjustments occur automatically unless rejected by either crew member. ATC is, in part, guiding the plane.
At the calculated top-of-descent point, the aircraft’s thrust is reduced to idle as it gradually pitches down. No “descend via” clearance required. Procedurally, it’s simply understood that this will occur. Atlanta weather and landing data has already been pushed to the FMS and EFB, and reviewed by both pilots. The PoG and PoB chatted (via chat window) about potentially gusty winds while in cruise and decided on a reduced flap setting for landing. Finally, when all communication and setup related to the approach is determined to be complete, each pilot signals their agreement with a digital “signature”, officially ending the briefing.
Passing through FL180, Sam verifies that the aircraft’s altimeter setting has automatically changed to the local setting, and through 10,000 feet, the flight attendants will normally receive an automated chime. Today, however, the PoG communicated with them before the descent began about the possibility of turbulence on the descent and manually activated the chime early.
Up to this point, the aircraft has continued to descend via the STAR. One last opportunity for spacing adjustment is a change to the radius of the turn to final, which is an RNP-style descending turn. On the MFD, Sam sees a slight adjustment to this turn with a with a widened radius displayed via dotted line next to the current course. She accepts the change. For safety reasons, a change such as this can also be calculated and recommended by the aircraft’s computer in the unlikely event that ATC updates aren’t received. Standard spacing is 3.5 miles at all times, whether in visual or instrument conditions. Visual approaches are no longer a normal procedure for Part 121 operations, and with aircraft descending almost directly to the runway from cruise, a visual approach would add neither speed or efficiency.
RNP status of the GPS signal has been continuously monitored throughout the STAR. Below 10,000 feet, the signal is augmented by a ground-based system. Operation can continue on either system alone in the event of signal loss, but under normal conditions the two are used together. On reaching the initial approach fix, the PoB and PoG can assume that the aircraft has been cleared fro the approach, indicated by a lack of communication from ATC.
As PoG, it’s Garys’ responsibility to monitor the aircraft’s progress along with Sam while on approach. If it’s anticipated that more than one of his flights will be in this phase of flight at the same time, another PoG will take over. Today, all of his other flights are still in cruise.
Descent was calculated to allow the aircraft to slow and reach landing configuration by by the final configuration point (FCP) - a newly created fix designation. This process is also automated, with each step occurring on schedule, preceded by a configuration chime. As the landing gear is extended and final flap position selected at SCHEL, both pilots closely monitor the GPS status along with the flight instruments. Ceilings are a little low today at 500 feet AGL, but Sam and Gary can both see the runway and preceding aircraft on infrared. At this point in the approach, even if all GPS data is lost, the aircraft can stay on course using its array of LiDar, radar, ultrasound and cameras, similar to the sensors found on self-driving cars. Essentially, it’s “locked on” to its view of the runway environment. The loss of precision in this case is negligible, however, Sam might choose to manually land the aircraft if this were to occur. Today, no such action is necessary and PM 42 will commence with an auto-land, which is SOP for PM Express.
Nearing the runway, the aircraft transitions to Land Mode and is committed to landing. A manual go-around would be required at this point, which includes a brief hand-flown segment before the autopilot takes over again at 400 feet. No missed approach will be required and the aircraft continues to make an accurate, though somewhat firm, landing in the touchdown zone. Brakes are applied along with thrust reversers and spoilers to bring the aircraft to a controllable speed by the pre-selected taxiway.
Sam takes the tiller and makes a gradual right turn onto taxiway B11. Her taxi route is already displayed on the MFD. Another right on taxiway B brings the aircraft to an auto-tug hold short point, where the waiting tug moves from the RTB track to the front of the aircraft and quickly scoops up the nose wheel into its shallow bucket. While Sam is monitoring the tug, Gary starts the APU and, with a single click, executes the after landing configuration. Sam shuts down both engines for an efficient taxi once APU power becomes available.
The trip to the gate is uneventful. Not all aircraft are under the control of an auto-tug, but each is being coordinated by the same surface traffic management system. Sam monitors her progress all the way to the gate, where the aircraft is parked without the need for wing walkers or a marshaller. After the parking brake is set, Sam is prompted with a “Complete Flight?” message on the AFD. On responding in the affirmative, all final parking items are configured.
This aircraft is returning to JFK in 45 minutes. Rather than wait for its next departure, the PoG will be paired with another flight. Sam and Gary exchange a “so long” via chat and, and after spending some time saying goodbye to the passengers, Sam rushes into the terminal to quickly buy lunch before the next flight.
09-17-2019, 07:37 AM
#3
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,252
Not a bad stab at what it might look like.
But the cost of redundancy still far outweighs the cost of a second "PoB".
Redundancy for the pilot requires one of...
a) 99.99999999% secure and 99.9999999% reliable ground-air communication system, and it needs to be broadband with streaming HD video, not just a few bytes of acars data. Also the USAF found they cannot safely land drones via SATCOM, the latency is too high for split-second reactions, so they moved contract pilots into theater so they can control them via line-of-sight at the airfield. The mission pilots stayed in CONUS, SATCOM is good enough for that.
b) An AI suitable to completely replace a human, which does not exist. Nor does anyone have an idea how to make it. And if they could make it, they have no idea how to certify it since you cannot predict exactly what it will do, it could respond differently to nearly identical situations on different days. The best idea they have so far is to use a non-deterministic model to learn how to do something (ex be a pilot), and then freeze that configuration and use it as a deterministic box which would have to be ops tested for many years to be certifiable. You could probably never be completely confident in what it will do, but maybe after millions of flight hours you can say it's good for the 10(-9) civil aviation standard. Maybe. The risk is if you go all in on that box, and then it fails, the industry is hosed... there would be no way to "tweak" such a box like MCAS, swat it on the arse, and send it back up. The entire process would start all over, with millions of hours of "IOE" required to develop confidence (ie certification) in the new configuration.
And it might need to be done for each aircraft variant, since you really have no idea what effect underlying circumstances and experiences affect the final model.
But the cost of redundancy still far outweighs the cost of a second "PoB".
Redundancy for the pilot requires one of...
a) 99.99999999% secure and 99.9999999% reliable ground-air communication system, and it needs to be broadband with streaming HD video, not just a few bytes of acars data. Also the USAF found they cannot safely land drones via SATCOM, the latency is too high for split-second reactions, so they moved contract pilots into theater so they can control them via line-of-sight at the airfield. The mission pilots stayed in CONUS, SATCOM is good enough for that.
b) An AI suitable to completely replace a human, which does not exist. Nor does anyone have an idea how to make it. And if they could make it, they have no idea how to certify it since you cannot predict exactly what it will do, it could respond differently to nearly identical situations on different days. The best idea they have so far is to use a non-deterministic model to learn how to do something (ex be a pilot), and then freeze that configuration and use it as a deterministic box which would have to be ops tested for many years to be certifiable. You could probably never be completely confident in what it will do, but maybe after millions of flight hours you can say it's good for the 10(-9) civil aviation standard. Maybe. The risk is if you go all in on that box, and then it fails, the industry is hosed... there would be no way to "tweak" such a box like MCAS, swat it on the arse, and send it back up. The entire process would start all over, with millions of hours of "IOE" required to develop confidence (ie certification) in the new configuration.
And it might need to be done for each aircraft variant, since you really have no idea what effect underlying circumstances and experiences affect the final model.
08-31-2020, 02:16 PM
#4
On Reserve
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jun 2019
Posts: 11
FedEx feeder plane takes flight without pilot aboard in test for Reliable Robotics
https://www.commercialappeal.com/sto...cs/5655258002/
08-31-2020, 03:30 PM
#5
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,252
Originally Posted by eatittom
FedEx feeder plane takes flight without pilot aboard in test for Reliable Robotics
https://www.commercialappeal.com/sto...cs/5655258002/Nothing here that hasn't been done before, the Navy's done it on an aircraft carrier.
Easy to do 99.9% of the time. It's the other 0.09% that's the real technological biatch.
08-31-2020, 05:37 PM
#6
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2011
Position: A320 FO
Posts: 846
Originally Posted by rickair7777
FDX would participate in this for no other reason than to put the fear of God in their union.
Nothing here that hasn't been done before, the Navy's done it on an aircraft carrier.
Easy to do 99.9% of the time. It's the other 0.09% that's the real technological biatch.
Nothing here that hasn't been done before, the Navy's done it on an aircraft carrier.
Easy to do 99.9% of the time. It's the other 0.09% that's the real technological biatch.
Modern soulless MBAs will spend billions with a B on cap ex to save millions with an M on labor costs. It is the way they roll. Especially if something happens to their shiny buyback scam toy. There is very little Wall Street loves more than screwing labor and automation is just the ticket.
If you are 55+ feel free to poo-poo it all day long. I suspect you are younger than that though. I put it at a 50/50 chance of affecting a 40 year old's career progression and 80/20 for a 30 year old.
Your drone example demonstrates that 1 pilot at each airport is all that is needed for LoS intervention. Add in automated ground vehicles or drone swarms and the number of airports freight haulers need to serve drops quite a bit.
I'll also point out we purposely program cell towers to ignore airborne targets because it is confusing to the algorithms when the client can 'see' so many towers. Increasing bandwidth and faster processing could change that. Communication reliability is improving.
08-31-2020, 08:21 PM
#7
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2016
Posts: 417
Originally Posted by tallpilot
I'll also point out we purposely program cell towers to ignore airborne targets because it is confusing to the algorithms when the client can 'see' so many towers.
This is a good summary for the layman - I can dig up a much more technical explanation if you need it. link
09-04-2020, 08:01 AM
#8
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,252
Originally Posted by bradthepilot
This is not accurate. Cell towers don't see very high (6,000-10,000 feet anecdotally in GA aircraft) because of the radiation pattern used by the tower antennas - think of a donut laying on it's side and you'd be close to what it looks like. There are other considerations as well that make cell service in an airplane problematic, but none of them involve cell towers being programmed to "ignore airborne targets".
This is a good summary for the layman - I can dig up a much more technical explanation if you need it. link
This is a good summary for the layman - I can dig up a much more technical explanation if you need it. link
But the towers do actually intentionally filter out signals which have too much doppler shift, since modern cell systems use very tight frequency slices to accommodate max users within the allocated freq range. A jet flies fast enough to induce enough doppler shift to get rejected by the tower because it's infringing on other user's allocated slice. The tolerance for that was set specifically to allow enough doppler shift (and maybe also system frequency slop) to accommodate users in ground vehicle, but since jets travel significantly faster than ground vehicles they can easily exceed the allowable tolerance. Doppler depends on your direction of motion relative to the tower, so it is possible on the right heading to stay within the allowable doppler shift, and also stay within a lobe long enough to get useful service (perhaps to send a text or email, but probably not long enough to have a phone conversation).
You could hypothetical fly a circle around a tower at the right distance and altitude to stay within a high lobe with zero doppler. That should give you good service, probably even up in the flight levels.
Last edited by rickair7777; 09-04-2020 at 08:36 AM.
09-04-2020, 08:32 AM
#10
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,252
Originally Posted by tallpilot
How many pilots do we need for that 0.1%? It IS coming and most of us will see some percentage of it in our lifetimes. Many will be retired; many more will be past retirement age but still working after getting screwed by multiple downturns and being in the wrong part of the wrong seniority list at the wrong time.
Modern soulless MBAs will spend billions with a B on cap ex to save millions with an M on labor costs. It is the way they roll. Especially if something happens to their shiny buyback scam toy. There is very little Wall Street loves more than screwing labor and automation is just the ticket.
If you are 55+ feel free to poo-poo it all day long. I suspect you are younger than that though. I put it at a 50/50 chance of affecting a 40 year old's career progression and 80/20 for a 30 year old.
Your drone example demonstrates that 1 pilot at each airport is all that is needed for LoS intervention. Add in automated ground vehicles or drone swarms and the number of airports freight haulers need to serve drops quite a bit.
Modern soulless MBAs will spend billions with a B on cap ex to save millions with an M on labor costs. It is the way they roll. Especially if something happens to their shiny buyback scam toy. There is very little Wall Street loves more than screwing labor and automation is just the ticket.
If you are 55+ feel free to poo-poo it all day long. I suspect you are younger than that though. I put it at a 50/50 chance of affecting a 40 year old's career progression and 80/20 for a 30 year old.
Your drone example demonstrates that 1 pilot at each airport is all that is needed for LoS intervention. Add in automated ground vehicles or drone swarms and the number of airports freight haulers need to serve drops quite a bit.
You need one of three things:
1) A generalized AI which can function as a human being in such a manner as to be certifiable. We have no idea how to do that, and we also have some serious reservations about whether we should if could.
2) A dumb automated aircraft which just flies from point A to point B mindlessly and reacts to pre-programmed events from a script. If it gets off script, it just crashes.
3) A sufficiently comms network to ensure an level of QoS and reliability that is currentl inconcievable to allow ground-based pilots to deal with emergencies.
We don't know how to do #1.
We could do #2 right now, and accept that X number of flights will end as smoking holes. You could possibly, with enough redundancy, achieve something in the ballpark of 10^-9 statistical safety, but I think you'd still be one or maybe two decimal places off. The problems are twofold, one is the cost of all the extra redundancy (and operational costs of CANX and diverts when any little redundancy is lost), the other is the psychological aspect... people like control and even if the statistics were in their favor they'd still rather have someone fighting for their lives on the way to the impact site. Many people are fearful of flying, but are perfectly happy to engage in much riskier activities (such as driving to the airport) if their hands are on the wheel.
#3 would be hideously expensive, and would require vast and redundant sat and ground based systems. Sat systems are VERY easy to jam since their power output is minuscule. We have nothing which even remotely resembles the robust comms network required, anyone who uses the mil system would consider it better than nothing but by no means comprehensive and reliable.
Recall that the military lost about half of their UAVs to non-hostile-fire accidents. But financially it made sense to have expendable, relatively cheap drones providing persistent presence over the objective. Also in some cases it was better than risking the life/capture of a human pilot. Airliners are neither cheap nor expendable.
Also I think a lot of people tend to think just because it's possible, that it's imminent. Science fiction writers accurately predicted space travel and nuclear submarines long before they were technically possible... at least 100 years early.
People also forget that even if it's possible, vast systemic changes are vastly expensive... managers will default to what they KNOW will make money next quarter, as opposed to squandering vast sums of shareholder value on risky projects which may reap big benefits for their successors years down the road. Case in point: BCA and the endless 737 upgrades...
Originally Posted by tallpilot
I'll also point out we purposely program cell towers to ignore airborne targets because it is confusing to the algorithms when the client can 'see' so many towers. Increasing bandwidth and faster processing could change that. Communication reliability is improving.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
orlandoite
Flight Schools and Training
12
06-03-2008 02:32 AM
