rickair7777

Not in our lifetime, from an engineering standpoint it's possible but hideously expensive. It would take a government-funded manhattan project, which ain't in the cards.

Total electrical failure highlights one of the engineering challenges...you would need MASSIVE redundancy which means weight and money. Then you would have severe operational challenges...almost all systems MEL's would be no-go items with an auto-airliner. Not only would you need extra redundant system components they would have to be built and maintained like spacecraft...in a clean room.

An automated airliner is comparable in engineering scope to a communication or spy satellite...which can cost about $1 billion.

hurricanechaser

I agree with you that it might be far off, maybe 100 years into the future. But then again my grandfather saw Mule to Moon. Literally he saw horseback and buggy, before the first car hit the road, to a Saturn V rocket being launched to the moon. He was born before the Wright brothers decided to come up with this contraption called a self powered airplane and lived to see regular scheduled shuttle launches.

My point is this is definitely possible in at least my lifetime to see. The problem with the Government implementing the ADS-B system is the GOVERNMENT. Give me some like minded individuals with a can do attitude and this will be possible.

When I implement this unmanned airplane to the Public. I will first go the route of doing military cargo operations first like RickAir7777 mentioned. Then move on to selling an unmanned airplane for International routes and civilian cargo routes that are the most profitable. Before trickling down to domestic routes.



Why Not???

rickair7777

That's a good example of the scope of the project. It cost a fantastic amount of money and incidentally employed a lot of people. But we did to beat the russians. I don't think we have a compelling reason to spend trillions of dollars to get rid of 100,000 airline pilots in short order. Eventually the natural progression of technology will enable unmanned airliners, but don't think anyone is going to pay a premium to rush that technology along. Nobody benefits but the airlines, and they can't see any further ahead than their next earnings call. No airline manager is going spend ludicrous amounts of money on something that is not going to pay off during his own tenure.

hurricanechaser

A trillion dollars would not be neccessary. The total cost of the Saturn V program in todays inflation adjusted dollars is $43 billion. Our GDP today stands at 14 trillion. A program like the Saturn V would be less than 1% of GDP.

The government could easily finances a 43 billion dollar program if its spread out over the ten year period that the Saturn V took.

Now lets look at the cost of the Pilot Population. Average salaries cost a company $60,000 for a pilot. If we take your 100,000 pilot estimate. That's an annual cost of $6 billion just to pay salaries alone.

If the airlines could save $6 billion a year the program would pay for itself in 7-8 years if it costs $43 billion.

Obviously a program like this would start in the military first. They always will be the test bed for new technologies. However regulatory wise , it shouldn't be a problem if the airplane can think, react and use its artificial intelligence to communicate its intentions and fly the plane like a human could. If the plane can talk to air traffic controllers it can be handled the same way a human operated plane would be handled.

As far as infrastructure goes. I thought we already had airports and runways? Am I missing something here?

Elvis90

The current reliability of Air Force unmanned systems falls very short of current safety rates for airlines. If the FAA could ensure that unmanned systems met those safety standards, then the general public would have to get over its fear of the HAL9000 being their pilot. Plus...current Air Force automated systems still require pilots to fly them from ground stations. I still maintain that a Star Trek transporter would make more sense.

rickair7777

You have a gross lack of depth in your understanding of engineering and how the infrastructure works. $6 Billion? You are out of your mind! $600 billion wouldn't even begin to be enough. It took more than $6B just to design the 787!

Every step of the way from gate-to-gate requires human interaction. Unless the airplane can talk on the radio and think just like a human you will need automation interfaces for pushback, taxi, ATC, enroute separation, and gate arrival. None of these things exist

Not sure where you get your numbers, but you CANNNOT, with any technology we have today or have in the works, build an automated airliner for the same cost as a manned airliner. This is due to the extreme levels of reliability and redundancy which would be required to achieve current safety metrics. The only comparable system from an engineering and manufacturing perspective is a comm or spy satellite ($$$$).

Sorry, but the military is not going to help you out. We have gained great operational utility out of the unmanned fleet but it is not cheaper (yet) than manned systems. They have also lost about 50% of the fleet to accidents in ten years (and a tiny handful to hostile fire).

The military has ZERO interest in un-piloted pax aircraft with the possible exception of last-resort tactical medvac (I am in a position to know that for sure). The military operates a relatively small number of pax transports, and will certainly not send soldiers into a combat zone without a live pilot up front. They know better than that, the public backlash following the first crash would be catastrophic. Cargo, yes, but only in very controlled environments. It's going to be up to the airlines and boeing to pave the way for pax and cargo in civilian airspace.

Winged Wheeler

Just a thumbnail analysis, but here goes:

From 1903 to the mid 1950s we went from the Wright Flyer to the (commercial) 707 and many supersonic military craft. There were qualitative improvements in thrust, range, size, speed, aerodynmaic control, etc.

Since the mid 1950s I would argue that the improvemnets have been quantitative, but not qualitative (an A380 follows logically from a 707 but is not revolutionary).

The FAA was created in the mid 1950s as well. The supervision by gov't has made aviation much safer, but this has retarded progress.

The pilotless craft will never come unless we change our acceptable level of risk (and the regulatory oversight that follows from it).

I'm not promoting less safety--simply stating that TANSTAAFL.

WW

Radials Rule

Would HAL be programmed to check jumpseaters against scab lists?

.....not that any pilot in their right mind would want to ride on one of these things anyway.

Elvis90

Dave Bowman: Hello, HAL. Do you read me, HAL?
HAL: Affirmative, Dave. I read you.
Dave Bowman: Open the pod bay doors, HAL.
HAL: I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that.
Dave Bowman: What's the problem?
HAL: I think you know what the problem is just as well as I do.
Dave Bowman: What are you talking about, HAL?
HAL: This mission is too important for me to allow you to jeopardize it.
Dave Bowman: I don't know what you're talking about, HAL.
HAL: I know that you and Frank were planning to disconnect me, and I'm afraid that's something I cannot allow to happen.
Dave Bowman: [feining ingorance] Where the hell did you get that idea, HAL?
HAL: Dave, although you took very thorough precautions in the pod against my hearing you, I could see your lips move.
Dave Bowman: Alright, HAL. I'll go in through the emergency airlock.
HAL: Without your space helmet, Dave? You're going to find that rather difficult.
Dave Bowman: HAL, I won't argue with you anymore! Open the doors!
HAL: Dave, this conversation can serve no purpose anymore. Goodbye.

LowSlowT2

When does Skynet take over again?