You would need so much more than just a remote control link to the autopilot. That is in no way remotely near reliable and redundant enough for 121 ops. Ever. You would need full and massively redundant control of every function every switch, button, handle, lever, stick and rudder function to make this feasable for the single pilot ops fantasy.

Saying the technology has existed for a while doesn't bolster your argument at all. Of course they *could* do it. But in order to do it the end costs would be light years ahead of paying for the FO. Not even close to happening outside of airshows and MBA projects.

 

My bet still remains on them figuring out a way to make a 3 or 4 man augmented crew into a 2 man crew.

So 2 man until TOC then single pilot with ground link until TOD then back to 2 man.

 

So let me get this straight.... (this is all based on pilotless)


Say someone perfects the technology to have a of pilot-less 121 aircraft,

Then say someone also perfects the technology for the logistical requirements needed on the ground, in the air, space, ect...

Then you convince Boeing or Airbus to invest the multi billion dollars and years to develop a new aircraft,

Then after said company is done developing this aircraft and find somewhere to do the testing of the automation, (this is after they just make sure it can fly) because as previously stated additional ground aids are going to be necessary

Then they finally work out the kinks of getting the real kids to play nice in the sky and on the ground with the pretend kids,

Then you convince the FAA to approve it,

Then you convince congress to approve the billions of dollars to add all of this technology and training to the ATC system and Airports,

Then the company creates a TV show to convince the public they are safe and there is some chance people will fly on them,

Then you somehow convince an airline to buy a few of them....

Whats to stop the pilot groups from saying nope, were not flying in the sky with those things?


Could be way in left field, but i think its a long shot for quite a while. not saying the technology isn't around to make it reliable. But who knows... could be the next internet.

 

Lol....yep, just 10, 20, 50 years away.

Get ready!!

 

That's not the way it would be phased in, the updates would come first to existing aircraft in the form of a new type of predictive TCAS. The ATC system is then updated. All of this is going on while aircraft remain dual pilot. Then the autopilots on existing aircraft are updated to take advantage of the new TCAS/ATC system allowing them to go direct everywhere. When the system proves reliable, then the second pilot is eliminated because the workload is such that a second pilot isn't needed. In the event of pilot incapacitation, an FA could take over the controls, and be talked down, there is no need for all this redundancy as stated above.

Thus, single pilot will come out of automation required to deal with congested airspace, not because the airlines are eliminating pilots. Initially, you will have to add a third pilot to the ground to handle the transition to single pilot.

 

Here's a taste of what the general public out there is reading right now...

It's Time For Robot Pilots

It's Time For Robot Pilots | Motherboard




And people wonder why the mgmt bloodsuckers always get the better 1/2 of the bargaining agreement.

 

I was waiting for someone to post something from Missy Cummings. She's a USNA grad and former F/A-18 pilot who's been working pilotless aircraft for a while; she's really pushing for a pilotless future. Unfortunately, this crap is much closer to reality than most on this thread realize.

I read some of her stuff indicating that the first implementation of this concept will be in freighters, so UPS and FedEx pilots will be the first to lose their jobs due to this.

This technology's already being deployed in drone aircraft. We've got guys sitting in the Nevada desert controlling drones in the Middle East so many of the logistical challenges have already been overcome.
The fly in the ointment is high number of drone accidents. Crashes mount as military flies more drones in U.S. | The Washington Post

 

The military drones have a very different mission, and are far and way more complicated than a single pilot aircraft would need to be.

I don't know why we are having an argument about whether the tech exists or not, it most certainly does. With 3D chips, machine learning computers are about the size of an iPhone, and cost less than $500 to make. 5 years ago, it would have taken the computer the size of a football field, and $10 million plus to drive a car by itself. The technology for single pilot has been here only very recently. The focus should be on making sure we don't allow the regs to change to make this possible. If the FAA allows 121 single pilot, in 5 years we will be transitioning to single pilot, count on it, even the current fleet can be retrofitted for single pilot in just a few years.

 

I saw her little piece on CNNMoney. You're right, the problem is datalink loss. I can't tell you how many times I've seen drones taxi right off the runway or land rather firmly.

One thing that I have yet to really see is the sense of self-preservation. A pilot has a sense of self-preservation, he will do all he can to prevent an accident. May not work, or he may make things worse, but if a drone pilot has an issue, it's like "eh" and he drives off home. No harm, no foul, a drone pilot doesn't lose his life. And don't believe it'll be one drone pilot in charge of one drone plane, you'll likely see one drone pilot controlling ten, then twenty then many, many more aircraft.

 

They won't.