SWA vs FDX
11-26-2016, 10:32 AM
#51
Line Holder
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Posts: 44
Boxes vs FAs and pax is very subjective obviously.
Boxes allow you to be much more mission oriented and focused on the get from a to b stuff. It simplifies everything tremendously.
In the airlines the pax drive the mission. If you enjoy offering customer service and recognition than pax are for you.
Personally I prefer being more pilot and less concierge. The more I walk through terminals I realize I do not miss the crowds. Carrying pax that adoring audience will turn into a mob when their connection is in jeopardy. Hopefully you have competent FAs to handle the hiccups but every now and then you will get one that escalates the situation. When everything goes smoothly pax can be benign, maybe enjoyable, but when it starts to go south the bodies behind the door are a huge liability you have to responsibly manage. On the flip side at least pax don't spontaneously combust... unless they are igniting their shoes or underwear.
Boxes allow you to be much more mission oriented and focused on the get from a to b stuff. It simplifies everything tremendously.
In the airlines the pax drive the mission. If you enjoy offering customer service and recognition than pax are for you.
Personally I prefer being more pilot and less concierge. The more I walk through terminals I realize I do not miss the crowds. Carrying pax that adoring audience will turn into a mob when their connection is in jeopardy. Hopefully you have competent FAs to handle the hiccups but every now and then you will get one that escalates the situation. When everything goes smoothly pax can be benign, maybe enjoyable, but when it starts to go south the bodies behind the door are a huge liability you have to responsibly manage. On the flip side at least pax don't spontaneously combust... unless they are igniting their shoes or underwear.
11-26-2016, 12:22 PM
#52
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,013
Originally Posted by pilotnbr1
Boxes vs FAs and pax is very subjective obviously.
Boxes allow you to be much more mission oriented and focused on the get from a to b stuff. It simplifies everything tremendously.
In the airlines the pax drive the mission. If you enjoy offering customer service and recognition than pax are for you.
Personally I prefer being more pilot and less concierge. The more I walk through terminals I realize I do not miss the crowds. Carrying pax that adoring audience will turn into a mob when their connection is in jeopardy. Hopefully you have competent FAs to handle the hiccups but every now and then you will get one that escalates the situation. When everything goes smoothly pax can be benign, maybe enjoyable, but when it starts to go south the bodies behind the door are a huge liability you have to responsibly manage. On the flip side at least pax don't spontaneously combust... unless they are igniting their shoes or underwear.
Boxes allow you to be much more mission oriented and focused on the get from a to b stuff. It simplifies everything tremendously.
In the airlines the pax drive the mission. If you enjoy offering customer service and recognition than pax are for you.
Personally I prefer being more pilot and less concierge. The more I walk through terminals I realize I do not miss the crowds. Carrying pax that adoring audience will turn into a mob when their connection is in jeopardy. Hopefully you have competent FAs to handle the hiccups but every now and then you will get one that escalates the situation. When everything goes smoothly pax can be benign, maybe enjoyable, but when it starts to go south the bodies behind the door are a huge liability you have to responsibly manage. On the flip side at least pax don't spontaneously combust... unless they are igniting their shoes or underwear.
That said, I am a night owl, and my thankfully short time in the night freight world nearly killed me.
11-30-2016, 07:18 AM
#53
Line Holder
Joined APC: May 2013
Position: 737 FO
Posts: 60
Originally Posted by Drum
What's the x-wind limit on the Global Hawk again? Could I turn a 737 into a drone? Yup. Would that drone be able to operate safely in all the environmental conditions that air carriers operate in 100% - no.
The DARPA project is cute. Might have some practical applications in 20-25 years applied to military side - would expect to see perhaps a spinoff in the bomber fleets. But regularly scheduled pax operations? The underwriting alone would kill it off.
The DARPA project is cute. Might have some practical applications in 20-25 years applied to military side - would expect to see perhaps a spinoff in the bomber fleets. But regularly scheduled pax operations? The underwriting alone would kill it off.
Still think we can't be replaced by some some software? Care to guess what kind of wx mins this thing can operate in? 0/0. I would suggest a membership to the Flat Earth Society, but they might be too forward thinking for you.
11-30-2016, 07:32 AM
#54
Furloughed Again?!
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Position: Boeing 737
Posts: 4,796
Elevators and subway trains used to require operators too. It's not too far a reach to imagine one pilot with a datalink to a dispatcher at home in his pajamas acting as "copilot". Autoflight with onboard and remotely redundant "pilots"
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
11-30-2016, 05:24 PM
#55
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2005
Position: FDX MD11 Capt in MEM
Posts: 886
SWA vs FDX
Originally Posted by MarineFAC
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gtMzpss3QY
Still think we can't be replaced by some some software? Care to guess what kind of wx mins this thing can operate in? 0/0. I would suggest a membership to the Flat Earth Society, but they might be too forward thinking for you.
Still think we can't be replaced by some some software? Care to guess what kind of wx mins this thing can operate in? 0/0. I would suggest a membership to the Flat Earth Society, but they might be too forward thinking for you.
0/0 no sweat. How about CAVOK with a 90 degree crosswind 15G30?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
12-01-2016, 08:16 AM
#57
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: CA
Posts: 1,207
Originally Posted by MarineFAC
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gtMzpss3QY
Still think we can't be replaced by some some software? Care to guess what kind of wx mins this thing can operate in? 0/0. I would suggest a membership to the Flat Earth Society, but they might be too forward thinking for you.
Still think we can't be replaced by some some software? Care to guess what kind of wx mins this thing can operate in? 0/0. I would suggest a membership to the Flat Earth Society, but they might be too forward thinking for you.
Can the software be utilized to land a DC-10 that has lost all three hydraulic systems causing the loss of all flight controls and leading and trailing edge devices?
Can the software be utilized to glide an aircraft to ditch in a river after multiple bird strikes caused the loss of thrust to both engines three minutes after departure?
I'm sure the surviving 185 passengers of United flight 232 and the surviving 155 passengers US Air 1549 would want to know that the answer was "YES", the software can handle these scenario's.
Handling unique scenario's involved with loss of aircraft systems is where a human pilot earns his paycheck.
12-01-2016, 09:35 AM
#58
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,820
Originally Posted by MarineFAC
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gtMzpss3QY
Still think we can't be replaced by some some software? Care to guess what kind of wx mins this thing can operate in? 0/0. I would suggest a membership to the Flat Earth Society, but they might be too forward thinking for you.
Still think we can't be replaced by some some software? Care to guess what kind of wx mins this thing can operate in? 0/0. I would suggest a membership to the Flat Earth Society, but they might be too forward thinking for you.
12-01-2016, 10:29 AM
#59
Furloughed Again?!
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Position: Boeing 737
Posts: 4,796
When the argument for manned crews devolves to the point where the only remaining point is "who will taxi to the gate?" it is quite obviously lost. That's the easiest hurdle to leap. My son, a 5th grader, has built "robots" in school that follow a predetermined course to their destination. Easily programmed to have an electric motor on the nose wheel programmed to follow sensors embedded in the pavement. I would suggest that is the most elementary of the challenges to overcome.
The argument for manned crewmembers I the face of a United 232 or a Sully river landing scenario are much more compelling. At least for passenger operations I don't think anyone is discussing pilotless aircraft though. And even in freight I would imagine that the first officer would be eliminated generations before both pilots are -- at least for aircraft of such mass that the energy of an accident would be catastrophic.
It's the old pilot and the dog joke. One pilot and a dog to bite his hand if he touches anything. I foresee a time when the airplane happily flies itself via RNAV departure, enroute, approach, and landing with only an onboard operator to oversee the computer and intervene if/when human intervention is required. And should that pilot lose his marbles, the dispatcher takes over via real time datalink and handles the problem.
But this won't happen until we are all retired and gone. It's really only a problem for those under 30... and even that may be a stretch.
The argument for manned crewmembers I the face of a United 232 or a Sully river landing scenario are much more compelling. At least for passenger operations I don't think anyone is discussing pilotless aircraft though. And even in freight I would imagine that the first officer would be eliminated generations before both pilots are -- at least for aircraft of such mass that the energy of an accident would be catastrophic.
It's the old pilot and the dog joke. One pilot and a dog to bite his hand if he touches anything. I foresee a time when the airplane happily flies itself via RNAV departure, enroute, approach, and landing with only an onboard operator to oversee the computer and intervene if/when human intervention is required. And should that pilot lose his marbles, the dispatcher takes over via real time datalink and handles the problem.
But this won't happen until we are all retired and gone. It's really only a problem for those under 30... and even that may be a stretch.
12-01-2016, 10:38 AM
#60
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,820
Originally Posted by ZapBrannigan
When the argument for manned crews devolves to the point where the only remaining point is "who will taxi to the gate?" it is quite obviously lost. That's the easiest hurdle to leap. My son, a 5th grader, has built "robots" in school that follow a predetermined course to their destination. Easily programmed to have an electric motor on the nose wheel programmed to follow sensors embedded in the pavement. I would suggest that is the most elementary of the challenges to overcome.
The argument for manned crewmembers I the face of a United 232 or a Sully river landing scenario are much more compelling. At least for passenger operations I don't think anyone is discussing pilotless aircraft though. And even in freight I would imagine that the first officer would be eliminated generations before both pilots are -- at least for aircraft of such mass that the energy of an accident would be catastrophic.
It's the old pilot and the dog joke. One pilot and a dog to bite his hand if he touches anything. I foresee a time when the airplane happily flies itself via RNAV departure, enroute, approach, and landing with only an onboard operator to oversee the computer and intervene if/when human intervention is required. And should that pilot lose his marbles, the dispatcher takes over via real time datalink and handles the problem.
But this won't happen until we are all retired and gone. It's really only a problem for those under 30... and even that may be a stretch.
The argument for manned crewmembers I the face of a United 232 or a Sully river landing scenario are much more compelling. At least for passenger operations I don't think anyone is discussing pilotless aircraft though. And even in freight I would imagine that the first officer would be eliminated generations before both pilots are -- at least for aircraft of such mass that the energy of an accident would be catastrophic.
It's the old pilot and the dog joke. One pilot and a dog to bite his hand if he touches anything. I foresee a time when the airplane happily flies itself via RNAV departure, enroute, approach, and landing with only an onboard operator to oversee the computer and intervene if/when human intervention is required. And should that pilot lose his marbles, the dispatcher takes over via real time datalink and handles the problem.
But this won't happen until we are all retired and gone. It's really only a problem for those under 30... and even that may be a stretch.
I agree with your points and I think all of our cars will be self driving before pilots are totally gone. When computers can't crash and software can't be hacked, I'll consider getting on a pilotless plane with 200 other people.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
