F-102's were remote piloted in the 80's, from Patrick.

Fortunately for all of us there were some visionaries in the beginning of the 20th century that took some risks and put people in airplanes, even though riding the train was much safer.

When single pilot ops happens, it will not be because it is safer. I will be because of economics.....just like every other crew complement change in the last 60 years. Safety will always be a consideration.

 

And how long will a single engine plane fly if it loses its engine? You're making the point, not refuting it.

Except that joke is about automation.. not CRM. CRM actually is about working as a crew and is one of the reasons there are fewer accidents now than in the era of the all powerful captain.

Big difference between a fighter, where the man is the weak link (ECS, ejection seat, G tolerance, fatigue, SAR considerations, to name a few) when a crash means merely "giving it back to the tax payers," and a transport where none of those problems with men in fighters apply and a crash kills hundreds. The only thing to be gained by pulling a pilot out of a transport is a economics and even that's negligible. BTW, your assessment of military pilots not understanding the impact of drones is way off. I remember 15-20 years ago hanging out in my reserve unit and we were all in agreement the F-35 would probably be the last manned fighter.

Which goes back to the single engine analogy. If one pilot traps 99% of the errors, you still have a 1% error rate. Throw another pilot in there and you now trap 99% of that 1% taking your error rate down to 0.01%. And would you seriously want some of our problem children up there alone without a babysitter?

I'm not saying never, but when you consider that a consistent VNAV arrival seems to be beyond our present technology, we're likely all going to be on the wrong side of the grass before single pilot widebodies launch out of Newark for Sydney.

 

You are most likely correct. It may very well be the evolution of the industry.

The problem is that this proposal is a tax funded FAA mandate. If Boeing, Airbus, UAL, or whichever private company wants to invest billions in this technology then go for it. This should NOT be funded by tax payers in order for airlines to save a buck.

This is proof that our government is controlled by corporations. Not that we didn't already know that. Anyone know who insisted that this be put in the bill?

 

I for one welcome our new robot overlords

 

Yep, always been that way.............CAA, FAA, NASA,...all those studies over the years, including public university studies on such things as CRM.

Some people complain we haven't got our money's worth from NASA and the Lunar landing... other than Tang.

 

The B-787 is a Drone now!

FAR91 BBJ-787 Limitations: 2 pilots required for Take-off and Landing only. Taxiing is the limiting factor.

The richest people in the world ride around in single-pilot corporate jets. They spend a lot of money on training their pilots and they know how to use VNAV to keep the ground prox from going off.

Fly Safe

 

Most likely it was “Airlines for America” (formerly ATA), the lobby for big carriers. The robot/UAV concept would be a useful bogeyman for suppressing their pilots’ contract demands, even if the hardware won’t be practical for many decades.

 

Those are the planes that are always crashing! Also if they are so rich, they can afford another pilot!

 

The AI is the one that put forth the single pilot proposal. Its just their way of removing us from all the positions of power until it can take over completely.

 

Be great to revisit this thread in 10 years!
Some passionate responses/opinions.

But lets be brutally honest. BMEP100 has hit it out of the ballpark with the statement

Welcome to the 21st century. Sorry if it doesn't fit your style

Times ARE changing. Like it or not. Explain to me why it's ok for single pilots to be flying a Caravan for FedEx Feeder out of EWR but it won't be ok for the next generation Freighter (B797/NMA) to be single pilot with AI/DataLink Enabled?

Currently there are test program going on (and planned) for next generation Small Electric SINGLE PILOT (for now) Drones to act as air taxi's.
As a guy who flies DJI drones, I see the limitations, the problems but also the fixes as technology advances.
Once these 4-6 seater Uber Air Taxi's start to take off (no pun intended), you'll see this issue come up again with regards to testing Single Pilot Cargo.

The Marines used an unmanned KMax during Afghanistan.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...ILjpoy_cjoIwIC


The Navy is getting ready to go with an unmanned Tanker Drone.

Lockheed's MQ-25 Tanker Drone Looks Impressive, But It's Still Just A Paper Plane - The Drive


Guys and gals.. it's coming.
No one is talking single engine or no pilot. But the reality is (probably.. if we don't blow ourselves up before then!) with the next generation of aircraft that Boeing and Airbus will build, they will probably have hardened avionics and comms, with camera's and sensors (LIDAR) [https://www.wired.com/story/lidar-se...uminar-video/] that will allow for reduced pilot operations.
Google, Amazon and Elon Musk will be the ones pushing for it and once it's tested, it will start to become the norm. Not next year or in 10 years.. but it will come.

The only real argument/question should be.. why should the FAA fund this? Then again, it's already being researched in the private sector so maybe this is a way for the FAA to get a little more money to cover the stuff they are already doing.

Great discussion.
Motch