Staffing Projections
04-04-2016 | 05:04 AM
#32
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2012
Posts: 3,599
Likes: 205
From: 787
Joe, I agree 100% with all but the last sentence.
By all accounts, self-driving cars are probably only 5 years away. A self driving car is 10x harder that a self flying airplane. The only thing that will slow our replacement by automation is bureaucracy and legal liability.
How long do we have? Same problem with predicting the future. I would guess the FO will first be replaced with a monitoring pilot for takeoff and landing only, remotely sitting in a VR cubicle. Sort of how Predator drones are flown.
The jet will be mostly autonomous. Eventually they will be completely autonomous.
I would bet 1 man cockpits for cargo in 5-10 years. For part 121? Hard to say. A few years later?
I think if you are young pilot looking for a career, THIS is the 800b gorilla in the room. For those of us 45 or older, we will probably finish out our careers.
As far as short term pilot numbers, I think the 16,000 number is smoking crack. The only UCH "growth" planned is ASM growth, and that is coming by putting more seats in each jet, and replacing 50 seaters with something bigger. For the combined UCH, including United and UAX, we are planning a slight reduction in block hours.
"In-sourcing" UAX flying to the mainline is the only road to 16,000 pilots in the next few years, and it just might happen. Or, not.
Those jobs should have always been at the mainline. Hopefully they will undo the mistakes of the last 20 years in this regard.
By all accounts, self-driving cars are probably only 5 years away. A self driving car is 10x harder that a self flying airplane. The only thing that will slow our replacement by automation is bureaucracy and legal liability.
How long do we have? Same problem with predicting the future. I would guess the FO will first be replaced with a monitoring pilot for takeoff and landing only, remotely sitting in a VR cubicle. Sort of how Predator drones are flown.
The jet will be mostly autonomous. Eventually they will be completely autonomous.
I would bet 1 man cockpits for cargo in 5-10 years. For part 121? Hard to say. A few years later?
I think if you are young pilot looking for a career, THIS is the 800b gorilla in the room. For those of us 45 or older, we will probably finish out our careers.
As far as short term pilot numbers, I think the 16,000 number is smoking crack. The only UCH "growth" planned is ASM growth, and that is coming by putting more seats in each jet, and replacing 50 seaters with something bigger. For the combined UCH, including United and UAX, we are planning a slight reduction in block hours.
"In-sourcing" UAX flying to the mainline is the only road to 16,000 pilots in the next few years, and it just might happen. Or, not.
Those jobs should have always been at the mainline. Hopefully they will undo the mistakes of the last 20 years in this regard.
Worst case scenario will be 30 years before no pilots on property. The last United pilot hasn't even been hired yet I assure you.
04-04-2016 | 05:25 AM
#33
Stuck Mic
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,059
Likes: 0
I agree with MOP.
We are getting BRAND NEW 737s and these things still have a lot of the same technology from the 50s/60s. These aircraft will be flying for at least 20+ years.
Even the new CS series requires pilots and it's one of the most advanced aircraft out there. A350? 2 pilots. 787? 2 pilots. That's as new and as advanced as commercial aircraft get.
Could they be converted? Possibly but at a massive expense.
Heck they can't even get rid of flight attendants who aren't even flying the plane. Once that happens and meals and drinks and safety and customer service issues are handled without FAs onboard then I will start to worry if I'm next.
We are getting BRAND NEW 737s and these things still have a lot of the same technology from the 50s/60s. These aircraft will be flying for at least 20+ years.
Even the new CS series requires pilots and it's one of the most advanced aircraft out there. A350? 2 pilots. 787? 2 pilots. That's as new and as advanced as commercial aircraft get.
Could they be converted? Possibly but at a massive expense.
Heck they can't even get rid of flight attendants who aren't even flying the plane. Once that happens and meals and drinks and safety and customer service issues are handled without FAs onboard then I will start to worry if I'm next.
04-04-2016 | 05:38 AM
#34
Line Holder
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 875
Likes: 1
04-04-2016 | 11:51 AM
#36
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 3,076
Likes: 3
From: The GF of FUPM
Just because pilotless planes are management's wet dream, it doesn't mean the public will ride in them. I've got ten bucks that says it will never pass muster with the fares, at least for the next 30 years.
Would YOU sit in the back of one? Me neither.
Humans recently un-porked a seriously porked up situation (caused by inept ATC) while descending below 2000 feet in IMC conditions in a far away country with very big rocks. Some days you snooze, some days you earn your keep. We're there for a hell of a lot of valid reasons.
Absent the human element, Captain Sullenberger's plane would have would up in some Jersey or Long Island neighborhood. Al Haynes' plane would have augured in as well. Ditto Captain Dave Cronin's and Captain Stoops. And Captain Galloways. As would have...........you get the idea.
I don't lose sleep over it. There are other, far more pressing and immediate threats LEAPing out at our job security and contract. Hats and pilotless planes don't make the top twenty.
Would YOU sit in the back of one? Me neither.
Humans recently un-porked a seriously porked up situation (caused by inept ATC) while descending below 2000 feet in IMC conditions in a far away country with very big rocks. Some days you snooze, some days you earn your keep. We're there for a hell of a lot of valid reasons.
Absent the human element, Captain Sullenberger's plane would have would up in some Jersey or Long Island neighborhood. Al Haynes' plane would have augured in as well. Ditto Captain Dave Cronin's and Captain Stoops. And Captain Galloways. As would have...........you get the idea.
I don't lose sleep over it. There are other, far more pressing and immediate threats LEAPing out at our job security and contract. Hats and pilotless planes don't make the top twenty.
Last edited by oldmako; 04-04-2016 at 12:09 PM.
04-04-2016 | 12:11 PM
#37
(retired)
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 422
Likes: 0
From: Old, retired, healthy, debt-free, liquid
Considering the first fully automated commercial jet isn't even on the drawing soars yet it's going to be at least 10-15 years, and that's if they start today. The certification process is going to be insane and will most likely take a couple years. Then it will go to cargo to prove itself and gain public support. Once people are ok with the technology, and flying on an aircraft with no pilot, the airlines will start to pick them up (5-10 years). Then they will have to get 800-1000 on property to ditch all the pilot flown aircraft and that's going to take decades.
Worst case scenario will be 30 years before no pilots on property. The last United pilot hasn't even been hired yet I assure you.
Worst case scenario will be 30 years before no pilots on property. The last United pilot hasn't even been hired yet I assure you.
Because of the certification process and ultimate public acceptance, it is probably closer to 50 to 80 years. Even with a sophisticated design, software and certification capable of unmanned passenger flight , flight decks will probably see at least one or two (augmented crew
) minimally certified emergency button pushers for many years beyond initial unmanned certification, based upon public "unease" alone.The last pilot as we know flying today hasn't been hired. However, the last "minimally-certified emergency button-pusher only," before totally unmanned passenger flight, hasn't been born yet.
You guys are safe for awhile.
04-04-2016 | 01:27 PM
#38
Where's my Mai Tai?
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,823
Likes: 14
From: fins to the left, fins to the right
From talking to some AF guys, the loss rate for their drones is pretty substantial. I doubt if it will ever be encrypted enough to be hack proof.
04-04-2016 | 02:59 PM
#39
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 481
Likes: 0
From: Airbus 320 Captain
I always thought it was funny that the US-3 (an S-3 modified to carry passengers on / off the carrier) had the front ejection seats removed. I guess they didn't feel the pilots should eject and leave all the passengers to figure out what where all the wind was coming from.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
