pilotless airliners in the future?!

[Kream926]

to think even further into this, a computer will and is programed to handel certain situations, like what to do during and engine fire and such, but it will never be able to match wha a competent pilot can do during unforseen situations like the pilots did in the sioux <sp?> city crash.....

please tell me mr. (whome ever came up with this idea) how will your super computer do it that situation??

 

[N5139]

I completely agree with Kream and others, but I'm going to play the devil's advocate:

- How many KSUX-like situations have there been in airline history? I HATE to say it (again, I'm playing the devil's advocate), but it's just like the threat of terrorism. We're focusing and throwing money on something that is, historically, unlikely to happen frequently in the United States.

Here's my take:

I believe that passenger planes will always have pilots, but their roles will change dramatically, along with the rules governing them. I can totally see airlines lobbying for LEGAL naps in the cockpit (a good thing) in order to LENGTHEN duty day limits (not as good), allowing transcon round-robins. Airlines will argue that a 10 hour, two-leg trascon only requires four critical periods of flight (2 takeoffs and landings), and that eight hour duty-day limitations are only suitable for pilots who fly more legs. All fingers will be pointed towards highly-automated cockpits as a reason for such change.

Long after we're all dead, I can still see pilots at the pointy end. However, they will be there for liability's sake (no jury would believe an airline after a crash say "we did all we could" without having a human up there), and I imagine that the job will be quite boring.

J.

 

[FN FAL]

to think even further into this, a computer will and is programed to handel certain situations, like what to do during and engine fire and such, but it will never be able to match wha a competent pilot can do during unforseen situations like the pilots did in the sioux <sp?> city crash.....??

Actually, the defense contractors are working on interactive systems that would allow military pilots to contiue to fly a stricken bird in the event that control surfaces are damaged. And if I'm not mistaken, pilots are only able to fly the stealth fighter because of computers.

Humans were never able to re-create a successful ending to SUX flight scenario...a specialized computerized flight control system similar to the one mentioned above, could re-recreate a successful solution, each and every time. And it wouldn't need a nap to operate at it's best.

 

[BornAgainPagan]

"500 feet above minimums"
"continue"
"ah, we got a fatal exception message"
"control alt delete checklist"
"uh, yes or no to 'send error report' to microsoft'?"
"are we at dh yet?"

 

[rubberducky]

Never say never... I know that it would take alot for the flying public to get onto a pilotless plane, but look at the military. UAVs are the wave of the future and that technology will continue to spread. The military has long term studies that include pilotless fighter/bomber/attack and transport aircraft. That said I do agree that the flying public still wouldn't get onboard. Cargo flights on the other hand...

 

[Traderd]

Actually, the defense contractors are working on interactive systems that would allow military pilots to contiue to fly a stricken bird in the event that control surfaces are damaged. And if I'm not mistaken, pilots are only able to fly the stealth fighter because of computers.

Humans were never able to re-create a successful ending to SUX flight scenario...a specialized computerized flight control system similar to the one mentioned above, could re-recreate a successful solution, each and every time. And it wouldn't need a nap to operate at it's best.

A look into the Global Hawk program will yield a perspective on how far UAVs have come. Autonomous UAV transcontinental operations have been here for a while. No pax or cargo yet, just cameras (as far as I know). And take a look at the X-45 and derivatives. I had an AF code on board about two years ago that told me the Raptor will be the last manned fighter procured by the AF. Time will tell.



If it were to happen, I would guess the normal progression: intel, cargo then pax. And of course, the Marines will go first



Civil side I'm not sure I see the reason. Aren't pilots pretty inexpensive right now?

 

[FN FAL]

Civil side I'm not sure I see the reason. Aren't pilots pretty inexpensive right now?

Yea, but accidents are expensive. What I see in the future, is single pilot aircraft with autonomous control as the co-pilot...for the purpose of safety.

The captain would use the autonomous control just as he/she would a second pilot. It could perform either pilot flying or pilot non-flying duties, as well as both in the event of a captain incapacitation or catastrophic loss of control surfaces. Also, autonomous control could be triggered by hostile forces breaching the cockpit, by a change in pilot health telemetry or by typed pilot technicians on the ground utilizing secure digital data uplink in the event that the pilot was unable to react. I would imagine that the final layer of aircraft protection would be onboard programed flight profiles...pretty simple, the autonomous control squawks the code and uses programed flight profiles and data from onboard sensors to avoid wx and fly the flight plan on time...shooting an approach to an ILS at eta.

 

[FN FAL]

Passenger lands pilotless Gulfstream Turboprop...hmmmm?

Check out this pilotless airplane...

Passenger Crash-Lands Plane

NORTH LAS VEGAS, Nev. (AP) -- A passenger was forced to crash land a private plane Thursday after the pilot suffered an apparent heart attack, authorities said.

The pilot later died. The two passengers were taken to University Medical Center in Las Vegas after the crash at North Las Vegas Airport, said Donn Walker, regional spokesman for the Federal Aviation Administration.

The plane was registered to Douglas R. Reichardt of Henderson, who was piloting the twin-engine Gulfstream I turboprop. A hospital official didn't know whether Reichardt died in the air or later at the hospital.

The two passengers did not appear to be seriously hurt, authorities said. Their names were not immediately released.

The pilot had filed a flight plan to San Diego and the plane took off from North Las Vegas at 8:30 a.m., Walker said. About 45 minutes later, the plane crashed on its belly several hundred feet short of an airport runway. The pilot is believed to have suffered a heart attack, Walker said.

The FAA and the National Transportation Safety Board are investigating the crash.

Reichardt had a valid multiengine airline transport pilot's license, according to FAA records.