Pilotless Airplanes?

[A Passenger]

With the recent advances made in automatic or pilotless planes, it is possible that in 20 years, we could all be out of a job. The new pilotless planes are supposed to be safer and more efficient than regular airplanes, and airlines could save thousands of $$$ by not having to hire pilots. Will pilots really become extinct within the next 20 years?

 

[SuperFLUF]

Hell NO, I won't go!

Look at all the "little" problems that Airbus has had with their automated flight control systems. The fact that they have decided to follow Boeing's lead and use soft limits on the A380 is proof enough that the automation and programming does not work all the time. One of those "little" incidents that have occoured on the A320 would be a hell of a big incident if it happend on that monster.

No engineer (or any human for that matter) can program an automated system with control logic that will be able to safely react to every possible scenario and/or not have flaws in the control logic.

If pilotless airplanes ever come to pass, they would truly be pilotless because you wouldn't find any pilots that would ride in the back either.

 

[mar]

Exactly.

How many times has a takeoff been aborted because "something didn't feel right" and it turned out to be a good decision.

However, I was jumpseating on a United Airbus one day when the Capt speculated that at sometime in the future the FO would be required for Take off and Landing but during Cruise he would be required to go in the back and help with the service.

Who knows?

Fly safe.

 

[Ailerongirl]

Re: Exactly.

[QUOTE
However, I was jumpseating on a United Airbus one day when the Capt speculated that at sometime in the future the FO would be required for Take off and Landing but during Cruise he would be required to go in the back and help with the service.

[/QUOTE]


No offense meant to the F/O that would have to do that, but he'd have a job.......technically it would mean one less f/a in the back.

 

[DenverDude2002]

I hate to say but I think pilotless aircraft are in aviations future, just a long ways down the road. I'm guessing it will be 50+ yrs. I mean they already want to send astronauts to the ISS in a pilotless craft, so i think its only a matter of time and technology before we see pilotless aircraft for commercial aviation.

 

[siucavflight]

Thing of the future, they are already here in military use.
Do you mean in passenger aviation? If so i would think that the technology would be possible but i do not ever think that you could ever convince the flying public to get into a hollow tube doing 500kts 35,000 ft in the sky. What i do think is in aviations future is single pilot airliners, the pilot only being needed to monitor all of the computers and systems that are flying the aircraft.

 

[mar]

Typical airline management?

Hi Ailerongirl. Has anybody ever told you you look an awful lot like Lucy?

Well, yeah. One less $25,000/year FA while the $80,000/year FO serves drinks. Why not? It sounds like typical airline management to me!

Coffee, tea, flaps or gear? I always get those confused.

 

[TonyC]

The new pilotless planes are supposed to be safer ...

Says who? How so?

Will pilots really become extinct within the next 20 years?

Would YOU board a pilotless airplane?!?!?

Have you ever had an automatic system fail?

 

[bart]

Don't kid yourself...

They will give the $25,000 FA the additional duty of calling airspeeds and raising the gear - The $80,000 FO will get to be a $50,000 RJ Captain.

 

[A Passenger]

Says who? How so?


Would YOU board a pilotless airplane?!?!?

Have you ever had an automatic system fail?

Yes, I would board a pilotless airplane if it was proven to be safe. If the system fails, I'm sure there will be some kind of back-up. The airlines are looking into these pilotless aircraft because they make economic sense, not having to pay for pilots means the airline saves millions of dollars.

I predict that by 2050, the pilot will be as outdated as the covered wagon driver.

 

[Ailerongirl]

Hi Ailerongirl. Has anybody ever told you you look an awful lot like Lucy?

As in the fact I always have my mouth open to annoy someone?!?!

They will give the $25,000 FA the additional duty of calling airspeeds and raising the gear - .

*laughing* Sounds like what already happens when there's an empty flight, and a super awesome cool crew!


Shhhhh!!

 

[TonyC]

Yes, I would board a pilotless airplane if it was proven to be safe.

What exactly would be your standard of proof?

What percentage of the time would the equipment have to be reliable?

If 99.9% of flights landing in the U.S. each day landed successfully, how many crashes would there be each day?

Do you feel lucky?

 

[Dan CFI/CFII]

See, the basic problem here is that we would be replacing pilot error with computer programmer error. However, the pilot at least has the chance to fix his mistakes, the programmer is long gone.

I can't see a real pilotless aircraft anytime in my lifetime, at least not carrying the general public.

Dan

 

[SuperFLUF]

Yes, I would board a pilotless airplane if it was proven to be safe. If the system fails, I'm sure there will be some kind of back-up. The airlines are looking into these pilotless aircraft because they make economic sense, not having to pay for pilots means the airline saves millions of dollars.

I predict that by 2050, the pilot will be as outdated as the covered wagon driver.

The problem is not really when an automated system fails. The real problem (as we have seen with the Airbus) is when the system encounters a situation that it has not been programmed for and then goes bezerk. No level of backups can counter that situation.

We allready have pilotless airplanes. The Airbus A318 through A340 give the final control authority over the aircraft flight controls to the flight control computer. In many scenarios abord those aircraft the pilots are just along for the ride and there are many flight control related incidents for these aircraft as a result.
Just do a search for Airbus accidents and incidents and you will find some of the stories. Airbus works hard to pin the blame on the pilots but if you dig you can find the truth.

An fairly recent incident in Britain comes to mind; when the Captain of an A319 decided to go around during landing and the flight controls did not respond to his commands. The engines advanced to go-around power but the aircraft flew ITSELF into the runway and collapsed the nose gear. Airbus acutally admitted a flaw in the flight control logic on this one (rare for them to admit).

Once again these "little" problems are why with the A380 Airbus is moving away from the hard limit flight control logic of the A320...etc to a Boeing style soft limit fly-by-wire system that can be overridden by the pilots.

IF IT AINT BOEING, I AINT GOIN'!

Besides, any money the airline mgmt. saves on pilot costs will just go to increase their paychecks.

 

[flywithastick]

Won't be any pilotless (people) transport planes for a long time. To much cultural stigma with the reliability of man made/automated systems.

The reality is that humans are really very unreliable. They are though, very flexible and intelligent (as compared to something man made).

we'll see single pilot airliners in our lifetime. I'd guess 20-30 yrs from now. No telling how long before seeing pilotless. 50, 75 yrs maybe? But it will be here some day.

 

[crash-proof]

Can you just imagine, the plane/computer goin bezerk like HAL did in 2001.

"I'm afraid I can't do that, Dave"

Then the plane self-destructs.

 

[WrightAvia]

Can you just imagine, the plane/computer goin bezerk like HAL did in 2001.

"I'm afraid I can't do that, Dave"

Then the plane self-destructs.

No I can't picture that. But what I can picture is this...

Saleem: "Why can't I turn this plane towards the building!"

HAL: "I'm afraid I can't do that! I'm programed to overide dangerous flight commands...have a nice day."

 

[furloboy]

I work with UAVs every single day.

I'll tell you now, pilotless airliners aren't going to happen in your lifetime.

it's unbelievable what goes into just a single flight. I could write a book about why it won't happen.

They aren't less expensive to build and operate than manned airplanes. You've got to have an awful lot of very expensive systems to make decisions that a 4th grader can make safely every time, every day. And you need a lot of personnel to support the launch, recovery and en route efforts that a single pilot normally takes care of. The primary reason the military is looking at them is not because they'll be less expensive (they won't be), but instead to employ against the really nasty targets (SAMs, etc.).

But the big truth-teller is that there is no manufacturer pushing for it. They know it won't fly (pun intended).

I'm in the business and know what of I speak.

Regards,
Furloboy

 

[spinfreezone]

Pilotless airplanes have been talked about for decades, but just like the flying car, you probably won't see one in your lifetime. If the technology ever got there you would still have to have experts constantly monitoring everything from the ground, and I don't see how this is safer, better, or cheaper than having pilots actually on board keeping an eye on things. Anyway in my opinion the subject is so far out there it doesn't even merit serious discussion, people spending too much time watching the sci-fi channel. By the time the technology would ever make it feasible we really will all have flying cars, and when that happens commercial aviation will have become irrelavant anyway.

 

[Goffer]

Pilotless aircraft is more than possible, with upgrades to systems at the airports. But it will be a long time before the customer will be willing to ride in an aluminum tube with no one sitting up front. The passenger needs to know at the very least there is a human to over see the actions of the computer. At this time fully automated aircraft carrying passengers is something for the sci-fi channel. I just hope a pilot won't just be a moderator in the future.