Who's Really Flying The Plane?

[albertschu]

What you apparently choose not to consider are the astronomical start up costs to develop the technology and infrastructure to support your plan. Those costs are unbelievable and are absolutely unaffordable from the government's end (air traffic control system revolution), the airline industry's end, and the manufacturers' end. Who is fronting the money for that? Boeing? Are they going to spend hoards of their own money to develop pilotless airplanes that someone may or may not even buy?

We not only will pay the cost, we are paying the cost. Let's look at some of the technologies we'll need: some sort of system to avoid traffic collisions, some sort of system to prevent ground collisions, a global constellation of navigation satellites to augment onboard navigation systems, a system to digitize ATC-type information. So far that's TCAS, GPWS, GPS, and ADS. Were they cheap to develop? No. Did we develop them anyway? Yes. What else we'll we need? A way to meet the FAA's "see (sense) and avoid" requirement--in work. A system to autonomously detect a suitable emergency landing area--in work. What other technologies would be needed? They are either in work or they will be soon.

How do you develop enough trust in your proposed technological revolution to get the public to accept that they are safe on board a pilotless airplane?

Incrementally. We are and will continue to add all the technologies necessary to manned aircraft until it becomes a UAV with two dudes, then one dude up front. At which point the share holders will start wondering why their payroll expense is so high.

What happens after the very first glitch that happens with a pilotless airplane? It doesn't have to be a crash. It just has to be something that went wrong that makes the nightly news. Folks will never get on board one again.

Why do they keep getting on piloted aircraft?

[Edited for grammers]

Edited March 30, 2012 by albertschu

[Beaver]

What flips the switches in the cockpit? An inflatable dude like in Airplane?

You do know that there are physical switches up front, right? Switches that control generators, cabin temp, bleed air, etc. Do the black boxes have hands? Who shuts things off in an emergency? Who pulls the fire bottle when a motor is burning? You get the idea. It WOULD require a full redesign.

You have not thought this through.

Ha ha - we have to have pilots to control the air conditioning. There's lots of complicated switches and things in there! Who'll flip all those switches? I think unmanned is inevitable.

[General Condition]

I am a trunk monkey, but the solid truth is that the statistics show pilot performance is the big x-factor in mishaps, not mechanical breakdowns. And if the plane were entirely automated, it would prevent any more 9-11s because it would be physically impossible to take the controls...because there wouldn't be any more physical controls. It won't take long. Most of us will probably see the day when it happens. If we can do this for trains, cars, and boats, there is no logical reason we can't do it for planes. Perhaps the pilot-types feel differently because they are the ones in control of the jet...but your average passenger has the same amount of impact on the conduct of the flight whether there's a guy in the cockpit or a computer: none.

Does this answer your question jackass?

[Beaver]

Does this answer your question jackass?

Didn't settle the issue when it was posted on the first page of the thread, soooo...probably not going to do much on page 5.

[General Condition]

My bad - too lazy to read that far back.

[Orbit]

IF IT AINT BROKE DONT FIX IT.

[albertschu]

Does this answer your question jackass?

Doesn't it? This is NOT footage of a flight test of an experimental fully autonomous aircraft. It is a standard configuration Airbus A320-111. The aircraft not only had a human crew, but also 130 human pax. Among other causes, a critical factor was that the captain thought the aircraft was at 30 meters AGL, when in fact it was at 30 ft AGL. As a side note, the captain would have stalled the aircraft earlier had the automated systems not prevented him from doing so.

[pawnman]

IF IT AINT BROKE DONT FIX IT.

That's why we're still flying around in DC-10s, right?

[Techsan]

That's why we're still flying around in DC-10s, right?

Travis & McGuire still are.

[Danny Noonin]

Ha ha - we have to have pilots to control the air conditioning. There's lots of complicated switches and things in there! Who'll flip all those switches? I think unmanned is inevitable.

No. Reading comprehension.

He said it wouldn't take a big redesign of current airplanes, just "a couple black boxes connected to the auto-pilot" He is wrong.

[albertschu]

Yeah, unmanned passenger jets are about as inevitable as when people said we'd be living on the moon in the 50s. It's easy to just say THE FUTURE WILL TAKE CARE OF THE PROBLEM and be an idiot claiming something like this is inevitable.

No, it is about as inevitable as when people in the 40s said super sonic flight was impossible.

[Infamous]

That's why we're still flying around in DC-10s, right?

Fedex?

[Rifleman96]

If UAV's is the way to go, I challenge our gov't leadership to lead the way. 89th AW nothing but UAV pax aircraft.

On a serious note, we are BROKE. The economy is crap and I think the market is building up for another huge crash. Nobody is going to be able to afford the full infrastructure required to control all those UAVs.

Man I hate UAV's.

[Guest]

That's why we're still flying around in DC-10s, right?

WTF, weren't you listening? Didn't you see what Fred said to Weird? Fred isn't going to buy new airplanes until UAVs come out.

He's all over it. We're going to be flying in wind powered UAV airliners soon.

Listen up.

Edited March 31, 2012 by Rainman A-10

[Beaver]

No. Reading comprehension.

He said it wouldn't take a big redesign of current airplanes, just "a couple black boxes connected to the auto-pilot" He is wrong.

Reading comprehend yourself, dickhead. I know what he's saying.

His point was that all those things, even the very tiny things such as air conditioning, requires that the entire jet would have to be developed for the use of an unmanned platform. It's not like you can just rip out the cockpit of a 777 and install a UAV control package. Literally the entire jet would have to be designed from the ground up to facilitate not having a pilot in the cockpit. Meanwhile, the price of gas is spiking and you're torching your R&D budget dollars to develop an experimental concept that saves a fraction of what you could have saved by trying to make the jet more fuel efficient.

Yeah, unmanned passenger jets are about as inevitable as when people said we'd be living on the moon in the 50s. It's easy to just say THE FUTURE WILL TAKE CARE OF THE PROBLEM and be an idiot claiming something like this is inevitable.

You're an idiot if you underestimate the airlines' desire to cut personnel expenses.

[Beaver]

Now that I think about it, it is possible, and even probable, that a remotely piloted airliner can happen

Glad we agree now.

[guineapigfury]

We're going to be flying in wind powered UAV airliners soon.

THE FUTURE HAS ARRIVED:

[Infamous]

WTF, weren't you listening? Didn't you see what Fred said to Weird? Fred isn't going to buy new airplanes until UAVs come out.

He's all over it. We're going to be flying in wind powered UAV airliners soon.

Listen up.

My bad. :(

[Biff_T]

My bad. :(

THE FUTURE HAS ARRIVED:

What’s an autopilot?

The guy on top or bottom….

[135ASelect]

Wait. The ambiguously gay duo had a hang glider?

[guineapigfury]

Wait. The ambiguously gay duo had a hang glider?

One of them is a male flight attendant, so there is nothing ambiguous in this case.

[Danny Noonin]

Noonin, I really don't care who thinks their prediction of the future is more right. I admit, however, I just can't believe that an airline pilot believes their cut of a $350 fare is 0.52%.

That's in error by at least a factor of ten.

I used me as an example, which I clearly stated. My payscale was $109/hour (but I'm on mil leave right now) The airplane I was on seats 210. 2% 401k. 12% b fund. I cost zero to the company for healthcare (tricare reserve select). Obviously costs vary by airframe, seat, and longevity, but those are my numbers.

I didn't go to USAFA so I'm not real smart. Explain please how I'm off--using me as an example, not a 30 year 747 captain--"by a factor of at least ten."

As for relative, I'm talking pilot expenses versus the list of expenses discussed to get the complete unmanned air system up and running and what passengers would pay to have some human eyes looking out the front window. But you can read so you knew that.

All of that pilot cost stuff is totally irrelevant to the discussion about why this may or may not happen, however. The reason this will never happen is the unions. Not one pilot contract allows it. No threat of furlough or offer of massive pay increases will get pilots to vote for a contract that allows unmanned airplanes as that would spell the end of their jobs anyway. It's a non-starter. At the first attempt to force a UAV on property, the pilots will strike, grind the company and its revenue stream to a halt, and bring the company down with them instead of voluntarily concede the end of their profession. They have nothing else to lose at that point. No scabs will fly in their place because they know they'd be killing their own flying future too.

Everything else is chaff. This won't happen.

Edited April 2, 2012 by Danny Noonin

[pawnman]

I used me as an example, which I clearly stated. My payscale was $109/hour (but I'm on mil leave right now) The airplane I was on seats 210. 2% 401k. 12% b fund. I cost zero to the company for healthcare (tricare reserve select). Obviously costs vary by airframe, seat, and longevity, but those are my numbers.

I didn't go to USAFA so I'm not real smart. Explain please how I'm off--using me as an example, not a 30 year 747 captain--"by a factor of at least ten."

As for relative, I'm talking pilot expenses versus the list of expenses discussed to get the complete unmanned air system up and running and what passengers would pay to have some human eyes looking out the front window. But you can read so you knew that.

All of that pilot cost stuff is totally irrelevant to the discussion about why this may or may not happen, however. The reason this will never happen is the unions. Not one pilot contract allows it. No threat of furlough or offer of massive pay increases will get pilots to vote for a contract that allows unmanned airplanes as that would spell the end of their jobs anyway. It's a non-starter. At the first attempt to force a UAV on property, the pilots will strike, grind the company and its revenue stream to a halt, and bring the company down with them instead of voluntarily concede the end of their profession. They have nothing else to lose at that point. No scabs will fly in their place because they know they'd be killing their own flying future too.

Everything else is chaff. This won't happen.

Just like that whaling union kept us from using electricity, or the carriage driver union kept cars off the road.

[Guest]

Yeah, that's what I would have said. It was Friday and the truck was loaded for a weekend backpacking/camping trip with the kids. It was a deliberate decision to completely blow off the MultiQuoted keyboard debate over meaningless bullshit and get outside and do something worth my time. I will say, it was a fine post... double spaced with lots of quote brackets and all.

You made the right call blowing off a response to me.

I was just busting your balls.

I'm not interested in nit picking this either.

[Wandering Dog]

Okay, let me put it this way. You're an airliner manufacturer with a finite R&D budget. You want to build an airliner that people will buy. Do you spend the lions share of your budget on making fuel efficient, lightweight aircraft, possibly even using alternative energy sources, at a time when fuel costs are perpetually rising, or do you undertake a massive, costly, and risky project on eliminating pilots from the cockpit, which may or may not pan out with regards to the flying public, while your competitors are also focusing on fuel costs and eating up your market share?

Do you seriously believe there's any realistic scenario in the future in which that investment will be worth the payoff? With the upward trending price of oil and fuel costs being the vast majority of operating expenses for an airline?

Anyone can just say "oh yeah it'll happen someday because the FUTURE!". But if you actually sit down and think about how that situation would possibly play out, it becomes less and less plausible.

Yeah, because if there's one phrase to describe military aerospace R&D funding in the 50s, it's "cash strapped".

Now that I think about it, it is possible, and even probable, that a remotely piloted airliner can happen, but if and only if we come up with a cheap energy solution to power aircraft engines. But that's a pretty ######ing big "if".

I'm guessing the changes will be incremental and unrelated to the airline industry until both sides of the equations meet. I don't think anyone here was talking about a crash research program and I don't think people are saying "The FUTURE!" either. Generational change is required culturally, not to mention everything else.