Cyprus-Forum.com

[Paphitis]

To understand aviation and the professionalism and the interface between human and machine, people need to read Flight Discipline written by Flt Colonel Tony Kern whom I have met.

He was a B-1B Strategic Bomber Pilot (USAF) - Multi Crew. That's very important. Military Multi Crew pilots are well trained.

I have been blessed to have also completed most of my flying in a multi crew environment and I am also blessed to be an old school stick and rudder guy mostly on Lockheed aircraft.

I have flown many types - currently fly a Challenger and the automation does exist but you can only use the automation in so far as the FCOM or company SOPs allow it. For instance, our company forbids an instrument approach in NAV Mode and VNav Mode. You got to hand fly it. It maintains pilot proficiency and keeps the pilots proficient and maintaining their discipline. Tony Kern talks about this quite a bit.

Boeing aircraft, including the B787 Dreamliner has all the automation of Airbus, but they allow airlines to set their own policies with regard to their own FCOM and SOPs. You can hand fly the thing all the way if you want. Can't do that in an Airbus.

Automation does not reduce accidents or remove human error. In fact, the evidence is that it has the opposite affect and that it brings in other dangerous elements such as loss of Situational Awareness, complacency, and also modern pilots such as the First Officer of the Ethiopian Airlines Max 8 not being able to fly as well or maintain a good Instrument Scan. They probably only fly an instrument approach once every 6 months in the sim. I fly instrument approaches about 10 times a week even in CAVOK we are given a STAR and ILS Approach which we hand fly, albeit 2 crew in 2 distinct roles - Pilot Flying and Pilot Monitoring.

One time, I had to evaluate a Pilot from Korean Airlines in the simulator for a job. We got him to do an Non Directional Approach at Cairns, QLD. From the outbound to inbound teardrop turn, the guy turned the wrong direction. In real life, the consequences of this wrong turn would be disastrous as there is high terrain in the vicinity. In treal life, the FO would have called for a Missed approach.

The reason for the error: it wasn't because he was a bad pilot. On the contrary, this was an extremely experienced guy flying for Korean. He lost SA and he also failed to use the second pilot to shed his workload.

So there are 2 trains of thought. Boeing is more stick and rudder for now.

Airbus is going full automation.

My preference is for Boeing. They fly better and in my opinion are a lot more safer because pilots are better trained, get more stick time and have better SA.

There is no replacement for multi Crew pilots. This is what makes aviation the safest transport system in the world. Its the pilots, their professionalism and their discipline. It's not a computer. We already have the technology to eliminate the pilot altogether in faour of land based operators like the guys that fly Predator Drones from a ground based station on the other side of the world.

Meet the Boeing MQ25:

https://www.boeing.com/defense/mq25/

Pilots are the only cog in the wheel that can manage a cockpit crisis.

Additionally, it is extremely important for pilots to maintain sound Aircraft Systems Knowledge. It's important to understand every component and system on the aircraft you fly. Your life will one day depend on it. pilots do have a lot of knowledge and as much knowledge as an engineer does, the only difference is the allowable maintenance that can be done on the 2 different licenses.

[Robin Hood]

Papitis:

I have flown many types - currently fly a Challenger and the automation does exist but you can only use the automation in so far as the FCOM or company SOPs allow it. For instance, our company forbids an instrument approach in NAV Mode and VNav Mode. You got to hand fly it. It maintains pilot proficiency and keeps the pilots proficient and maintaining their discipline. Tony Kern talks about this quite a bit.

But most accidents seem to happen in either the take-off or the landing phase! This says there is more likelyhood of crashing when a human is at the controls than when it is flown by a computer. That is what this indicates......... the choice of the 737 is arbitrary ....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_accidents_and_incidents_involving_the_Boeing_737

You can hand fly the thing all the way if you want. Can't do that in an Airbus.

See comment above!

Automation does not reduce accidents or remove human error.

I don’t agree! The Pilot(s) are the weak link in the safety chain as they are the predominant cause of accidents. The more ability you take away the pilots to override automatic functions the better. When there is a serious mechanical or systems failure a computer is for more adept than a human being to being able to respond. A computer can handle masses of information in milliseconds ..... whilst the pilots are still in the ‘WTF’ phase of their problem analysis and having to read the instruction book to determine what they are dealing with ...... in many cases the computers will have diagnosed both the problem and the consequences and taken action before the pilot is even aware he has a problem.

Is a computer infallible ..... absolutely not but as it is a two-out-of-three (at least) voting system, it is less likely to act on erroneous information. But even then the errors in the system are most often human errors in the design or the software, which is why each of the triplicated software systems is designed by a different team of engineers. There will always be failures that neither man or machine can handle ..... so no matter how perfect there will always be accidents. But there is no argument that the human ..... the Pilot ..... is the weakest link.

There is no replacement for multi Crew pilots.

Really? They seem to manage ok when operating drones, space vehicles ..... and now CARS! If the world can cope with millions of cars/motor bikes/Vans/buses/lorries and mopeds as well as ambulances/fire trucks and police cars. all travelling in different directions and speeds etc. ....... on the same roads as cars with humans making the decisions ..... then the automation of the flight of an aircraft would be a piece of cake!

Aeroplanes go from A to B in corridors in the sky, under 100% ground based control with both departure and arrival monitored and controlled by others on the ground. All rely on ground based RADAR and other electronic systems. No matter how indispensable you think the Pilot is .... he isn’t, the reality is changing very rapidly.

This is what makes aviation the safest transport system in the world. Its the pilots, their professionalism and their discipline. It's not a computer. We already have the technology to eliminate the pilot altogether in favour of land based operators like the guys that fly Predator Drones from a ground based station on the other side of the world.

Just shows how little you really know about the subject.

Pilots are the only cog in the wheel that can manage a cockpit crisis.

They often react incorrectly and have been shown time after time to have made the wrong decision that ended up crashing the aircraft. This is far less likely to happen with a multi-computer based control system.

Additionally, it is extremely important for pilots to maintain sound Aircraft Systems Knowledge. It's important to understand every component and system on the aircraft you fly. Your life will one day depend on it. pilots do have a lot of knowledge and as much knowledge as an engineer does, the only difference is the allowable maintenance that can be done on the 2 different licenses

.
Rubbish! You are only a pilot and you believe you have the same knowledge as the dozens of highly qualified and experienced engineers, of various disciplines that designed the aircraft to fly as it does and safely? That makes you very dangerous as you are the sort of ‘process operator’ that ends up truly believing he actually knows more than the experts ..... until it all goes wrong!

I don’t question your competence or expertise in your job but like many jobs it is a dying profession and yours will not be the first profession to go that way! The day is rapidly approaching where the ‘pilot’ will be a shift worker on the ground sitting behind a screen(s) and will handle more than just one aircraft, with specialists taking over for the departure and approach phases. Very similar to the way ATC is divided at the moment. A dedicated AI system working multiple computers in the aircraft will replace the human factor in the front seat.

I’ll give it ten years at most.

[cyprusgrump]

Rubbish! You are only a pilot and you believe you have the same knowledge as the dozens of highly qualified and experienced engineers, of various disciplines that designed the aircraft to fly as it does and safely? That makes you very dangerous as you are the sort of ‘process operator’ that ends up truly believing he actually knows more than the experts ..... until it all goes wrong!

I don’t question your competence or expertise in your job but like many jobs it is a dying profession and yours will not be the first profession to go that way! The day is rapidly approaching where the ‘pilot’ will be a shift worker on the ground sitting behind a screen(s) and will handle more than just one aircraft, with specialists taking over for the departure and approach phases. Very similar to the way ATC is divided at the moment. A dedicated AI system working multiple computers in the aircraft will replace the human factor in the front seat.

I’ll give it ten years at most.

I think you are missing a bit here… in fact quite big bit…

Pilots like to fly, I mean they really like to fly, in fact they love to fly…. You can’t imagine what most of them go through to get their ticket, flying parachutists, teaching useless students and people that got a ‘flying lesson’ for their birthday just to get their hours up and work towards a commercial licence…

Just the instrument flying part of which is beyond the comprehension of most people as to how complex and exhausting it is (I trained for an IMC which is a private pilot’s shadow of the real thing)… The guy that taught me to fly was the best pilot I’d ever met at that point but his Instrument Rating physically drained him like he’d run 100 marathons!

I sold my ¼ share in an Arrow (a single engine 4-seat prop plane) to a BA pilot – he flew transatlantic as a profession and at weekends flew around the country in G-AVWO as a hobby – he loved flying!

And that is why you end up with people like Chesley Sullenberger sitting in the left seat – when the shit hit the fan (literally) he did something with Flight 1549 that no computer is probably capable of…

...and there aren’t millions of computer controlled cars driving around – there are a small number and they have managed to kill a number of people already.

[Robin Hood]

Rubbish! You are only a pilot and you believe you have the same knowledge as the dozens of highly qualified and experienced engineers, of various disciplines that designed the aircraft to fly as it does and safely? That makes you very dangerous as you are the sort of ‘process operator’ that ends up truly believing he actually knows more than the experts ..... until it all goes wrong!

I don’t question your competence or expertise in your job but like many jobs it is a dying profession and yours will not be the first profession to go that way! The day is rapidly approaching where the ‘pilot’ will be a shift worker on the ground sitting behind a screen(s) and will handle more than just one aircraft, with specialists taking over for the departure and approach phases. Very similar to the way ATC is divided at the moment. A dedicated AI system working multiple computers in the aircraft will replace the human factor in the front seat.

I’ll give it ten years at most.

I think you are missing a bit here… in fact quite big bit…

Pilots like to fly, I mean they really like to fly, in fact they love to fly…. You can’t imagine what most of them go through to get their ticket, flying parachutists, teaching useless students and people that got a ‘flying lesson’ for their birthday just to get their hours up and work towards a commercial licence…

Just the instrument flying part of which is beyond the comprehension of most people as to how complex and exhausting it is (I trained for an IMC which is a private pilot’s shadow of the real thing)… The guy that taught me to fly was the best pilot I’d ever met at that point but his Instrument Rating physically drained him like he’d run 100 marathons!

I sold my ¼ share in an Arrow (a single engine 4-seat prop plane) to a BA pilot – he flew transatlantic as a profession and at weekends flew around the country in G-AVWO as a hobby – he loved flying!

And that is why you end up with people like Chesley Sullenberger sitting in the left seat – when the shit hit the fan (literally) he did something with Flight 1549 that no computer is probably capable of…

...and there aren’t millions of computer controlled cars driving around – there are a small number and they have managed to kill a number of people already.

I too have a PPL that I got in 1987 and have both night and IMC ratings, so I am not ill informed and have missed nothing as I was also an Instrument/Control Systema Engineer by profession. So I have watched the incursion of the electronic age on my own discipline and can directly relate that to the airline industry.

I was never rich enough to own even a share in a light aircraft but learned on a 152/172, and have flow the Piper Arrow, Cherokee and an airways equipped Piper 181 Warrior. I flew out of Hawarden and Liverpool and a couple of times from Manchester. I have spent many hours on the flight deck of commercial airliners over the years (before the practice was banned) and have visited many airfields up front ... so to speak. Even Larnaca and have flown a Cherokee on one occasion from Paphos for a sight seeing trip over Episkopi.

It all became far to expensive to have as a hobby, so when I retired from working in 2001 I also retired my licence.

So I see it from the angle of being a pilot (and you are right, it is fun especially flying on instruments) and also as one who has spent 40+ years watching plants that 'needed' a trained crew of multiple operators, to a plant being run by two guys and a very cleaver electronic control system.

I didn't say there are millions of driverless vehicles ..... but that is the intent. Imagine how difficult that will be to implement in Cyprus!

[cyprusgrump]

Rubbish! You are only a pilot and you believe you have the same knowledge as the dozens of highly qualified and experienced engineers, of various disciplines that designed the aircraft to fly as it does and safely? That makes you very dangerous as you are the sort of ‘process operator’ that ends up truly believing he actually knows more than the experts ..... until it all goes wrong!

I don’t question your competence or expertise in your job but like many jobs it is a dying profession and yours will not be the first profession to go that way! The day is rapidly approaching where the ‘pilot’ will be a shift worker on the ground sitting behind a screen(s) and will handle more than just one aircraft, with specialists taking over for the departure and approach phases. Very similar to the way ATC is divided at the moment. A dedicated AI system working multiple computers in the aircraft will replace the human factor in the front seat.

I’ll give it ten years at most.

I think you are missing a bit here… in fact quite big bit…

Pilots like to fly, I mean they really like to fly, in fact they love to fly…. You can’t imagine what most of them go through to get their ticket, flying parachutists, teaching useless students and people that got a ‘flying lesson’ for their birthday just to get their hours up and work towards a commercial licence…

Just the instrument flying part of which is beyond the comprehension of most people as to how complex and exhausting it is (I trained for an IMC which is a private pilot’s shadow of the real thing)… The guy that taught me to fly was the best pilot I’d ever met at that point but his Instrument Rating physically drained him like he’d run 100 marathons!

I sold my ¼ share in an Arrow (a single engine 4-seat prop plane) to a BA pilot – he flew transatlantic as a profession and at weekends flew around the country in G-AVWO as a hobby – he loved flying!

And that is why you end up with people like Chesley Sullenberger sitting in the left seat – when the shit hit the fan (literally) he did something with Flight 1549 that no computer is probably capable of…

...and there aren’t millions of computer controlled cars driving around – there are a small number and they have managed to kill a number of people already.

I too have a PPL that I got in 1987 and have both night and IMC ratings, so I am not ill informed and have missed nothing as I was also an Instrument/Control Systema Engineer by profession. So I have watched the incursion of the electronic age on my own discipline and can directly relate that to the airline industry.

I was never rich enough to own even a share in a light aircraft but learned on a 152/172, and have flow the Piper Arrow, Cherokee and an airways equipped Piper 181 Warrior. I flew out of Hawarden and Liverpool and a couple of times from Manchester. I have spent many hours on the flight deck of commercial airliners over the years (before the practice was banned) and have visited many airfields up front ... so to speak. Even Larnaca and have flown a Cherokee on one occasion from Paphos for a sight seeing trip over Episkopi.

It all became far to expensive to have as a hobby, so when I retired from working in 2001 I also retired my licence.

So I see it from the angle of being a pilot (and you are right, it is fun especially flying on instruments) and also as one who has spent 40+ years watching plants that 'needed' a trained crew of multiple operators, to a plant being run by two guys and a very cleaver electronic control system.

I didn't say there are millions of driverless vehicles ..... but that is the intent. Imagine how difficult that will be to implement in Cyprus!

Driver-less is impossible to imagine anywhere, you only have to drive any journey from A to B to see the bizarre range of threats that are faced every day... Not just drivers but pedestrians, cyclists, animals, etc. I simply can't see how you can automate such things without implementing such strict rules that you effectively end up with railways...

I respect your flying experience, I learnt on a Warrior, did stalls on a Slingsby, aeros on a Pits and bought ¼ of G-AVWO... Everything I've learnt about flying tells me that when it all goes tits you need an experienced pilot to get you out of the shite - not a computer... Or Paphitis obviously...

[cyprusgrump]

I too have a PPL that I got in 1987 and have both night and IMC ratings, so I am not ill informed and have missed nothing as I was also an Instrument/Control Systema Engineer by profession. So I have watched the incursion of the electronic age on my own discipline and can directly relate that to the airline industry.

I was never rich enough to own even a share in a light aircraft but learned on a 152/172, and have flow the Piper Arrow, Cherokee and an airways equipped Piper 181 Warrior. I flew out of Hawarden and Liverpool and a couple of times from Manchester. I have spent many hours on the flight deck of commercial airliners over the years (before the practice was banned) and have visited many airfields up front ... so to speak. Even Larnaca and have flown a Cherokee on one occasion from Paphos for a sight seeing trip over Episkopi.

It all became far to expensive to have as a hobby, so when I retired from working in 2001 I also retired my licence.

So I see it from the angle of being a pilot (and you are right, it is fun especially flying on instruments) and also as one who has spent 40+ years watching plants that 'needed' a trained crew of multiple operators, to a plant being run by two guys and a very cleaver electronic control system.

I didn't say there are millions of driverless vehicles ..... but that is the intent. Imagine how difficult that will be to implement in Cyprus!

Just one further thought...

You clearly understand EFATO, you don't turn back downwind, ever... Look for a field, straight ahead and dump it on the flattest piece of ground you can find... And I can see how you could program that...

But how would you program losing both engines on a fully loaded Airbus and not being able to turn downwind and not having enough height to glide to the closest runway capable of taking you safely and that therefore your only option of saving all souls on board was to dump it in The Hudson...? AI is not going to be able to make decisions like that in the next ten years...

...and okay, it is a one in a billion chance... I've flown all over the place (and on Concorde) and never had so much as a go round (apart from my first solo when I managed seven) but the general public will want to believe that Chesley Sullenberger is sitting up front in the left seat, not some X-Box gamer in a computer room somewhere in Silicone Valley when they get on the plane...

[Paphitis]

Sorry but there isn't a better system right now than the current Multi Crew.

Even drones have pilots, it's just that they are on the ground and won't get killed when the drone spears into the ground. They also have less Situational Awareness. Therefore, more drones were crash because of it. In a military sense, it doesn't matter as drones are actually expendable in high risk missions.

Automation can't provide the following:

Discipline
Skill
Proficiency

The bedrock pillar cornerstones of Airmanship

Or the pillars of knowledge:

Self
Aircraft
Team
Environment
Risk

to give captured outcomes which are:

Situational Awareness
Judgement

We call that Threat & Error Management in this day and age because threats and errors are ever evolving. They are not static although some can be. The environment and the weather as well as the aircraft systems are ever changing into a different set of circumstances, and automation can't cope with all the permutations like a 2 pilot multi crew can.

Airbus and Boeing can eliminate the pilot right now. They won't, at least not within the next 50 years. They are hesitant about passenger drones as well or whatever you want to call it. They know this product will not capture the confidence or trust of the flying public. Passengers prefer pilots to go down with them. Bottom line.

To prevent accidents you need to capture errors - organizational and internal.

organizational - regulatory and company induced (culture, procedures etc)

Internal - pilots.

BTW - its not correct to say pilots are responsible for most accidents. that is completely not true. Pilots are only a small part of a series of errors which when combined had led to an accident. Pilots are only a contributory factor most of the time.

Drones still have accidents from both Organizational Errors and Internal as they are still flown by pilots.

The best way to capture Internal Errors is still the Multi Crew Environment. In other words 2 pilots. A Pilot Flying and a Pilot Monitoring. The Automation such as autopilots and so on are just a tool, used by the Multi Crew to shed load and release brain power.It too reduces mistakes as a result of what its designed to achieve.

it isn't a substitute for proper TEM or Airmanship. The buck will still stop with the Captain. Ships can also be auto-piloted, but the captain is in charge and responsible. Plus, computers don't actually operate autonomously. They will only do what they are programmed to do. put shit in, shit will come out.

All emergencies are pre-briefed especially the following:
1. Engine Fire
2. Engine Failure
3. Red Light warning
4. Structural
5. any unsafety

That' is done before plane starts to TAXI. The crew will go through all drills in the event of any of these outcomes after Take Off.

Then the Standard Departure Brief for One Engine Out is briefed. We have a separate SDP for One Engine Out that takes us into a pre-programmed Holding Pattern. It's just a case of pushing one bottom and the autopilot takes us into the pattern, completes the sector entry and flies the hold. Leaves the pilots free to do other critical things.

We go into the Holding Pattern in the event of a an emergency to allow the identification of the failure and then completion of Phase One checks (Memory Items) and then Phase 2 Checks (non-memory items). We actually look up the Quick Reference Guide to complete the read and do checks like a shopping list. PM is in charge of check lists.

This is what makes aviation so safe. The 2 crew system is like an orchestra. It's a symphony and one complements the other. Each pilot knows their duties as they are split into Pilot Flying and Pilot Monitoring duties. For instance, PM is in charge of all radios and comms so PF can fly the plane. It's a very beautiful system.

Now is we had an EFATO, we will fly into the hold which is usually 20 miles from the airport into the hold to identify, complete phase ones and phase twos.

After that we sit and evaluate before making decisions. 2 pilots are involved and its a process of elimination really - a pros and cons. We need to look at our options and we need to assess the potential ramifications of each course of action - to make the right decision. Maybe we can't land immediately because we are in-excess of the Max Landing Weight. Therefore, we need to shed fuel or burn it to reduce our weight. Maybe the runway is not long enough for our landing at this airport because of our weight and inertia, therefore we need to go to another, preferably with emergency services (another consideration). No use going to a small town in bumfuck nowhere where there are no hospital beds, ambulances, or airport Fire Response. A One Engine Out plane needs 67% more runway than the when it has all engines operating, because in OEO there is no reverse thrust. If you put the live engine into reverse than you would veer off the runway and end up in buildings or across a highway and into a school bus. You rely on disc brakes which will get so hot they can burst into flames (why we need Emergency Response and Fire Rescue). What about the Weather (are there Thunderstorms or a big crosswind?). What about the NOTAMs? These are the kinds of things we talk about and make decisions accordingly.

Is there an immediate threat? In an engine failure the answer is no. We have 2 of them remember. We can fly on one. No one is going to die just yet.

But in an engine fire there could be if the fire is not extinguished by the fire suppression systems which are on board.

If there is an immediate threat, you need to get on the ground immediately and so on. A computer is not able to meet or comprehend all the threats. Nor will it achieve a lesser accident rate than the multi crew. As a tool however, then yes, automation has its place and reduces Internal Errors because it sheds the load off pilots. Like when it flies the aircraft for us so that we can do other things like identify, communicate intentions to ATC (issue a Pan Pan or Mayday)so that we have priority to all other traffic, then complete all our checks.

Pilot overload or high workload = more errors. Automation helps address this, but it isn't a pilot replacement.

Everything we do is a process of Threat and Error management. it's not possible to eliminate all errors, and the industry accepts this but it also sets a very high bar both in the regulatory and organizational sphere and also within the Flight Operations of a multi crew. Humans are not God and computers which are made and operated by humans do not have the intelligence of humans to assess or manage Errors.

But we have systems in place to capture 99.99% of errors.

[Robin Hood]

cyprusgrump:

Driver-less is impossible to imagine anywhere, you only have to drive any journey from A to B to see the bizarre range of threats that are faced every day... Not just drivers but pedestrians, cyclists, animals, etc. I simply can't see how you can automate such things without implementing such strict rules that you effectively end up with railways...

I agree with you 100% .... it has to be all auto or all manual! Oil and water don’t mix. I see that change in ground transport as eventually being limited ‘personal’ transport (Electric) to hubs where you catch an automated mass transit link to other hubs to reach a given destination.

I respect your flying experience, I learnt on a Warrior, did stalls on a Slingsby, aeros on a Pits and bought ¼ of G-AVWO... Everything I've learnt about flying tells me that when it all goes tits you need an experienced pilot to get you out of the shite - not a computer... Or Paphitis obviously...

I agree when it applies to light aircraft as they are yet to embrace automated computer controls, (that would take the fun out of flying) they still use the old pull-and-push system where there is a physical link between the pilots limbs and the control surfaces.

You clearly understand EFATO, you don't turn back downwind, ever... Look for a field, straight ahead and dump it on the flattest piece of ground you can find... And I can see how you could program that...

Again I agree when applied to light aircraft .... a bit more complex on a jet liner.

But how would you program losing both engines on a fully loaded Airbus and not being able to turn downwind and not having enough height to glide to the closest runway capable of taking you safely and that therefore your only option of saving all souls on board was to dump it in The Hudson...?

Yes .... there will always be what is seemingly impossible. But in that instance he NEEDED to reference all the avionics for speed/height/direction etc ...... but he still obviously had the hydraulics and avionics working or he could not have achieved what he did. Which in any ones book was a magnificent piece of flying ..... even then they initially tried to blame him for the accident!

AI is not going to be able to make decisions like that in the next ten years...

I think if you actually look at it in detail ..... it would even be possible today! We get our input from our senses and the brain converts that into a reaction. A computer can do the same a million times faster and with thousands more inputs considered. When you think about it the computer does what a good pilot would do but much, much faster, considering many different scenarios and can decide what it considers the best option on all the information it has. We, as human beings are limited ..... some more than others!

...and okay, it is a one in a billion chance... I've flown all over the place (and on Concorde) and never had so much as a go round (apart from my first solo when I managed seven) but the general public will want to believe that Chesley Sullenberger is sitting up front in the left seat, not some X-Box gamer in a computer room somewhere in Silicone Valley when they get on the plane...

My first engine failure simulation with the CFI, a Senior BA pilot, he closed the throttle with us at about 1500ft and a mile or so from the field and said ‘OK .... now put it down on the airfield.’ I did magnificently! Just cleared the hedge at the approach to the runway and put it down on the narrow approach strip before the big number 270! Very good he said but let me give you a tip? It is better to run off the tarmac at the end of the field at walking pace ..... than it is to hit the approach hedge at 60+mph! Aim for the middle of the chosen point next time!

He was right ..... that happens when you lack experience and you think you know it all.

[Kikapu]

Paphitis,

Great post with great information, but the reason why we need multi crew in the cockpit right now, is because that is the way the cockpits are set up with hundreds of knobs, buttons, switches and gauges. Not too long ago, we had even more than what we have today, hence the reason why there were 3 pilots in the cockpit with the engineer behind the two in the front. As more automation has been introduced into the cockpit, the engineer’s position has been eliminated, and with time, we will get down to one pilot as more automation is introduced. Eventually, the single pilot too will be eliminated as the planes would become fully automated. There may be a “pilot” on the plane monitoring the system with his iPad from his small cabin to rest with a bed, until the time comes, even he too won’t be needed.

As we go into the future, reducing cost in plane building will become a priority, as well as time in producing them. With billions of more people in the world, there will be need for more and more planes. By having a fully automated planes to self fly without pilots would eliminate almost all of the instruments in the cockpit, which would be a major cost savings as they will no longer be needed. Even all the windows will be eliminated for the cockpits and the passenger sections. Today, only 15-20% of the passengers enjoy window view as the rest of the passengers do not.

Planes will fly more and more from point to point, flying 15, 20 and more hours, non stop, which is very hard on the flight crew. Today there are shortage of pilots in every airline and as more and more planes are needed by the thousands, fast production with less cost is going to be the standard, as there will be major shortage of pilots for the future aviation. With many more planes occupying the same space we have today, flying much closer together to fit them all in the air safely, all will be controlled by GPS satellites to separate them all without much input from humans to get the planes from A to B.

As with most professions in different industries with advancement in technology, pilots too will become redundant. I give it 30 years. Younger generation today are all growing up in the technological world, so for them to fly without a pilot on the plane will be no different than cars, trains, buses trucks and ships all being self driven. It will become second nature for them. It is inevitable.

[Robin Hood]

Kikapu:

A well thought out post! That is exactly what I was trying to get over. Everything Paphitis described in what was a sort of job description would be far more efficient, more economically viable, far more reliable and much safer if it is done by a triplex computer system with inputs from 'pilots' on the ground.

BTW: There were originally four on the flight deck .... the pilot, the co-pilot, the flight engineer and for a short time after WWII ..... they also needed a navigator. He was the first to go and was replaced by RADAR and ATC. ATC can handle several flights and before long the ground based 'pilot' will be doing the same. Now we are down to just two on the flight deck, who spend most of the time really doing not-a-lot apart from the first and last few minutes of the flight ...... but I think the glamour days of being a pilot with a girl on each arm ..... are a rapidly becoming a distant memory?

When Paphitis is as old as me and he tells some kid that he was once a pilot, the snotty nosed little brat will say "What the f**k is a pilot?"