"Aerodynamics does not admit of style."

[GreyGeek]

.....
For those interested in such things, Patrick Smith, an actual pilot, effectively debunks the notion that planes can be fully automated.
....

He sounds like a pilot trying to protect his job and justify his presence in the cockpit. I suspect that a time will come when commercial flights will be flown by autopilots, with a few human pilots in locations around the country ready to take over remotely, just like UAV RQ-170 are flown on occasions, and land the plane remotely. One pilot at some joystick location in Omaha, for example, may be able to be on standby for a couple dozen planes, or more, ready to take remote control of an aircraft in trouble.

I picked up my private pilots license to facilitate travel while operating my own consulting business. More than once I've programmed a triple axis auto pilot on a Cessna Centurion 210 with speeds, altitudes and way points. On take-off, as soon as I retracted the landing gear, I hit the autopilot button and it took over, taking me to the set altitude, on the set heading, and at the set air speed. At a way point a bell alarm would sound and I would take notice of where we were at with where we were supposed to be. This was before GPS. Rarely more than a mile difference after 200 or 300 or more miles of flight. My final way point was the at altitude entry point to the downwind leg of the landing pattern. That's when I'd switch off the autopilot, drop the wheels and manually land the plane, in contact with the tower, of course.

Today, with highly accurate, computer controlled GPS navigation devices one can truly let the autonav system start at the end of the runway and end up at the end of the destination runway, even taxing the plane to the terminal spot. That a pilot doesn't let the autonav system take as much control as it is capable of isn't a reflection of the ability of the autonav system.

One of my clients hired me to computerize their CA, GJ, GL and payroll. (and later their inventory, AR and AP) The head accountant in the office was a man about my age at the time, 50 or so. He had two gals working for him. After my software created the GL he'd spend time running his manual calculator with the pull lever on it, making a manual GL listing, and comparing his with the computer's. Tap, tap, tap, crunch.... repeat, repeat ..... He did this several times a day for more than two weeks. Sometimes he'd jump up and exclaim "ah ha! the computer made a mistake." One of the gals would redo his work and show him his mistake. One Monday, near the end of the project, I came into the office and noticed only the two gals. "Where's ****?" "He was let go", one gal said. "He was wasting too much time and was blocking progress. They made me the head accountant." Some pilots and unions are like that. Blocking progress.

The drones are on autonave most of the time, until it comes time to drop munitions. That's when humans take over.

[oshunluvr]

As a retired Air Traffic Controller certified in all aspects of air traffic control (EnRoute RADAR, Terminal RADAR, Tower) and all at the highest levels of complexity and volume, I am frequently involved in "Human Factors" (the new PC term for Psychology) studies regarding Next-Gen adaptation of Air Traffic automation. I.e. I am one of the guinea pigs.

I hold the opinion that the full automation of aviation will happen, but we're not there yet. One of the biggest hurdles is the ability of the human mind and senses to receive countless amounts of peripheral input and act instantly on that input. When you're working two parallel runways with a line up of 30-40 airplanes to depart, there's a stream of arrivals lined up for more than 200 miles all headed to land on your runways, aircraft are landing, taking off, crossing runways, helicopters and banner tows are passing through, Traffic Management wants one aircraft in the middle of the line up to depart first, the third aircraft out for landing has smoke in the cockpit, one of the pilots is blocking the frequency complaining about the delay or he pushed the wrong button and thinks he's transmitting in the cabin, and a King Air just touched down and tried to turn off the runway too soon and announces he's not going to be able to stop in time to prevent crossing the other runway - What do you do and what order do you do it in?

The above is not a fictional day in the life - it's everyday in the life of a controller at a busy airport. Computers cannot do that yet or come anywhere close. Life in the cockpit isn't much different than that either. Automation is coming, but in baby steps, and it will move from outward in. Meaning; cross country high altitude total automation will come very soon. Heck, we're already more than half way there. When it comes to what we call "Critical Phase Of Flight," we've got a long way to go.

Oddly enough, far more people die in car crashes (mostly caused by human error) than aircraft. A better question might be why aren't we automating cars first? It has to be easier just by the fact that's there's one less dimension to consider.

[GreyGeek]

..... The above is not a fictional day in the life - it's everyday in the life of a controller at a busy airport. ....

That explains why ATCs have such a short half-life.

It also makes me glad I have no fear of dying, or I wouldn't get on board a commercial airliner. Not being afraid of dying doesn't mean making stupid choices. If the weather was marginal or bad I often chose to drive the ChickenHawk instead of flying the Skyhawk. Yet, in terms of passenger miles/accident commercial flying is the safest way to travel despite the complexity and pressure on ATC staff.

However, I liked to fly private because as pilot in command I get to make the critical choices. I was flying to a client in McCook, Ne. It is an uncontrolled airport and on arriving I announced my position and intentions on 119 unicom. I noticed a KingAire lined up on the runway and gave another 119 shout because he didn't respond. He never did. Apparently his ears were on Minneapolis flight control. He shot down the runway and took off. I watched as he climbed up and headed in my directions. More calls on 119 didn't bring a reply. He must have turned on his autopilot and had his head in the cockpit because I saw him in my rear view mirror and pulled up and hard to the right. He passed underneath me, about 10ft below, and rose in front of me about 50 feet ahead. He never gave any indication that he saw me.

[oshunluvr]

Scary GG. I'd like to say I've never heard of that happening before, but I'd be lying. I could tell you stories that would turn your hair grey.

Hmmmm, OK- white !

[SteveRiley]

Computers cannot do that yet or come anywhere close. Life in the cockpit isn't much different than that either. Automation is coming, but in baby steps, and it will move from outward in. Meaning; cross country high altitude total automation will come very soon. Heck, we're already more than half way there. When it comes to what we call "Critical Phase Of Flight," we've got a long way to go.

Which is the point Patrick Smith was making in his article. The comparison to technological advances in the operating room is meaningful. Flying an airplane, like working within the delicate confines of a living human body, requires a certain degree of on-the-spot inventiveness: "Uh oh, we've never seen this before, let's quickly extrapolate a new procedure or {we're all | the patient is} dead." I've read some interesting articles lately about machine learning; so far, despite monumental efforts, machines really haven't been able to invent truly new responses to multiple varied simultaneous stimuli.

Oddly enough, far more people die in car crashes (mostly caused by human error) than aircraft. A better question might be why aren't we automating cars first? It has to be easier just by the fact that's there's one less dimension to consider.

Isn't it fascinating that we've got another thread here on KFN discussing this very topic, at the same time? Heh. I believe, Stuart, that you noted the key difference: driving involves fewer spatial dimensions. If I were to consider which $TRANSPORT-by-wire I'd be willing to trust my life to, my vote would go for fully-automated driving. Consider, for example, the fully-automated subway trains in Singapore. True, they're on fixed paths, and unexpected conditions are rare. The same could be said for existing roads that are redesigned to permit only fully-automated cars, as well: fixed paths, controlled entrances and exits, full end-to-end state of all routes -- and, as a result, rare unexpected conditions.

[oshunluvr]

One thing to consider in the other direction though, is the utter lack of options that driving presents. You are committed to a single surface and fixed altitude. Zero flexibility. Trust me when I say if all aircraft had to operate the way cars do, air travel would cease to exist at a very rapid pace.

EDIT: On the other-other hand, airplanes can't stop mid-travel!

Car automation should phase in similarly to aviation. We already have the technology, just not the infrastructure.

Picture this: You drive you car onto the freeway into the right lane. You have already programmed your destination. You change into the "transition" lane. An inductive coil lowers beneath your car. The coil collects electricity from a buried cable in the lane, your gasoline engine shuts down and the car takes over. The navigation system accelerates to a pre-programmed speed and executes a lane change into the "automatic" lanes. You unfold your newspaper and read the days news - EDIT: Sorry, grab your tablet and read the days news. A few minutes prior to your exit, your car warns you and then changes back to the transition lane and reduces to normal speed. You put away your tablet and cell phone. Your engine comes alive and you take the wheel when ready. You exit the freeway and continue on your way.

I have just solved automotive automation, lowered green house gas emissions, reduced our dependency on foreign oil, reduced "distracted" driving accidents, decreased travel time, and ushered in a new age of travel!

[SteveRiley]

Picture this: {...snip vision of driving utopia...}

I have just solved automotive automation, lowered green house gas emissions, reduced our dependency on foreign oil, reduced "distracted" driving accidents, decreased travel time, and ushered in a new age of travel!

Whew! I'm all sweaty and exhausted! Think I'll take a cold shower and light a spliff. LOL

[oshunluvr]

lol

[GreyGeek]

... Hmmmm, OK- white !

Too late! Old photo!

[oshunluvr]

Too late! Old photo!

Well, you know what they say...

...getting old sucks, but it beats the alternative!

[woodsmoke]

oshunluver, you have all sorts of unsung things that you have done!

woodsmoke

[oshunluvr]

oshunluver, you have all sorts of unsung things that you have done!

woodsmoke

That explains why ATCs have such a short half-life.

Hired at 20, retired at 45. 'nuff said...

[GreyGeek]

Well, you know what they say...

...getting old sucks, but it beats the alternative!

My frequent saying is "Every day above ground is a good day!".
Retiring with your sanity after a career in ATC says a lot for your constitution.

[woodsmoke]

I just LOVE the way that the very intelligent people at this fourm have morphed the original idea!!!

woodlovinitsmoke