Boeing studies pilotless airplane

This forum has been developed to discuss aviation related topics.

Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog

Post Reply
trey kule
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4762
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 7:09 pm

Re: Boeing studies pilotless airplane

Post by trey kule »

Well played. :prayer:
---------- ADS -----------
 
Accident speculation:
Those that post don’t know. Those that know don’t post
User avatar
C-GGGQ
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2051
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 12:33 pm

Re: Boeing studies pilotless airplane

Post by C-GGGQ »

The point of ground based pilots for military drones is to keep people out of warzones and harms way. There is no practical reason for ground based crews on a passenger plane. Its an unecessary complication.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
confusedalot
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 959
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 9:08 pm
Location: location, location, is what matters

Re: Boeing studies pilotless airplane

Post by confusedalot »

So now we are talking ground based pilots on a pilotless aircraft thread. What's the point of putting them behind a desk? You still need a pilot. Who cares where he is situated. You are still paying a salary to that person.

It appears to me that you can take an off the shelf well equipped airliner today and make it operate on it's own with a few more automated systems. All you need is auto taxi, takeoff, collision and weather avoidance, gear and flap actuating, autoflight selections and yer done. All within current technology, actually ten year or more technology. Weather avoidance may be a bit dicey though, weather radar is good but not great, still takes alot of human interpretation. Handling an emergency through automated means is really no big deal....cargo fire...no problem.....fire the bottles, divert to closest airport.

ATC can easily be provided with the tools to direct the machine with a mouse or some very basic keyboard commands, therefore ensuring separation, by replacing verbal or cpdlc type communications. No big deal there.

But, ATC effectively becomes the operator of the aircraft, raising responsability and legal issues.

Even though it can be done in a perfect world, I can't see it happenning anytime soon. Primarily because of cost, but also because of regulatory inertia and, down the road, acceptance by the ordinary person on the street. Met a few non aviation people over time who are absolutely terrified of airplanes.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Attempting to understand the world. I have not succeeded.

veni, vidi,...... vici non fecit.

:?
Posthumane
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 649
Joined: Sat May 09, 2009 6:16 pm

Re: Boeing studies pilotless airplane

Post by Posthumane »


I'm sure Boeing does have many subject matter experts guiding the engineers in studying this, and the one in charge of this study quoted in the article seems to completely agree with me.
Perhaps you should read what he said again. You said the task is impossible until a true ai who is self aware is developed. He said that the technology won't be used until it can deal with emergency situations as well ss human pilots have. They are not at all the same statements. His I agree with.

BTW, did you know in the B787 there are many environmental conditions that exceed the autopilot's capabilities and autoland is not approved. There are many equipment faults that seriously degrade the autopilot's function, and by a very quick search of the QRH at least 3 that render the autopilot inoperative completely. I'm sure there are more that Boeing hasn't anticipated or figures will never happen so don't need a procedure for. Airbus used to think like that too when the 320 first came out. Their education has been a hard and bloody one over the years.

First rule when an engineer extols the virtues of his unproven creation...don't believe him.
Did you know that the 787 is an aircraft designed to be piloted by humans? Like the airbus, although it has some piecemeal automation to aide the pilots, it was obviously never designed to operate without them. Systems like the autopilot are not designed to the practical limit of reliability and redundancy because they don't have to be. Things like powerplants are, at much greater cost, because a total power failure carries much more risk than an autopilot failure. After all, the pilots can't pedal the damn thing. But even thren, total power failure can still happen, and that's simply a risk that's accepted. In autonomous aircraft where the autopilot is a critical item they are made with the same levels of redundancy as the powerplants. In small, cheap aircraft that means one questionable powerplant and one questionable autopilot, and in larger systems that can pose a real hazard it means multiple systems with error monitoring and fault tolerance, which can fly with several control system failures.

Btw, i have yet to see an organization where thr designers and engineers are supervised by tge equipment operators. The SMEs are typically other, more senior engineers.
Rockie wrote: Fri May 18, 2018 2:16 pm Did the engineers expect the pitot tubes to ice up, the air data computers go crazy and the autopilots to fail? If so why didn't they prevent it so the crew wouldn't be put in that position in the first place?
Indeed they did. Which is why they made alternate control laws which come into effect when the systems have some failures, relying on the pilot as the backup system. I'm sure you know a lot about alternate laws, since that is actually your area of expertise.
---------- ADS -----------
 
"People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it." -George Bernard Shaw
Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8433
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: Boeing studies pilotless airplane

Post by Rockie »

Still missing the obvious point Posthumane. Dealing with all the possible emergencies requires a self aware real AI. You could cherry pick something and in 50 years build a system to deal with that one narrow set of circumstances, but we are required to deal with everything. You just don’t get that and never will it seems. That’s also why engineers are not supervised by senior engineers, they are supervised by SME’s.

Years ago in a different life my company hired at great expense software designers to build a scheduling program. These people knew how to build software...they did not know anything about what it was actually supposed to do and it was a dismal, expensive failure.

Engineers by themselves do not know anything about physically flying an aircraft and certainly know nothing about commanding one. How could they?

Stay in your lane.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Posthumane
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 649
Joined: Sat May 09, 2009 6:16 pm

Re: Boeing studies pilotless airplane

Post by Posthumane »

Rockie wrote: Tue May 22, 2018 3:17 pm Still missing the obvious point Posthumane. Dealing with all the possible emergencies requires a self aware real AI. You could cherry pick something and in 50 years build a system to deal with that one narrow set of circumstances, but we are required to deal with everything. You just don’t get that and never will it seems.
Let me know when a human is built that can handle everything in all circumstances. When they start building those, then all accidents will cease to exist. In the mean time, we will continue to have a non-zero failure rate of both man and machine. Which failures do you know that an autonomous system can't handle and what is your evidence?
That’s also why engineers are not supervised by senior engineers, they are supervised by SME’s.
This has been a trend in all the engineering jobs you've held? I suppose your experience working as an engineer differs from mine as every supervisor I've had was a senior engineer or scientist. They were all SMEs in their fields of course.
Years ago in a different life my company hired at great expense software designers to build a scheduling program. These people knew how to build software...they did not know anything about what it was actually supposed to do and it was a dismal, expensive failure.
[/quote ]
Ah, well that of course settles it. Your company once bought a bad product from a software company and therefore no product can ever be made to work well. Btw, who was in charge of specifying what it was actually supposed to do?
Engineers by themselves do not know anything about physically flying an aircraft and certainly know nothing about commanding one. How could they?
Firstly, some do. Engineers are not a unified group who all have the same knowledge and experience. Second, when a person doesn't know something, they go out and learn about it. That often involves bringing on other people with more exoerience in the subject. I don't work for Boeing, but I'm willing to bet that they have access to some experience with aircraft and flying them.
Stay in your lane.
Sure thing. I'll stick to the threads that talk about building new systems, and engineering, and autonomy, and military, and maybe a little bit of aircraft maintenance. I promise to stay out of threads about air canada union disputes.
---------- ADS -----------
 
"People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it." -George Bernard Shaw
goldeneagle
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1177
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2006 3:28 pm

Re: Boeing studies pilotless airplane

Post by goldeneagle »

Rockie wrote: Tue May 22, 2018 3:17 pm Engineers by themselves do not know anything about physically flying an aircraft and certainly know nothing about commanding one. How could they?

Stay in your lane.
I read the rants with interest, would love to comment in detail, but I am contractually bound to not discuss much of this in a public forum.

I am an engineer, my original education was in aircraft design, specifically flight control systems, did that back in the late 70's and early 80's. I did computer options in those days, became a 'recognized expert' in digital software for such systems. I also hold an ATPL and spent more than a decade sitting in the front seat of airplanes, quit that role in '90, and was immediately snapped up by an engineering firm working in this field due to the flying experience combined with the engineering background.

I find your rant interesting, because it's so far from the truth. The team I originally started out with back in the day was fully populated with engineers, all of whom had either commercial or military flying experience. Some were there because they lost a medical, some were there because the preferred the schedule and working conditions, and some were there because they just simply got bored with driving airplanes from point A to point B. To a tee, a couple things we all agreed on, the money was FAR superior to what was available for a cockpit position, and the work is far more interesting. The positions attract the cream of the crop, and folks with only one area of expertise need not apply. To work in senior position that area on the bleeding edge design teams you need expertise in at least two, preferably three disciplines.

I know that folks currently flying the line consider automation unthinkable, but, reality is they will be the last folks consulted on the process. The folks at Boeing and Airbus have plenty of in house expertise in both the design and operational side of this business. I've sat in design requirements meeting with folks from both of those companies and the breadth of experience and knowledge in those meetings is far beyond what you give them credit for. They know how airplanes work, they understand operational requirements, and they understand regulatory requirements. That's why they are in the positions they are.

The writing is already on the wall for the process moving forward. The fate of the second pilot will become the same as the fate of the FE position over the next generation of airliner design cycles. Current generation of production was designed around regulatory requirements for two folks up front, much like older equipment was designed around a requirement for 3. Eventually the FE slot was essentially replaced by the FADEC. The next generation will be very capable of operating with just one and the second seat will be available for an optional crew member. Much like the method used to bring ETOPS online, there will eventually come a proving phase, then it will start to deploy wider, and by that time the single pilot airliner will be the norm for new production, older equipment will continue to fly with two as they were designed. Kinda iike there are still a few older machines flying with 3, but that number is now approaching zero as old airframes are retired.

The generation after that will be designed around the concept of 'pilot optional', and the process will begin again heading into a proving phase. I wont see it in my lifetime, but, my grandchildren (currently 2 years old) will have the opportunity to fly in a fully automated people hauler in the later portion of life. By then, there will still be a few very old 787 and 380 type machines flying around with two folks up front, the majority of the fleet will have one, and the bleeding edge new stuff will be rolling out as 'pilot optional' and you can bet your last dollar some low price carrier will be flying them that way to try grind a few cents off the ticket price.

Feel free to rant all you want, but, in the end it's essentially the horseless carriage debate starting anew. In time things will change, like it or not, it will happen.
---------- ADS -----------
 
DrSpaceman
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 102
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2014 8:03 am

Re: Boeing studies pilotless airplane

Post by DrSpaceman »

Creating a wireless link to operate an aircraft imo is completely irresponsible. To go completely pilotless you need true AI, and at that point there are WAY more jobs that can be automated for way more savings than pilots. It’ll create a paradigm shift too big for us to comprehend today.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8433
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: Boeing studies pilotless airplane

Post by Rockie »

Once again I will state that it’s not impossible, but it is not possible without real AI. Boeing agrees.

Boeing Co (BA.N) is looking ahead to a brave new world where jetliners fly without pilots and aims to test some of the technology next year, the world's biggest plane maker said in a briefing ahead of the Paris Airshow.

The idea may seem far-fetched but with self-flying drones available for less than $1,000, "the basic building blocks of the technology clearly are available," said Mike Sinnett, Boeing's vice president of product development.

Jetliners can already take off, cruise and land using their onboard flight computers and the number of pilots on a standard passenger plane has dropped to two from three over the years.
Sinnett, a pilot himself, plans to test the technology in a cockpit simulator this summer and "fly on an airplane next year some artificial intelligence that makes decisions that pilots would make", he said.

Self-flying aircraft would need to meet the safety standards of air travel, which had its safest year in 2016, according to the Aviation Safety Network. They would also need to convince regulators who don't yet know how to certify such planes.

"I have no idea how we're going to do that," Sinnett said. "But we're studying it right now and we're developing those algorithms."

Airlines are among those backing the idea, in part to deal with a projected need for 1.5 million pilots over the next 20 years as global demand for air travel continues to grow.
But a self-flying plane would need to be able land safely as Captain Chesley Sullenberger did in the "Miracle on the Hudson," Sinnett said. "If it can't, then we can't go there."


What do you think is required to make the radically out of the box determination that a river landing is your best chance of survival? What about figuring out how to fly a DC-10 with no hydraulics? What about when the power goes out completely? How about an out of control cabin fire or running out of gas?

You think an Ipad’s going to make the right decisions?

Real artificial intelligence. When you have that let me know...
---------- ADS -----------
 
mixturerich
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 344
Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2015 7:04 pm

Re: Boeing studies pilotless airplane

Post by mixturerich »

Guys, listen. We may one day have pilotless airplanes, but that day will be a very long time from now. We barely even have automated freight trains, buses, or cargo ships. They haven’t removed the crew from those, so why would they remove the crew from airplanes. Besides, the new aircraft have 40+ year service lives and I don’t foresee it being cost-effective to retrofit one to become pilotless. So for now, and for probably half a century, we can all just chill out.
---------- ADS -----------
 
av8ts
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 848
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 8:31 am

Re: Boeing studies pilotless airplane

Post by av8ts »

Totally agree. Although it is coming, I will not see pilotless commercial passenger aircraft in my lifetime
---------- ADS -----------
 
Minimums
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 172
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 2:08 pm

Re: Boeing studies pilotless airplane

Post by Minimums »

It will be here sooner than you think. First cargo ops, then single pilot airliners. We will see it by 2030.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
C-GGGQ
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2051
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 12:33 pm

Re: Boeing studies pilotless airplane

Post by C-GGGQ »

The Otto people who made the famous driverless beer delivery last year were asked when they thought their driverless tech would be ready for mass adoption. Their answer "15 years" so I highly doubt pilotless airplanes will show up in 12.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “General Comments”