how long

This forum has been developed to discuss aviation related topics.

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

Post Reply
User avatar
'97 Tercel
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 613
Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2013 5:19 pm

Re: how long

Post by '97 Tercel »

C'mon, this thread is super awesome - keep it going...
---------- ADS -----------
 
homesick
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 26
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:45 am
Location: Where the streets have no names

Re: how long

Post by homesick »

I'll bite.

Speaking of spelling in school....

prosecuters??
---------- ADS -----------
 
Screw you hippies!!!!
Eric Janson
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1032
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 10:44 am

Re: how long

Post by Eric Janson »

Zaibatsu wrote: Wed Aug 05, 2020 8:16 pm
tsgarp wrote: Wed Aug 05, 2020 4:53 pm In aviation, the trend is obvious. A 1950's era transport required 4 people up-front; 2 Pilots, an Eng and a Nav. The Engs and the Navs are gone because all of their work was based on pattern recognition. Their jobs were the first to be automated out of existence because the patterns with which they dealt were not that complex and not that dynamic.
1950s transports used to have 4 engines too. Then three. Then two.

I can see where that trend is going too, but it sounds more like the punchline of a blonde joke.
I still fly a 4 Engine Jet for a living - operating a 2 Engine Jet on some of the flights I do would be problematic.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Always fly a stable approach - it's the only stability you'll find in this business
User avatar
valleyboy
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 685
Joined: Tue May 03, 2016 4:05 am
Contact:

Re: how long

Post by valleyboy »

Multi-Engine and I mean aircraft with more than 2 engines is a wonderful thing. More is definitely better. The plusses are enormous and less complicated. From alternates to extended flight over water it's a much better world compared to that of the twin engine ops. I can't believe people actually do single engine IFR/night now and convince themselves it's ok. Damn how times change.

Just took this opportunity to keep the thread drift going and stir the shit a little and see covid brain reactions.
---------- ADS -----------
 
tsgarp
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 165
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2004 3:18 pm

Re: how long

Post by tsgarp »

rookiepilot wrote: Thu Aug 06, 2020 7:31 pm
tsgarp wrote: Thu Aug 06, 2020 7:04 pm
I put smart in quotes because there is no universally accepted definition of intelligence.
Based on your posts, I'd call them what we call in the business, "negatively correlated" to intelligence.

It's a big word, can google that one too.
I think you are mixing me up with tsgas, given that you and haven’t addressed each other yet on this thread.
---------- ADS -----------
 
tsgarp
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 165
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2004 3:18 pm

Re: how long

Post by tsgarp »

Rockie wrote: Fri Aug 07, 2020 1:46 pm
tsgarp wrote: Fri Aug 07, 2020 1:16 pm
Rockie wrote: Fri Aug 07, 2020 9:56 am

Imagine this sentence being some critical line of code and you get my point.
Your point is moot because critical lines of code get much better proof reading than Avcanada posts.
Yet mistakes still happen, imagine that. As for the Hornet and Airbus (both of which I actually have significant time in...unlike you), it sure isn’t computer programmers or their product flying them either or they’d all crash. So who is flying them?

I’m tempted to say f**k off you insignificant, irrelevant s**t, but that wouldn’t be polite.

Trump didn’t build a business, he built a criminal enterprise that is corrupt to the bone. It’ll be interesting how much fraud and money laundering the SDNY prosecuters dig up now that they’re getting the Trump family records.

And by the way, did they teach spelling at the school you went to?
I hate to break this to you, but, in both the Airbus and the Hornet there are many layers of computers and code between you and the control surfaces. One needs no time in the aircraft to know this, one only need know how to read.

There will indeed be mistakes in the computer code, however, most of the data indicates that those mistakes result in fewer accidents than the human errors (were they allowed to occur) they prevent. In summary, the computers aren’t perfect, they are just much, much better than you.

I figured that lighting the Trump fuse would result in some fireworks; you did not disappoint. So, after three years of being under the most intense and biased scrutiny with no results, you still think Trump is a criminal? Dude, at some point you will have to realize that you can’t make something true just by wishing it hard enough. This also applies to pilotless airliners; the ugly truth is that your are replaceable. But take heart, no computer could ever do what you do here on Avcanada.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8096
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: how long

Post by Rockie »

tsgarp wrote: Sun Aug 09, 2020 6:41 am
I hate to break this to you, but, in both the Airbus and the Hornet there are many layers of computers and code between you and the control surfaces. One needs no time in the aircraft to know this, one only need know how to read.

There will indeed be mistakes in the computer code, however, most of the data indicates that those mistakes result in fewer accidents than the human errors (were they allowed to occur) they prevent. In summary, the computers aren’t perfect, they are just much, much better than you.

As it turns out I both know how to read and have years of actual experience flying both types which you seem to think isn't relevant. Layers of code between me and the control surfaces doesn't mean those layers of code are flying the airplane. I hate to break this to you, but the pilot does. And if I were to break down the number of times I intervened in what the computers were doing to keep from violating air regulations, or airspace, and/or dying versus how many times computers intervened in what I was doing it would be a score of about a million to zero.

You speak like a computer engineer who doesn't actually use the product you build and believe your own hype. Or a high school student with no actual experience in anything including human relations.
---------- ADS -----------
 
tsgarp
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 165
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2004 3:18 pm

Re: how long

Post by tsgarp »

Rockie wrote: Sun Aug 09, 2020 7:05 am
As it turns out I both know how to read and have years of actual experience flying both types which you seem to think isn't relevant. Layers of code between me and the control surfaces doesn't mean those layers of code are flying the airplane. I hate to break this to you, but the pilot does. And if I were to break down the number of times I intervened in what the computers were doing to keep from violating air regulations, or airspace, and/or dying versus how many times computers intervened in what I was doing it would be a score of about a million to zero.

You speak like a computer engineer who doesn't actually use the product you build and believe your own hype. Or a high school student with no actual experience in anything including human relations.
Rockie, this is not a matter of opinion, its a matter of observable fact. Airbus did it. They built an airliner that flies without pilots. It's here. There is no reason not to expect that technology to be used in appropriate environments in the near future.

I'm going to expose you to something called a Fermi analysis (a systematic approach to forming an estimate based on limited information). I am assuming that you had an average career length as a pilot; that equates to roughly 25000 hrs of flying. We'll take your claim that you needed to intervene with your automation 1000000 times over your career as valid. That means that you had to intervene with you automation 40 times per hour, or roughly every 1.5 minutes during your flying career. This leads to one of several possible conclusions; 1) You exude some as yet undocumented force on computers that makes them malfunction (i.e. computers find you just as annoying as humans), 2) You are one really unlucky person, 3) You just can't count all that well, or 4) You like hyperbole. Any one of these four conclusions explains your position on this thread.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8096
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: how long

Post by Rockie »

tsgarp wrote: Sun Aug 09, 2020 7:52 am

Rockie, this is not a matter of opinion, its a matter of observable fact. Airbus did it. They built an airliner that flies without pilots.

It's here. or 4) You like hyperbole. Any one of these four conclusions explains your position on this thread.
Airbus demonstrated it, but pilotless drones have been around a while and this was just a bigger version of one. The reasons why pilotless drones will not be carrying passengers in non-sterile airspace have been explained many, many times whether you recognize them or not, but if you or your great-great grandchildren are still alive when the first one does you're welcome to sign up.

#4 is correct. Not quite a million, but it's telling that you take things so literally you can't recognize hyperbole. Like you take statements like "it'll fly itself" as absolute fact. It is no exaggeration however that every actual pilot that actually flies automated aircraft intervenes constantly in that automation. As I've stated before many times, the FLCH, V/S, HDG and finally the A/T and autopilot disconnect switches are there for a reason and used constantly. According to you the aircraft takes care of itself which shows the spectacular degree of ignorance you live in.

You're an engineer right?
---------- ADS -----------
 
DrSpaceman
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 100
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2014 8:03 am

Re: how long

Post by DrSpaceman »

I think I know what the issue is here, Tsgarp watched this video and thinks he’s an expert on the subject:
https://youtu.be/7Pq-S557XQU

The fact is nothing short of a fully working general AI will work for removing both pilots completely from the cockpit. And once we get there, EVERYONE Is replaceable (doctors, lawyers, basically everything) so it won’t really matter at that point. They still have drivers in front trains and they’ve been able to automate that for decades.
---------- ADS -----------
 
garfield
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 229
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 5:35 pm

Re: how long

Post by garfield »

DrSpaceman wrote: Sun Aug 09, 2020 8:24 am The fact is nothing short of a fully working general AI will work for removing both pilots completely from the cockpit. And once we get there, EVERYONE Is replaceable (doctors, lawyers, basically everything) so it won’t really matter at that point. They still have drivers in front trains and they’ve been able to automate that for decades.
+1
---------- ADS -----------
 
digits_
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3190
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2011 2:26 am

Re: how long

Post by digits_ »

DrSpaceman wrote: Sun Aug 09, 2020 8:24 am The fact is nothing short of a fully working general AI will work for removing both pilots completely from the cockpit. And once we get there, EVERYONE Is replaceable (doctors, lawyers, basically everything) so it won’t really matter at that point. They still have drivers in front trains and they’ve been able to automate that for decades.
Why is that a fact?

Most people here seem to assume that pilots can only be replaced if airplanes can operate completely from A to B, without any human intervention at all, and deal with all diversion decision, notams, weather etc.

That's not the case. You still have ATC. What's the difference between ATC telling pilots to change a heading or give them a direct, and have the pilots put it in the autopilot, versus ATC inputting the data directly in the auto pilot? ATC can be the brains if necessary. They'll be on the ground for the tough decisions, and no pilots in the airplane. Thats not sciene fiction, that's just waiting for regulations to allow it, and some manageable technological changes to be executed.
---------- ADS -----------
 
As an AvCanada discussion grows longer:
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
Zaibatsu
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 543
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2016 8:37 am

Re: how long

Post by Zaibatsu »

digits_ wrote: Sun Aug 09, 2020 11:27 am
DrSpaceman wrote: Sun Aug 09, 2020 8:24 am The fact is nothing short of a fully working general AI will work for removing both pilots completely from the cockpit. And once we get there, EVERYONE Is replaceable (doctors, lawyers, basically everything) so it won’t really matter at that point. They still have drivers in front trains and they’ve been able to automate that for decades.
Why is that a fact?

Most people here seem to assume that pilots can only be replaced if airplanes can operate completely from A to B, without any human intervention at all, and deal with all diversion decision, notams, weather etc.

That's not the case. You still have ATC. What's the difference between ATC telling pilots to change a heading or give them a direct, and have the pilots put it in the autopilot, versus ATC inputting the data directly in the auto pilot? ATC can be the brains if necessary. They'll be on the ground for the tough decisions, and no pilots in the airplane. Thats not sciene fiction, that's just waiting for regulations to allow it, and some manageable technological changes to be executed.
Image
---------- ADS -----------
 
Meatservo
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2477
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2005 11:07 pm
Location: Negative sequencial vortex

Re: how long

Post by Meatservo »

My prediction is that there will continue to be human pilots in the front of airliners as well as increasingly capable auto pilots, until such time as they invent a system that is sufficiently advanced to function as an auto-SCAPEGOAT.
---------- ADS -----------
 
If I'd known I was going to live this long, I'd have taken better care of myself
digits_
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3190
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2011 2:26 am

Re: how long

Post by digits_ »

Zaibatsu wrote: Sun Aug 09, 2020 11:43 am
digits_ wrote: Sun Aug 09, 2020 11:27 am
DrSpaceman wrote: Sun Aug 09, 2020 8:24 am The fact is nothing short of a fully working general AI will work for removing both pilots completely from the cockpit. And once we get there, EVERYONE Is replaceable (doctors, lawyers, basically everything) so it won’t really matter at that point. They still have drivers in front trains and they’ve been able to automate that for decades.
Why is that a fact?

Most people here seem to assume that pilots can only be replaced if airplanes can operate completely from A to B, without any human intervention at all, and deal with all diversion decision, notams, weather etc.

That's not the case. You still have ATC. What's the difference between ATC telling pilots to change a heading or give them a direct, and have the pilots put it in the autopilot, versus ATC inputting the data directly in the auto pilot? ATC can be the brains if necessary. They'll be on the ground for the tough decisions, and no pilots in the airplane. Thats not sciene fiction, that's just waiting for regulations to allow it, and some manageable technological changes to be executed.
Image
The pilotless airplane would probably have crashed in that case, but it would have saved the lifes of people on board airplanes that overran runways due to landing past the markers, approaching too fast and trying to make it work etc. Not entirely sure the balance would swing in favor of the pilots if you added up all preventable accidents.
---------- ADS -----------
 
As an AvCanada discussion grows longer:
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
Zaibatsu
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 543
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2016 8:37 am

Re: how long

Post by Zaibatsu »

The mistake is focusing on the accidents rather than.
The thousands of safe flights made every day.

Rocky is right. He’s keeping the computer from doing an error every time he makes an input. I seriously doubt that the computer is telling him no when he says yes. You have to be far off them map for that.
---------- ADS -----------
 
digits_
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3190
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2011 2:26 am

Re: how long

Post by digits_ »

Zaibatsu wrote: Sun Aug 09, 2020 1:04 pm The mistake is focusing on the accidents rather than.
The thousands of safe flights made every day.

Rocky is right. He’s keeping the computer from doing an error every time he makes an input. I seriously doubt that the computer is telling him no when he says yes. You have to be far off them map for that.
Then he has pretty crappy computers on his plane. What inputs does he have to make to save the plane that could not have been done by ATC into the autopilot? How many emergencies have you encountered that would have had a significantly different outcome if a computer made the decision, so basically where not following the checklist was necessary to avoid a crash?
---------- ADS -----------
 
As an AvCanada discussion grows longer:
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
Rockie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 8096
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 7:10 am

Re: how long

Post by Rockie »

digits_ wrote: Sun Aug 09, 2020 1:27 pmWhat inputs does he have to make to save the plane that could not have been done by ATC into the autopilot?
All of them. The mistake you’re making is assuming pilots only intervene in the automation when ATC requires something. Hardly. Another mistake is that every clearance and instruction given to a pilot by ATC can be rejected by the pilot for safety reasons ATC is neither aware of or responsible for.
---------- ADS -----------
 
digits_
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3190
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2011 2:26 am

Re: how long

Post by digits_ »

Rockie wrote: Sun Aug 09, 2020 1:42 pm
digits_ wrote: Sun Aug 09, 2020 1:27 pmWhat inputs does he have to make to save the plane that could not have been done by ATC into the autopilot?
All of them. The mistake you’re making is assuming pilots only intervene in the automation when ATC requires something. Hardly. Another mistake is that every clearance and instruction given to a pilot by ATC can be rejected by the pilot for safety reasons ATC is neither aware of or responsible for.
Would you mind giving some examples? In the past 6 months (or 6 months pre covid if you like), what were the most critical changes you had to make, because the autopilot was going to screw something up?
---------- ADS -----------
 
As an AvCanada discussion grows longer:
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
DrSpaceman
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 100
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2014 8:03 am

Re: how long

Post by DrSpaceman »

This thread is full of people who have never been in a modern airliner cockpit. No plane flies itself. It’s akin to saying my car drives itself when it’s on cruise control.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “General Comments”