how long
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog
-
- Rank 8
- Posts: 775
- Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2013 5:19 pm
-
- Rank 1
- Posts: 42
- Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 6:45 am
- Location: Where the streets have no names
Re: how long
I'll bite.
Speaking of spelling in school....
prosecuters??
Speaking of spelling in school....
prosecuters??
Screw you hippies!!!!
-
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1250
- Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 10:44 am
Re: how long
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.Zaibatsu wrote: ↑Wed Aug 05, 2020 8:16 pm1950s transports used to have 4 engines too. Then three. Then two.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.
I can see where that trend is going too, but it sounds more like the punchline of a blonde joke.
Always fly a stable approach - it's the only stability you'll find in this business
Re: how long
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.
Just took this opportunity to keep the thread drift going and stir the shit a little and see covid brain reactions.
Black air has no lift - extra fuel has no weight
http://www.blackair.ca
http://www.blackair.ca
Re: how long
I think you are mixing me up with tsgas, given that you and haven’t addressed each other yet on this thread.rookiepilot wrote: ↑Thu Aug 06, 2020 7:31 pmBased 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.
Re: how long
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.Rockie wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 1:46 pmYet 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?
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.
Re: how long
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.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.
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.
Re: how long
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.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.
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.
Re: how long
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?
-
- Rank 3
- Posts: 102
- Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2014 8:03 am
Re: how long
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.
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.
Re: how long
+1DrSpaceman 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.
Re: how long
Why is that a fact?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.
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.
As an AvCanada discussion grows longer:
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
Re: how long
digits_ wrote: ↑Sun Aug 09, 2020 11:27 amWhy is that a fact?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.
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.
-
- Rank 10
- Posts: 2565
- Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2005 11:07 pm
- Location: Negative sequencial vortex
Re: how long
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.
If I'd known I was going to live this long, I'd have taken better care of myself
Re: how long
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.Zaibatsu wrote: ↑Sun Aug 09, 2020 11:43 amdigits_ wrote: ↑Sun Aug 09, 2020 11:27 amWhy is that a fact?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.
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.
As an AvCanada discussion grows longer:
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
Re: how long
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.
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.
Re: how long
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?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.
As an AvCanada discussion grows longer:
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
Re: how long
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.
Re: how long
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?Rockie wrote: ↑Sun Aug 09, 2020 1:42 pmAll 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.
As an AvCanada discussion grows longer:
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
-the probability of 'entitlement' being mentioned, approaches 1
-one will be accused of using bad airmanship
-
- Rank 3
- Posts: 102
- Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2014 8:03 am
Re: how long
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.