6 ms·

If it's a good enough name for airplanes, it's a good enough names for cars. Both require users to be ready to take control at any moment.

• foota 10y ago
  Yes but one has a much higher barrier to entry.
• witty_username 10y ago
  Pilots (require certification and extensive training) are different from car drivers.
  • wvenable 10y ago
    Flying a plane is more difficult, therefore requires more training. But driving a car requires licensing (certification) and training.
    • cmurf 10y ago
      Meaningful training is not required to get a driver's license in the U.S. In most states it is completely adequate for a parent to teach you to drive, with no minimum number of hours in a classroom, public or private. Pilots also receive ongoing currency training. This doesn't exist for automobile drivers. Maybe some states require a written test every few years? But in the three states I've lived in, no written, oral, or in-car test it recurrency training required since the original was issued when I was 15 or whenever.
    • darpa_escapee 10y ago
      I had to pass a 20 question multiple choice test, drive at 15mph on a short course and parallel park to get my license at 17 years old. That was my only certification process. Unless laws change, I will never have to go through a training or certification process again in my life. Comparing pilot certification to that of a driver's is disingenuous.
      • wvenable 10y ago
        Thankfully, it's not that easy in all countries. For my test, 3 failures in any category was an instant fail. It's fairly hard to pass the first time. Although if US drivers are so untrained, perhaps auto-pilot is even more relevant.
  • kirrent 10y ago
    No doubt, but both groups need to supervise their Autopilots because autopilots of any kind have always been supervised. That's the point the grandparent is making.
    • jedmeyers 10y ago
      The supervision required for the airplanes is not the same. If airplane autopilot flies you straight into the ground and turns off half a second before hitting it, that won't count as an acceptable behavior on it's part.
  • pyromine 10y ago
    Going beyond the plane analogy everyone is going with, all major transportation systems that utilize autopilot systems (planes, ships, trains) require training that teaches the pilots (or conductors for trains) to know how to stay alert and when to take over. Perhaps it is true that the semi-intelligent autopilot is good enough for these trained activities, but the untrained public doesn't realize that autopilot today is not full automation.
• DrStalker 10y ago
  You're far less likely to suddenly encounter unexpected conditions when flying though; the sky has a tendency to be nothing but air, while the ground has a tendency to be filled with things you have to avoid, many of which are moving.
• jml7c5 10y ago
  I would argue that the time frames involved are very dissimilar. In a Tesla, you need to be able to take complete control in under a second if the system fails. The closest I can think of in a plane is during an assisted landing, which is a relatively brief period where the pilot is fully engaged anyway.
• venomsnake 10y ago
  The clouds are rarely full of rocks. The planes have pilot/copilot and cabin crew. The pilots are highly trained professionals. The systems on the planes pass extremely rigorous testing to be certified. Chances of gaining control and awareness of the situation in a timely manner on an airplane are higher.
• jedmeyers 10y ago
  Airplane autopilots do not require millisecond reaction times from the pilots during the control hand off, while Tesla 'autopilot' apparently does.
• sangnoir 10y ago
  > If it's a good enough name for airplanes, it's a good enough names for cars * The real autopilot doesn't require hands-on-the-yoke while it is engaged, but 'autopilot' does. * Airplanes don't have to deal with complex traffic conditions requiring interaction with other airplanes * Airplanes do not smash into lane barriers/trees if they veer a few feet off the expected course * "Taking control" on an airplane could safely take tens of seconds, but for a car, that is far too long. So no, autopilot isn't good enough for cars. Cars need something much better.
  • neurotech1 10y ago
    Aircraft (with over 9 passengers) are required to have TCAS[0]. TCAS issues a resolution advisory if conflicting traffic is detected, and if the approaching aircraft also maneuvers, TCAS can issue a "Reversal" if needed. Airport Runways have typically have edge lighting, and if an aircraft is off-center during takeoff or landing, can hit them and do damage[1]. Airliners land at 150mph+ so it doesn't take much deviation to hit the edge lights. Occasionally, this also happens during a gusty cross-wind landing while coupled to autopilot (auto-land), or immediately after a touchdown after a coupled landing. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_collision_avoidance_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_collision_avoidance_sy... [1] http://www.emirates247.com/news/emirates/etihad-plane-hits-runway-lights-amid-zero-visibility-in-abu-dhabi-2012-01-31-1.440326 http://www.emirates247.com/news/emirates/etihad-plane-hits-r...
• darpa_escapee 10y ago
  Autopilot for planes came from a culture where failures weren't denied because of profits. Public safety and being surer than sure that incidents never happened again were and are the utmost concern. Pilots are professionals who went through training and certification.