3 ms·

>when both planes and trains haven't been automated for various reasons. I thought both were already highly automated?

Tobani 9y ago
Some trains are very automated. And there is autopilot/autolanding for jets, BUT the pilot has to engage them, and they can't be used in all circumstances. That is to say that they are about as automated as the Tesla Autopilot. Once you get on the highway, the car can keep course and maintain the appropriate speed. This is a long way off from the world of "Enter the destination from my garage, take a nap, and wake up an hour later at my destination," of "Full Autonomy." There is a distinct inflection point of utility where Autonomous vehicles require you to be paying attention to take over in emergency, and the point at which that is no longer required.
w0utert 9y ago
Automated: yes. Autonomous: no. There's a fundamental difference between the two. Airplane autopilots are basically scripted, and operate fully within the parameters set by the pilot. There is almost no intelligence, and very little adaptivity there. The pilot needs to reprogram the autopilot manually when the flight plan changes, for example. Flight conditions can change in many ways that require the autopilot to be reprogrammed, reconfigured, or even switched off. Airplanes have actually crashed more than once because the pilot configured the autopilot incorrectly. I don't know much about trains, except that fully automating without adapting all the rail infrastructure is more difficult than you would imagine, for example because there is basically no standardization in how semaphores are placed, for example.
- cmurf 9y ago
  FAA flight plan plus an IFR clearance is basically a script. Before autopilots, the pilot followed that script, without radar, with waypoint and next fix ETA reporting by radio. And it has a fallback in place for lost communications, the flight is expected to fly and land at its destination per it's clearance (or most recently amended version of it). And the fallback also includes the possibility of being unable to land at the destination, and instead having to go to the specified alternate in the flight plan. http://delta.jepptech.com/jifp/help/Images/FAAFlightPlan.gif http://delta.jepptech.com/jifp/help/Images/FAAFlightPlan.gif
- diggernet 9y ago
  Thanks for this. I wish there was more awareness of the distinction. Too many comments here are describing automated things as autonomous.

Some trains are very automated. And there is autopilot/autolanding for jets, BUT the pilot has to engage them, and they can't be used in all circumstances. That is to say that they are about as automated as the Tesla Autopilot. Once you get on the highway, the car can keep course and maintain the appropriate speed. This is a long way off from the world of "Enter the destination from my garage, take a nap, and wake up an hour later at my destination," of "Full Autonomy." There is a distinct inflection point of utility where Autonomous vehicles require you to be paying attention to take over in emergency, and the point at which that is no longer required.

w0utert 9y ago

Automated: yes. Autonomous: no. There's a fundamental difference between the two. Airplane autopilots are basically scripted, and operate fully within the parameters set by the pilot. There is almost no intelligence, and very little adaptivity there. The pilot needs to reprogram the autopilot manually when the flight plan changes, for example. Flight conditions can change in many ways that require the autopilot to be reprogrammed, reconfigured, or even switched off. Airplanes have actually crashed more than once because the pilot configured the autopilot incorrectly. I don't know much about trains, except that fully automating without adapting all the rail infrastructure is more difficult than you would imagine, for example because there is basically no standardization in how semaphores are placed, for example.

cmurf 9y ago
FAA flight plan plus an IFR clearance is basically a script. Before autopilots, the pilot followed that script, without radar, with waypoint and next fix ETA reporting by radio. And it has a fallback in place for lost communications, the flight is expected to fly and land at its destination per it's clearance (or most recently amended version of it). And the fallback also includes the possibility of being unable to land at the destination, and instead having to go to the specified alternate in the flight plan. http://delta.jepptech.com/jifp/help/Images/FAAFlightPlan.gif http://delta.jepptech.com/jifp/help/Images/FAAFlightPlan.gif
diggernet 9y ago
Thanks for this. I wish there was more awareness of the distinction. Too many comments here are describing automated things as autonomous.