3 ms·
Exactly, there is a limit to the intelligence that people are willing to pay for. For example, no aircraft manufacturer will go as far as to develop a differen
by one2know 6y ago
Exactly, there is a limit to the intelligence that people are willing to pay for. For example, no aircraft manufacturer will go as far as to develop a differential thrust system that replicates how UA 232 pilots guided their plane after flight controls are lost. Its just not cost effective.
- joshribakoff 6y agoIs it really any different from a self driving car thats designed to pull over to the side of the road safely if its main functionality fails for an unexpected reason?
- one2know 6y agoYeah, aircraft can't pull over to the side of the road in a catastrophic failure, and aircraft manufacturers will not pay to have the unique actions that a human faced with death would take built into the aircraft systems.
- lopmotr 6y agoIt's not necessary to reproduce all human abilities in recovering from emergencies because about half of crashes are caused by the human pilots in the first place. Just automating the routine things and letting it crash in exceptional cases could be safer than having a human that can save it in the exceptional cases but also mess up the routine things occasionally.
- 7952 6y agoAlthough we have no idea how many potential crashes become near misses as a result of human intervention. For example a pilot initiating a go around in response to a runway incursion. I absolutely agree that most of those issues could be avoided with better technology. But that may require changes to all airports, all aircraft and perhaps even all airport vehicles. Suddenly every single approach is category iii, all the time without any alternative.