4 ms·
The company hasn’t disclosed its pricing model, and the aircraft’s limited routes and capacity—one pilot and one passenger—might curb broad use initially. Why
by causality0 3y ago
The company hasn’t disclosed its pricing model, and the aircraft’s limited routes and capacity—one pilot and one passenger—might curb broad use initially.
Why would you put a pilot in the aircraft? He's not actually controlling the balance of the rotors, so why can't he be remote? If computer control fails the thing is cratering regardless of what the pilot does. Putting him in it is just wasting energy for no reason. "The pilot is less likely to run into something if he'd die along with the passenger" is that it?
- mozman 3y agoI absolutely want a pilot in the aircraft. Things go wrong and fail, you need someone trained to respond
- TechBro8615 3y agoMaybe the pilot is collateral to prove to the customer that the company has some stake in the thing not crashing.
- iliasku 3y agoNo, there are aviation laws that require a human pilot to be present.
- tlb 3y agoFly-by-wire systems have proven very safe. Most Airbus passenger jets are, for instance. But radio links for remote piloting are less reliable, because interference can be impossible to predict.
- palata 3y ago> why can't he be remote? If the pilot is remote, then there is a radio link somewhere. That increases the surface for failure. It is hard to keep a reliable radio link.