3 ms·

But if the pilot has ejected, shouldn't it go into a circular holding pattern?

Arrath 3y ago
Why not a loop, to allow the pilot to re-enter the craft after taking out their pursuer? /s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-wFI9vTqto https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-wFI9vTqto
BuyMyBitcoins 3y ago
I’m envisioning a team of software engineers and a product manager balking at the idea that they would need to implement a feature meant to save the airframe after the pilot ejects. “Who’s gonna need that? If the pilot ejects the thing is a lost cause and it’s just gonna crash anyways. Besides, do you know how hard that would be to implement? We don’t have the time. Anything that happens with the autopilot after ejection is out of scope.”
t0mas88 3y ago
The flight control system isn't aware of the ejection nor any navigation settings. It's not an autopilot, only a stability system that remains perfectly stable if nobody provides inputs. On autopilot it would be different. If the right mode is enabled it will keep flying the programmed route until the end of that route. Then at the end of the route it will either continue straight ahead on the last heading or enter a holding pattern at that position. Depends on what was programmed in the navigation database. But in the end it doesn't really matter after an ejection, it will run out of fuel and crash.
- iancmceachern 3y ago
  It's within the realm of possibility to have it self land after an incident. They certainly can't now, but we have the technology if we wanted. Logically, I think the main thing is there is typically a reason a pilot is ejecting. As the saying goes, a pilot does not eject from a good airplane. The assumption there being if the plane could be landed, it would have been landed by its pilot. If the pilot ejected, it's because they're was something gravely wrong, and therefore is not of great value to put a lot of effort into doing fancy tricks in a about to crash airplane.

Why not a loop, to allow the pilot to re-enter the craft after taking out their pursuer? /s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-wFI9vTqto https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-wFI9vTqto

BuyMyBitcoins 3y ago

I’m envisioning a team of software engineers and a product manager balking at the idea that they would need to implement a feature meant to save the airframe after the pilot ejects. “Who’s gonna need that? If the pilot ejects the thing is a lost cause and it’s just gonna crash anyways. Besides, do you know how hard that would be to implement? We don’t have the time. Anything that happens with the autopilot after ejection is out of scope.”

t0mas88 3y ago

The flight control system isn't aware of the ejection nor any navigation settings. It's not an autopilot, only a stability system that remains perfectly stable if nobody provides inputs. On autopilot it would be different. If the right mode is enabled it will keep flying the programmed route until the end of that route. Then at the end of the route it will either continue straight ahead on the last heading or enter a holding pattern at that position. Depends on what was programmed in the navigation database. But in the end it doesn't really matter after an ejection, it will run out of fuel and crash.

iancmceachern 3y ago
It's within the realm of possibility to have it self land after an incident. They certainly can't now, but we have the technology if we wanted. Logically, I think the main thing is there is typically a reason a pilot is ejecting. As the saying goes, a pilot does not eject from a good airplane. The assumption there being if the plane could be landed, it would have been landed by its pilot. If the pilot ejected, it's because they're was something gravely wrong, and therefore is not of great value to put a lot of effort into doing fancy tricks in a about to crash airplane.