26 ms·
> Remote control for what? That doesn't really help in the case of a serious mechanical failure. In my theoretical, the pilot would safely eject as he did here
by RankingMember 1y ago
> Remote control for what? That doesn't really help in the case of a serious mechanical failure.
In my theoretical, the pilot would safely eject as he did here (or possibly before the touch-and-gos) and the remote control would come into play to try and belly land the plane without it simply becoming a fireball immediately after ejection.
- nradov 1y agoYour theoretical is stupid. The mishap aircraft was uncontrollable.
- RankingMember 1y agoIt clearly was controllable up until the last touch-and-go. The point is they could've attempted an actual landing with the pilot clear of the aircraft prior to it becoming completely uncontrollable had their been a remote option. It's about pilot safety.
- nradov 1y agoThat's silly. You're talking about spending years and billions of dollars developing a capability that might be used once every few years. It's not going to do anything to enhance pilot safety.