4 ms·

I don't find it likely that pilots hand-fly approaches to make a point. Isn't it more likely that this is codified in airline operation instructions? As for co

by snom380 13y ago

I don't find it likely that pilots hand-fly approaches to make a point. Isn't it more likely that this is codified in airline operation instructions? As for completely autonomous, do you seriously think we have the technology available today to make an autopilot handle any conceivable situation without a human being present and ready to take over? (non-IR PP here)

lisper 13y ago
It isn't "just to make a point". It's also to stay proficient, or to make the job less tedious. But whether to hand-fly an approach is always the pilot's discretion (as far as I know -- I'm a just a private pilot so I could be wrong about that). And no, automation can't handle "every conceivable situation", but neither can humans. Furthermore, humans screw up more often than autopilots. Pilot error is currently the single biggest contributor to the overall accident rate. Mind you, I'm not advocating fully autonomous aircraft. I like having a human in the loop, but that's in part because I am the human in the loop. It's far from clear that human pilots are a net win for safety.
- snom380 13y ago
  Neither can humans, but humans can handle a lot more situations. We can take into account a lot of information and come up with creative solutions, while current computers will need a set of humans to come up with and program potential scenarios beforehand. I think we'll have computer level AI that will perform better in accidents eventually (AI is improving and our brains are not) but it a long way into the future, and not an imminent threat to pilot jobs as some would believe. In the meantime, the solution to the human factor isn't to eliminate humans, but to improve training (which is already happening after AF447). I like having human pilots primarily because I'm a programmer and I know how difficult it is to design robust computer systems. There's been one runway overrun and one serious in flight incident with passenger injury due to software design faults. Now try to design a system that makes sense of audio, video and smell in addition to the existing sensors, and not have it fail in some spectacular unforeseen way..
  - lisper 13y ago
    Actually, it is extremely rare for a human pilot to come up with a "creative solution" to an emergency. The vast majority of emergency responses are established procedures for which pilots train. Most of the time they're following a check list. I can only think of a single example of a "creative" response to an in-flight emergency that actually helped, and that was UA232 in 1989.
    - snom380 13y ago
      Aircraft accidents are extremely rare in the first place, so that's a given. The question should rather be whether computers would do a better job than pilots in the same situation, and currently the answer is no. The actual flying of the airplane which autopilots do today is just a small part of the pilots job, and automating the rest of the tasks a pilot performs is non-trivial.
      - lisper 13y ago
        Are you a pilot? Because I am, and I'm telling you from firsthand experience that you're wrong. Except for takeoff and landing, there's next to nothing I have to do. And the only reason I have to do the landing is because my plane is a small GA aircraft without autothrottle or autoland technology.
        snom380 13y ago
        Yes, I am a pilot, albeit not an instrument rated one. Are you telling me you don't do anything? Do you bring a book to read instead of monitoring the instruments? You don't talk to ATC, you never have to make a decision regarding a route deviation? You never take into account weather information and make a decision underway on whether to press on or to find another place to land?
        lisper 13y ago
        No, of course I'm not saying that. I'm saying all those decisions could be automated, not that they have been. Except for ATC communications, all the information I use to make in-flight decisions is already available in digital form. All the engine parameters are digital. I get en-route METARS via XM. I have an WAAS GPS coupled to the autopilot. The only thing standing in the way of making my aircraft completely autonomous is a throttle actuator and the right software. And no, writing that software would not be trivial, but neither would it be impossible.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]

by snom380 13y ago

lisper 13y ago

It isn't "just to make a point". It's also to stay proficient, or to make the job less tedious. But whether to hand-fly an approach is always the pilot's discretion (as far as I know -- I'm a just a private pilot so I could be wrong about that). And no, automation can't handle "every conceivable situation", but neither can humans. Furthermore, humans screw up more often than autopilots. Pilot error is currently the single biggest contributor to the overall accident rate. Mind you, I'm not advocating fully autonomous aircraft. I like having a human in the loop, but that's in part because I am the human in the loop. It's far from clear that human pilots are a net win for safety.

snom380 13y ago
Neither can humans, but humans can handle a lot more situations. We can take into account a lot of information and come up with creative solutions, while current computers will need a set of humans to come up with and program potential scenarios beforehand. I think we'll have computer level AI that will perform better in accidents eventually (AI is improving and our brains are not) but it a long way into the future, and not an imminent threat to pilot jobs as some would believe. In the meantime, the solution to the human factor isn't to eliminate humans, but to improve training (which is already happening after AF447). I like having human pilots primarily because I'm a programmer and I know how difficult it is to design robust computer systems. There's been one runway overrun and one serious in flight incident with passenger injury due to software design faults. Now try to design a system that makes sense of audio, video and smell in addition to the existing sensors, and not have it fail in some spectacular unforeseen way..
- lisper 13y ago
  Actually, it is extremely rare for a human pilot to come up with a "creative solution" to an emergency. The vast majority of emergency responses are established procedures for which pilots train. Most of the time they're following a check list. I can only think of a single example of a "creative" response to an in-flight emergency that actually helped, and that was UA232 in 1989.
  - snom380 13y ago
    Aircraft accidents are extremely rare in the first place, so that's a given. The question should rather be whether computers would do a better job than pilots in the same situation, and currently the answer is no. The actual flying of the airplane which autopilots do today is just a small part of the pilots job, and automating the rest of the tasks a pilot performs is non-trivial.
    - lisper 13y ago
      Are you a pilot? Because I am, and I'm telling you from firsthand experience that you're wrong. Except for takeoff and landing, there's next to nothing I have to do. And the only reason I have to do the landing is because my plane is a small GA aircraft without autothrottle or autoland technology.
      - snom380 13y ago
        Yes, I am a pilot, albeit not an instrument rated one. Are you telling me you don't do anything? Do you bring a book to read instead of monitoring the instruments? You don't talk to ATC, you never have to make a decision regarding a route deviation? You never take into account weather information and make a decision underway on whether to press on or to find another place to land?
        lisper 13y ago
        No, of course I'm not saying that. I'm saying all those decisions could be automated, not that they have been. Except for ATC communications, all the information I use to make in-flight decisions is already available in digital form. All the engine parameters are digital. I get en-route METARS via XM. I have an WAAS GPS coupled to the autopilot. The only thing standing in the way of making my aircraft completely autonomous is a throttle actuator and the right software. And no, writing that software would not be trivial, but neither would it be impossible.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]