5 ms·

I think this could be prevented by removing humans from the cockpit and let computers take over. Computers are already controlling most of the things inside an

by amix 12y ago

I think this could be prevented by removing humans from the cockpit and let computers take over. Computers are already controlling most of the things inside an airplane. If this isn't possible, then the flight software should at least have protection against malicious pilots (this would protect against the mentally ill and also against terrorism (e.g. 9/11)). Basically, the planes could have failsafes to prevent malicious pilots from crashing them down or crashing them into things.

seanmcdirmid 12y ago
Ya Get rid of the persons involved...i.e. Self flying planes. It will happen eventually, it is a much easier problem than self driving cars, and there are already planes that can take off and land themselves in certain conditions. But this isn't really a huge frequent problem, just one that gets a lot of press.
- acqq 12y ago
  Why stop there? The best way to get rid of persons involved is not flying the passengers. Until then, having the human pilot capable of overriding the computer is actually a good thing, see danieldk's comment. That the computers should help the humans as much as possible is indisputable, but it's a gradual and hard process to bring the real improvements.
  - seanmcdirmid 12y ago
    In the long term it's ineveitable, juist like self ddiving cars are. Computers are actually very suitable for this. Today, ya, maybe not yet, but we are definitely close. Flying is a hard job on humans, the hours suck, the job can be very monontomous. The problem isn't that the pilots are evil/bad, just that humans are unsuited to these kinds of tasks. Like driving.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
danieldk 12y ago
I think this could be prevented by removing humans from the cockpit and let computers take over. I think we are not there yet: http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/lufthansa-airbus-computerpanne-schickte-maschine-in-den-sturzflug-a-1024652.html http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/lufthansa-airbus-computerpann... tl;dr: frozen sensors put the plane on a crash course. Plane is saved by pilots completely shutting down the computer system.
ghshephard 12y ago
Unfortunately we're about 40-50 years out before an automated flight control system can reproduce the critical activities of a well-trained human team of pilots. But yes, we'll reach a point where the liability of having human beings fly planes vs the sophistication/reliability of an automated system will reach the point where the answer is a foregone conclusion. It's just a half-century away.
- moe 12y ago
  we're about 40-50 years out More like 10-15 years. Airliners already spend most of their life on autopilot today. Many (including the Airbus that crashed here) have auto-landing systems[1], too. Fully autonomous passenger aircraft are being tested[2] in shared airspace since 2012. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoland http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoland [2] http://www.baesystems.com/magazine/BAES_051920/look-no-hands http://www.baesystems.com/magazine/BAES_051920/look-no-hands
  - moray 12y ago
    A comple of months ago I experienced the auto-landing system (as a passenger of course). The captain made the announcement before landing as meteorological conditions weren't that good (fog). I must admit I felt a little uneasy...and I am an engineer (maybe that's the reason :))
  - ghshephard 12y ago
    Landing is (as you've already noticed) the least significant reason as to why we have a human piloting team in an airplane. If I could afford it, I would love to make a $10,000 long bet as to when we will see a major airline routinely (1/day) fly a route with > 200 passengers. I'm saying it won't be later than 2065, but also won't be sooner than 2050.
    - seanmcdirmid 12y ago
      I would take you up on that bet, and go for around 2025. Technology is progressing pretty fast in this area.
mapt 12y ago
The question is at what point flight software can be demonstrated to have a small fraction of the failure rate that humans have. We could certainly have software flying a plane tomorrow if we wanted to, at the cost of failure rates several orders of magnitude higher. Humans have the capacity look around, intuit what's going on and what doesn't make sense, and work around it. Software that can detect and understand what to do when 3 things that each occur only one in 1,000 flights, happen simultaneously while 3 out of 10 of the sensor networks are down for maintenance and rare weather patterns are occurring on the route. We have 100,000 flights per day to cover. Right now, we have lethal accidents roughly monthly, but we have contingency conditions that might plausibly cause a lethal accident a thousand times more often, conditions that are caught, troubleshooted, and successfully mitigated by a human.
pfortuny 12y ago
This is very easy to imagine but needs quite a bit of testing. Human sensors are taken care of 16/7 approximately, not so with mechanical ones. A pilot can always say "I feel sick." A frozen sensor cannot.

by amix 12y ago

seanmcdirmid 12y ago

Ya Get rid of the persons involved...i.e. Self flying planes. It will happen eventually, it is a much easier problem than self driving cars, and there are already planes that can take off and land themselves in certain conditions. But this isn't really a huge frequent problem, just one that gets a lot of press.

acqq 12y ago
Why stop there? The best way to get rid of persons involved is not flying the passengers. Until then, having the human pilot capable of overriding the computer is actually a good thing, see danieldk's comment. That the computers should help the humans as much as possible is indisputable, but it's a gradual and hard process to bring the real improvements.
- seanmcdirmid 12y ago
  In the long term it's ineveitable, juist like self ddiving cars are. Computers are actually very suitable for this. Today, ya, maybe not yet, but we are definitely close. Flying is a hard job on humans, the hours suck, the job can be very monontomous. The problem isn't that the pilots are evil/bad, just that humans are unsuited to these kinds of tasks. Like driving.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

danieldk 12y ago

I think this could be prevented by removing humans from the cockpit and let computers take over. I think we are not there yet: http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/lufthansa-airbus-computerpanne-schickte-maschine-in-den-sturzflug-a-1024652.html http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/lufthansa-airbus-computerpann... tl;dr: frozen sensors put the plane on a crash course. Plane is saved by pilots completely shutting down the computer system.

ghshephard 12y ago

Unfortunately we're about 40-50 years out before an automated flight control system can reproduce the critical activities of a well-trained human team of pilots. But yes, we'll reach a point where the liability of having human beings fly planes vs the sophistication/reliability of an automated system will reach the point where the answer is a foregone conclusion. It's just a half-century away.

moe 12y ago
we're about 40-50 years out More like 10-15 years. Airliners already spend most of their life on autopilot today. Many (including the Airbus that crashed here) have auto-landing systems[1], too. Fully autonomous passenger aircraft are being tested[2] in shared airspace since 2012. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoland http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoland [2] http://www.baesystems.com/magazine/BAES_051920/look-no-hands http://www.baesystems.com/magazine/BAES_051920/look-no-hands
- moray 12y ago
  A comple of months ago I experienced the auto-landing system (as a passenger of course). The captain made the announcement before landing as meteorological conditions weren't that good (fog). I must admit I felt a little uneasy...and I am an engineer (maybe that's the reason :))
- ghshephard 12y ago
  Landing is (as you've already noticed) the least significant reason as to why we have a human piloting team in an airplane. If I could afford it, I would love to make a $10,000 long bet as to when we will see a major airline routinely (1/day) fly a route with > 200 passengers. I'm saying it won't be later than 2065, but also won't be sooner than 2050.
  - seanmcdirmid 12y ago
    I would take you up on that bet, and go for around 2025. Technology is progressing pretty fast in this area.

mapt 12y ago

The question is at what point flight software can be demonstrated to have a small fraction of the failure rate that humans have. We could certainly have software flying a plane tomorrow if we wanted to, at the cost of failure rates several orders of magnitude higher. Humans have the capacity look around, intuit what's going on and what doesn't make sense, and work around it. Software that can detect and understand what to do when 3 things that each occur only one in 1,000 flights, happen simultaneously while 3 out of 10 of the sensor networks are down for maintenance and rare weather patterns are occurring on the route. We have 100,000 flights per day to cover. Right now, we have lethal accidents roughly monthly, but we have contingency conditions that might plausibly cause a lethal accident a thousand times more often, conditions that are caught, troubleshooted, and successfully mitigated by a human.

pfortuny 12y ago

This is very easy to imagine but needs quite a bit of testing. Human sensors are taken care of 16/7 approximately, not so with mechanical ones. A pilot can always say "I feel sick." A frozen sensor cannot.