Airbus says it already has the technology at hand to fly airplanes with just one or no pilots, and is focusing on winning over regulators and passengers.
Hell to the no!
Same. I won't even trust one pilot
Maybe they might fly better? But the systems would have to be perfect. Look what happened to the MAX because the sensor failed....
You'd be surprised (or scared) of just how automated flying already is.
That's what I was thinking
After seeing what happened to those 2 Boeing 737 crashes because of an issue with anti-stalling software.
No way in hell!
I mean, there are so many variables. Is AI really going to be able to get around that? They still can't get cars 100% right
Well... traffic on the roads is a lot more complex than organized runways at an airport.
I hate planes as it is, even though it's supposed to be the safest form of transport.. Rather take my chances with a boat, at least you got life jackets and other things to survive.
I'm looking forward to Ray Kurzweil's prediction of having human level AI by 2029 tho.
Been saying that to people for years. Planes may crash less often but when they do crash you are like 99.9% facked. With a boat, you are typically traveling at like 5kph, and humans can continue to swim without it. Good luck continuing to fly when the wings fall off.
31, never flown, until someone invents a working puddle jumper, never will fly.
I hate turbulence.
The last half dozen 737/747 crashes have been due to crappy software going kamikazi. If it were up to me, all the automation in existing planes would be ripped out and they would have to be flown 100% manual, with the plane unable to do anything without pilot input.
100% manual with 3 people in the cockpit. Pilot, co-pilot and a backup monitor watching to make sure neither of the first 2 fuck up or suddenly go psycho. Also, unless the weather is crap, they should be flying almost entirely by sight, not instruments. electronics lie, eyes do not.
You think that's going to be feasible for a 10+ hour flight? Hand flying gets tiring quickly and the ride is never as smooth as autopilot.
Who cares about smoothness. Safety is more important. A plane the size of a 737/747, the difference would barely be noticeable anyway. They actually already have bunks on planes for the pilots to take short breaks, adding a 3rd pilot would make it even easier for them to rotate shifts.
Its fine to have the automated technology to fly the plane as long as the pilot can over ride it.
The problem with the Boeing crashes were a faulty sensor thought the plane was stalling, so the software force the plane nose down.
The pilots tried to pull up, but the system would not allow them to override it.
Hell No !!!! i won't even sit in a driverless car in my country!
The real issue is hackers getting into them and turning them into remote controlled bombs with human lives on board.
All it needs is a bad bit of coding.
Planes have been able to pull out from the terminal, taxi to the runway, take off from point A and land at point B, taxi to the gangway without pilots since the at least the 1970's, if not before. Airliners can be flown remotely. One of the many reasons pilots exist is for the peace of mind of the passengers.
I really don't think it's mere technophobia, I just cannot get behind the idea of an automated plane with zero human controls. Too many variables. For what it's worth I wouldn't ride in an automated car either
Honestly I think a computer can react much faster and more accurately than a human to changing conditions.
I am far more fearful of this automated revolution because of loss of jobs than personal safety.
I mean if you had a company like Tesla build your AI pilot maybe I would have more confidence in planning a two trip on one of these
After 10 years of flawless testing, maybe.
I would, but only if I wanted to die!
TechSpy is a community of awesome people posting and discussing the latest tech news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.