Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by CoolHand on Tuesday April 07 2015, @09:29PM   Printer-friendly
from the extraordinary-hacker-opportunity-here dept.

John Markoff writes in the NYT that in the aftermath of the co-pilot crashing a Germanwings plane into a mountain, aviation experts are beginning to wonder if human pilots are really necessary aboard commercial planes. Advances in sensor technology, computing and artificial intelligence are making human pilots less necessary than ever in the cockpit and government agencies are already experimenting with replacing the co-pilot, perhaps even both pilots on cargo planes, with robots or remote operators. What the Germanwings crash “has done has elevated the question of should there or not be ways to externally control commercial aircraft,” says Mary Cummings. NASA is exploring a related possibility: moving the co-pilot out of the cockpit on commercial flights, and instead using a single remote operator to serve as co-pilot for multiple aircraft. In this scenario, a ground controller might operate as a dispatcher managing a dozen or more flights simultaneously. It would be possible for the ground controller to “beam” into individual planes when needed and to land a plane remotely in the event that the pilot became incapacitated — or worse. “Could we have a single-pilot aircraft with the ability to remotely control the aircraft from the ground that is safer than today’s systems?" asks Cummings. "The answer is yes.”

Automating that job may save money. But will passengers ever set foot on plane piloted by robots, or humans thousands of miles from the cockpit? In written testimony submitted to the Senate last month, the Air Line Pilots Association warned, “It is vitally important that the pressure to capitalize on the technology not lead to an incomplete safety analysis of the aircraft and operations.” The association defended the unique skills of a human pilot: “A pilot on board an aircraft can see, feel, smell or hear many indications of an impending problem (PDF) and begin to formulate a course of action before even sophisticated sensors and indicators provide positive indications of trouble.” Not all of the scientists and engineers believe that increasingly sophisticated planes will always be safer planes. "Technology can have costs of its own,” says Amy Pritchett. “If you put more technology in the cockpit, you have more technology that can fail.”

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Informative) by c0lo on Wednesday April 08 2015, @12:30AM

    by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday April 08 2015, @12:30AM (#167649) Journal

    How about we build some flying armoured tanks?

    My point? Absolute security is impossible, the security level is a matter of "weakest link" (fortify one link, another one will become the weakest), the law of diminishing returns guarantee an exponential cost for added security.
    How about we start accepting that life is a risky endeavour (and it's inevitable fatal anyway)?
    While at it can we apply the same to "terrorist attacks"?

    Speaking of 1900 - getting people to places was a risky business (in spite of what some had claimed [wikipedia.org]) - and yet this didn't stop people travelling

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Informative=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 2) by AnonTechie on Wednesday April 08 2015, @07:53AM

    by AnonTechie (2275) on Wednesday April 08 2015, @07:53AM (#167762) Journal

    Seems like: Living is injurious to health !

    --
    Albert Einstein - "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."