FedEx feeder plane takes flight without pilot in test for Reliable Robotics • Hacker News Board

Re: FedEx feeder plane takes flight without pilot in test for Reliable Robotics

#11

Post by alfalfasprout » Mon, Aug 31, 2020, 4:36 PM UTC

java-man wrote: post #8

gpm wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I was doing this I would start with remotely "piloting" (sending instructions to) them and having the remote pilot communicate with ATC via the traditional radio channel.

Right, but that requires a fairly reliable radio link (that we don't have, e.g. MH370). Or perhaps a set of dedicated routes, with ATC actively routing other traffic around the robots?

That would require radar contact along the whole route. Otherwise if a transponder stops working you suddenly have a ghost aircraft capable of causing massive amounts of damage.

Re: FedEx feeder plane takes flight without pilot in test for Reliable Robotics

#12

Post by liability » Mon, Aug 31, 2020, 4:38 PM UTC

alfalfasprout wrote: post #5

Frankly the tech for autonomous aviation has been around for a while now. I expect even strong crosswind landings will soon be better handled by a computer than a pilot. But then here’s the problem... Autonomous systems are great when things are going well, but at the end of the day they fare very poorly in edge cases sometimes with catastrophic results. When you’re driving a car you usually follow traffic rules and…

Along these lines, would an autopilot ever think of landing in the Hudson? (Particularly if it hadn't been done before?)

Re: FedEx feeder plane takes flight without pilot in test for Reliable Robotics

#13

Post by ceejayoz » Mon, Aug 31, 2020, 4:39 PM UTC

loceng wrote: post #10

There needs to be a pollution (including noise) tax collected to counterweight the inevitable of potentially non-stop swarm of buzzing that will be making 10,000s to 100,000s of deliveries in cities everyday.

This is a cargo plane, not a buzzy quadcopter drone. They already fly these routes; they just use human pilots to do so.

Re: FedEx feeder plane takes flight without pilot in test for Reliable Robotics

#14

Post by chickenpotpie » Mon, Aug 31, 2020, 4:41 PM UTC

loceng wrote: post #10

There needs to be a pollution (including noise) tax collected to counterweight the inevitable of potentially non-stop swarm of buzzing that will be making 10,000s to 100,000s of deliveries in cities everyday.

I would prefer if it was legally required to be below a certain amount or you can’t do it at all. Perhaps you can purchase decibel credits. If I can’t sleep at night it doesn’t make me any happier to know that the city is getting more revenue.

Re: FedEx feeder plane takes flight without pilot in test for Reliable Robotics

#15

Post by whiddershins » Mon, Aug 31, 2020, 4:42 PM UTC

If FedEx and Amazon set up private airports dedicated to these machines, only put cargo in them, and make their flight routes distinct from other aircraft, I imagine this could be up and running faster than people think.

Edge cases shouldn’t result in loss of life, so getting through regulations and insuring should be much easier than other situations.

Re: FedEx feeder plane takes flight without pilot in test for Reliable Robotics

#16

Post by java-man » Mon, Aug 31, 2020, 4:42 PM UTC

liability wrote: post #12

alfalfasprout wrote: post #5

Frankly the tech for autonomous aviation has been around for a while now. I expect even strong crosswind landings will soon be better handled by a computer than a pilot. But then here’s the problem... Autonomous systems are great when things are going well, but at the end of the day they fare very poorly in edge cases sometimes with catastrophic results. When you’re driving a car you usually follow traffic rules and…

Along these lines, would an autopilot ever think of landing in the Hudson? (Particularly if it hadn't been done before?)

One side benefit of using robotic planes (in theory) is that the fleet can be OTA'd to include emergency water landings, once the models are updated.

Re: FedEx feeder plane takes flight without pilot in test for Reliable Robotics

#17

Post by treis » Mon, Aug 31, 2020, 4:44 PM UTC

alfalfasprout wrote: post #5

Frankly the tech for autonomous aviation has been around for a while now. I expect even strong crosswind landings will soon be better handled by a computer than a pilot. But then here’s the problem... Autonomous systems are great when things are going well, but at the end of the day they fare very poorly in edge cases sometimes with catastrophic results. When you’re driving a car you usually follow traffic rules and…

>Autonomous systems are great when things are going well, but at the end of the day they fare very poorly in edge cases sometimes with catastrophic results

That describes humans as well.

Re: FedEx feeder plane takes flight without pilot in test for Reliable Robotics

#18

Post by ertemplin » Mon, Aug 31, 2020, 4:46 PM UTC

java-man wrote: post #2

It's only a matter of time. However, how will the robotic plances integrate with existing voice-based air traffic control? Would there be a new digital channel, or the planes would it use an on-board voice recognition and synthesizer?

If the airplane isn't in the clouds and is below 18,000 feet MSL the pilots are still responsible for seeing and avoiding other traffic. There are a lot of places in the USA that don't have ATC radar coverage, so traffic separation is based almost entirely on see-and-avoid and cloud distance laws for VFR pilots.

The ATC problem is probably the easiest one to solve, and there are already some solutions in use like D-ATIS and automated pre-departure clearance (PDC).

Re: FedEx feeder plane takes flight without pilot in test for Reliable Robotics

#19

Post by java-man » Mon, Aug 31, 2020, 4:47 PM UTC

treis wrote: post #17

alfalfasprout wrote: post #5

Frankly the tech for autonomous aviation has been around for a while now. I expect even strong crosswind landings will soon be better handled by a computer than a pilot. But then here’s the problem... Autonomous systems are great when things are going well, but at the end of the day they fare very poorly in edge cases sometimes with catastrophic results. When you’re driving a car you usually follow traffic rules and…

>Autonomous systems are great when things are going well, but at the end of the day they fare very poorly in edge cases sometimes with catastrophic results That describes humans as well.

Depending on the circumstances, a robotic system might offer a better response than the humans: it does not have emotions.

If anything, robotic systems might be more predictable.

Re: FedEx feeder plane takes flight without pilot in test for Reliable Robotics

#20

Post by evanlivingston » Mon, Aug 31, 2020, 4:48 PM UTC

ceejayoz wrote: post #13

loceng wrote: post #10

There needs to be a pollution (including noise) tax collected to counterweight the inevitable of potentially non-stop swarm of buzzing that will be making 10,000s to 100,000s of deliveries in cities everyday.

This is a cargo plane, not a buzzy quadcopter drone. They already fly these routes; they just use human pilots to do so.

And they're already loud. If they proliferate, whether human operated or autonomous, the noise will increase.

+1 vote for heavily regulating noise pollution.