Live data from Hacker News

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

commercialappeal.com

51–60 of 182 posts

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

#51
We're hiring!

https://reliable.co/careers/

We built avionics, software, mechanisms and a comm system that enables automated operation of the plane from a remote command station. The remote operator has a GUI where they can command the aircraft.

This article goes into a bit more detail about how it works: https://www.flightglobal.com/airframers/with-tesla-and-space...

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

#52
post #25
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

So get one. Partner with SpaceX or oneweb and plot courses only where you will have continuous connectivity. We pilot drones in warzones remotely, the technology exists to pilot then in peace time.

> We pilot drones in warzones remotely,

True but we also are ok with those drones getting destroyed.

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

#53
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, maintaining straight and level flight— i.e., not falling out of the sky— is the easiest part of flying an airplane. Computers have been good at that for a while; in fact, that’s how airline flights are controlled these days during basically all of cruise flight (by autopilot). Takeoff and landing are the tricky parts. (I say this as someone who’s firmly on the skeptical side of the spectrum regarding the…

Handling mechanical failures and other in-flight emergencies are the tricky parts.

That depends on your definition of "tricky". If you mean something that requires human intelligence, I would say it's the complete opposite. More or less the first thing pilots start doing during an emergency is to follow lists, it's all very procedural and most failures have been predicted in advance, as well as what would need to be done to resolve them, or at least eliminate the immediate threat -- and if these procedures do not help, you are in a very bad place anyway. There are exceptions, of course.[1] I would say that the "tricky parts", as always, are very generally the situations that we did not predict and did not program for.

[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=099cHWSbAL8

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

#54
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't forget that aircraft falls on someone or someone's property.

To be fair, maintaining straight and level flight— i.e., not falling out of the sky— is the easiest part of flying an airplane. Computers have been good at that for a while; in fact, that’s how airline flights are controlled these days during basically all of cruise flight (by autopilot). Takeoff and landing are the tricky parts. (I say this as someone who’s firmly on the skeptical side of the spectrum regarding the…

Takeoff and landing in rough conditions are tricky.

Takeoff and landing when the weather is fine is already a solved problem. So is taxiing.

https://newatlas.com/aircraft/airbus-attol-autonomous-airlin...

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

#55
Autonomous flight is a great example of the 80/20 rule. We've basically had "self flying" airplanes for decades, but to get them to 100% autonomous we need to spend all of the extra engineering effort into covering the remaining edge-cases + landing.

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

#56
post #6

Who do people think will have their jobs replaced first, cargo pilots or truck drivers? One big factor is it often comes down to which worker group has a stronger union and likewise entrenched political interests at local levels, as we've seen in technological progress elsewhere. Second to that is probably the safety regulatory process. 'AI' or computer automation has also been used heavily in airplanes for a long ti…

The "cost of the pilot" / "cost of the operation" metric gives us this order: urban transportation, inter-city ground transportation, air transportation, water transportation. The difficulty of automating it metric gives us this order: air transportation, water transportation, inter-city ground transportation, urban transportation. So I'm personally expecting a mix: air transportation, inter-city ground transportatio…

Why do you believe that water transportation would be harder to automate than air transportation?

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

#57

We're hiring! https://reliable.co/careers/ We built avionics, software, mechanisms and a comm system that enables automated operation of the plane from a remote command station. The remote operator has a GUI where they can command the aircraft. This article goes into a bit more detail about how it works: https://www.flightglobal.com/airframers/with-tesla-and-space...

No remote positions?

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

#58
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't forget that aircraft falls on someone or someone's property.

To be fair, maintaining straight and level flight— i.e., not falling out of the sky— is the easiest part of flying an airplane. Computers have been good at that for a while; in fact, that’s how airline flights are controlled these days during basically all of cruise flight (by autopilot). Takeoff and landing are the tricky parts. (I say this as someone who’s firmly on the skeptical side of the spectrum regarding the…

Avoiding icing situations (i.e. thunderstorms) is also important, so route planning and revision is too.

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

#59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And they're already loud. If they proliferate, whether human operated or autonomous, the noise will increase. +1 vote for heavily regulating noise pollution.

Noise pollution from airports is regulated. Many airports have departure patterns that avoid areas sensitive to noise. Drones are going to need similar regulation, I agree.

Shout out SNA, which has a spectacular departure flight path to ensure compliance with back bay NIMBYS who showed up after the airport was already built.

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

#60
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.

We need to find a drone motor that produces more laminar and less turbulent flow than the current ducted fans do.
Post reply on HN