Why do pilots still die from not knowing which end is up? • Hacker News Board

Re: Why do pilots still die from not knowing which end is up?

#61

Post by omegant » Sun, Oct 23, 2011, 7:39 AM UTC

gnaffle wrote: post #43

antoinehersen wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pilots are very reluctant to hand over control to any kind of computer. It goes completely agains their self image. This is more true in certain company than other. A very similar phenomenon is how the USAF crashes more drones than the Army since they use pilots that insist on flying them in manual, vs the Army operators that do not consider themselves pilot. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/04/29/young_usaf_predato…

I think it's easy to say that without taking into account all the experience that pilots may bring to the table when an incident occurs. Pilots (and airlines) seem more than happy to turn flying over to the computers, in fact FAA and Airbus are concerned that modern pilots lack hand-flying skills due to over-automation. The AF447 crew did not have training in high altitude hand-flying, for instance. Until you have a…

And still with AI systems taking care of the plane security there would be failures that will knock downd computers , lightning strikes, generator spikes, some kind of fisical damage to the plane, fire at the computer rack. All this is usual enough to keep comercial flights from using drones.

Re: Why do pilots still die from not knowing which end is up?

#62

Post by caf » Sun, Oct 23, 2011, 8:32 AM UTC

mkr-hn wrote: post #15

0x12 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a simple trick for that: I know the consumption of my car on a level road in 5th gear at 90 km/h, so when I'm in doubt about whether or not I'm going up, down or level I look at the fuel consumption indicator. If it is higher than 6.6L/100km then I'm going up, less is down. If you don't have a fuel consumption indicator then that will not work but lots of cars have them these days and I think using them as a l…

This is the first I've heard of fuel consumption indicators. What kind of car is it?

My Subaru Liberty has one.

Re: Why do pilots still die from not knowing which end is up?

#63

Post by pazimzadeh » Sun, Oct 23, 2011, 9:01 AM UTC

The enemy's gate is down.

Re: Why do pilots still die from not knowing which end is up?

#64

Post by tjoff » Sun, Oct 23, 2011, 9:58 AM UTC

apaprocki wrote: post #20

0x12 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What the pilot will do to keep the passenger and plane safe can't be foretold by software written in static situations on terra firma. Sensors can lie, equipment can break. Your software may have no better idea of the true situation than the pilot. In the end it is a judgment call and if you limit the ability of those judgment calls to a bunch of software then you are saying that those in a different time and place h…

I think a more robust model of N completely different systems (both mechanical and electrical) to compute the same variable could be found so that the probability that it is computing a value outside of x% of the actual real value is lower than the probability that the human could make a mistake. Even if a speed indicator model in the event of pitot tube loss had a 25% margin of error, autopilot could have done the r…

"For example, there is no way to stop any Mercedes after 2009 from automatically applying full brakes in an impending collision."

Which is sad.

From your link: [quote]Brake Assist PLUS uses two radar systems. Both of these radar systems are very good at not only registering objects up ahead but also calculating the distance from these objects and their relative speed. If the distance between the vehicle and the registered object is so small that there is a real danger of collision, Brake Assist PLUS issues a visual warning on the instrument cluster display and sounds an alarm over the car speakers. While this is happening, the electronic system calculates the braking deceleration necessary to avert the collision. If the driver then hits the brakes, the braking pressure needed to bring the vehicle to a stop before impact is immediately provided automatically. Ensuring that an appropriate braking force is not exceeded gives those driving behind more time to react.[/quote]

A human would be quick to notice that the reason for why the car in front is braking is because of the impeding concrete wall. The computer however doesn't know that and would only brake in order to not hit the car in front and thus ensuring that both cars hit the concrete wall at equal speeds, great! (I truly hope that it respects my choice if I really wan't full brakes).

What if there are slippery conditions? The collision might easily be avoided by changing lanes but changing lanes in muddy snow while braking could be suicide. What if I just started changing lanes when the computer feels like it needs to brake?

What if the reason for why the air-speed indicator is malfunctioning (reporting wrong, a complete loss of velocity is too easy to check for) is because the plane just flew into a flock of birds, it might be obvious for a pilot why the stall-warning was issued and the pilot might opt to to pull back the stick - just to avoid an collision...

Unless the sensors truly get the whole picture and the complete state of the aircraft/car (and I doubt we can do that before being able to implement a true AI) the pilot/driver must always have the last word. Assistance can be great, especially in cases where a human wouldn't have the time to react but you should always be able to override it.

The assistance should be clear and specific enough so that the pilot/driver really thinks twice before overriding anything (this requires that the pilot/driver respects the system). And if the pilot/driver can't handle the vehicle despite that then he/she shouldn't be allowed to drive it.

Re: Why do pilots still die from not knowing which end is up?

#65

Post by scotty79 » Sun, Oct 23, 2011, 10:47 AM UTC

I never knew that pilots rely on their sense of movement and orientation while piloting. It seems to me like a crazy idea.

I imagined that pilot training is mostly to make people ignore the spatial feelings and stick to what they see through windows or on instruments.

Re: Why do pilots still die from not knowing which end is up?

#66

Post by scotty79 » Sun, Oct 23, 2011, 10:50 AM UTC

0x12 wrote: post #16

apaprocki wrote: post #10

Given the analysis of what happened in the recent Air France crash, I can't imagine why the industry does not write better software to help combat this. It seems as if the programmers writing the software are more concerned about writing valid code to fit the designed system ("the pilot signaled us to climb at exactly 40 degrees, so do it") rather than writing code that models the real world situations accurately. I…

What the pilot will do to keep the passenger and plane safe can't be foretold by software written in static situations on terra firma. Sensors can lie, equipment can break. Your software may have no better idea of the true situation than the pilot. In the end it is a judgment call and if you limit the ability of those judgment calls to a bunch of software then you are saying that those in a different time and place h…

> Your software may have no better idea of the true situation than the pilot.

Also:

The pilot may have no better idea of the true situation than your software.

All that matters in the and is not who is more awesome and versatile but who crashes less planes.

Re: Why do pilots still die from not knowing which end is up?

#67

Post by Sharlin » Sun, Oct 23, 2011, 10:59 AM UTC

samstave wrote: post #52

Would not a helium balloon tethered to the floor/dash solve this problem for basically no cost?

A helium balloon suffers from the exact same flaw as your vestibular sense: it cannot distinguish between orientation and acceleration. There is already an instrument in every cockpit that shows the true orientation of the craft: the artificial horizon.

Re: Why do pilots still die from not knowing which end is up?

#68

Post by darklajid » Sun, Oct 23, 2011, 11:01 AM UTC

mkr-hn wrote: post #15

0x12 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a simple trick for that: I know the consumption of my car on a level road in 5th gear at 90 km/h, so when I'm in doubt about whether or not I'm going up, down or level I look at the fuel consumption indicator. If it is higher than 6.6L/100km then I'm going up, less is down. If you don't have a fuel consumption indicator then that will not work but lots of cars have them these days and I think using them as a l…

This is the first I've heard of fuel consumption indicators. What kind of car is it?

No offense intended, but this scares me.

They are ~everywhere~ for a long time around me. Quite a lot of driving instructors (specializing in 'reduced fuel consumption' trainings) use them as a general guideline to "see" how your behavior drives the consumption up.

Heck, mum and dad use that thing for years and drive even slower since they first saw that they could make their car use less gas.

You need to get a new car.. :)

Re: Why do pilots still die from not knowing which end is up?

#69

Post by andrewcooke » Sun, Oct 23, 2011, 11:15 AM UTC

omegant wrote: post #60

apaprocki wrote: post #10

Given the analysis of what happened in the recent Air France crash, I can't imagine why the industry does not write better software to help combat this. It seems as if the programmers writing the software are more concerned about writing valid code to fit the designed system ("the pilot signaled us to climb at exactly 40 degrees, so do it") rather than writing code that models the real world situations accurately. I…

The airfrance crash INMHO was a lack of training( or missunderstanding of it) because the pilot flying on the captain seat ( actually a copilot, the captain was resting) was performing the maneuver for fighting windshear( you won't find this on any conclusions is my guess from his input on the sidestick). In a stall you want to recover your speed asap , you dive and apply full throttle till you are able to level off…

the comment "Stall is seen as a improbable danger due to the airplane software protections." puts the suggestion that software do more to make things "safe" in an interesting light. thanks.

Re: Why do pilots still die from not knowing which end is up?

#70

Post by omegant » Sun, Oct 23, 2011, 12:38 PM UTC

andrewcooke wrote: post #69

omegant wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The airfrance crash INMHO was a lack of training( or missunderstanding of it) because the pilot flying on the captain seat ( actually a copilot, the captain was resting) was performing the maneuver for fighting windshear( you won't find this on any conclusions is my guess from his input on the sidestick). In a stall you want to recover your speed asap , you dive and apply full throttle till you are able to level off…

the comment "Stall is seen as a improbable danger due to the airplane software protections." puts the suggestion that software do more to make things "safe" in an interesting light. thanks.

Software in airplanes is a huge help! Also if is not properly thought or has bugs it can kill you too. One of the problems right now is over reliance in the capacity of the plane to detect and combat properly ANY failure or emergency.