Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Airlines lobbying FAA to have only one pilot in the cockpit

cbsnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 267 posts

Re: Airlines lobbying FAA to have only one pilot in the cockpit

#21

Post by teeray »

teeray wrote: post #16

Since we’re going to be talking about automation quite a bit here, I found Sully’s take on automation in the cockpit to be quite relevant: > “I’VE COME across a number of people over the years who think that modern airplanes, with all their technology and automation, can almost fly themselves. That’s simply not true. Automation can lower the workload in some cases. But in other situations, using automation when it is…

I’m going to pull another quote from that section that I think also supports the idea. There are specific cases cited in the book… I just don’t think copying an entire section of a book will be as helpful at getting the ideas out here:

> “Dr. Wiener[0] worried, and I agree, that the paradox of automation is that it often lowers a pilot’s workload when that load is already low. And it sometimes increases the workload in the cockpit when it is already high… For those who believe technology is the answer to everything, [he] would offer data to prove that isn’t the case. He said that automated airplanes with the highest technologies do not eliminate errors. They change the nature of the errors that are made. For example, in terms of navigational errors, automation enables pilots to make huge navigation errors very precisely… Dr. Wiener is not antitechnology, and neither am I. But technology is no substitute for experience, skill, and judgment.”[1]

[0] “Earl Wiener, Ph.D., a former Air Force pilot who is now retired from the University of Miami’s department of management science. He is renowned for his work in helping us understand aviation safety.”[1]

[1] Sully: My Search for What Really Matters by Chesley B. "Sully" Sullenberger III, Jeffrey Zaslow https://a.co/gRNJtON

Re: Airlines lobbying FAA to have only one pilot in the cockpit

#22

Post by p_l »

shitlord wrote: post #11
totalZero wrote: post #4

I'm not sure I'd want to travel on commercial aircraft if the regulators eliminate pilot redundancy.

If autopilot can control an airplane, then couldn't someone also pilot the plane remotely (as if it were a drone)? That would provide some pilot redundancy. I imagine airlines could also save money on staffing if the copilot didn't have to be physically present.

1) the autopilot is actually quite dumb ("keep altitude", "fly on course X", "maintain set speed", "change altitude at rate X / to level Y"), doesn't handle exceptions (in fact, autopilots are designed to disengage in case of exception), and is generally totally blind to environment other than heading, speed, altitude and optionally position (but not, for example, detailed environment on the ground)

2) The latency issues are literally deadly.

Re: Airlines lobbying FAA to have only one pilot in the cockpit

#23

Post by p_l »

pigtailgirl wrote: post #14
totalZero wrote: post #4

I'm not sure I'd want to travel on commercial aircraft if the regulators eliminate pilot redundancy.

-- interesting - total opposite for me - #1 cause of commercial aircraft accidents is pilot error - by a long shot - personally - looking forward to the day humans are not involved in flying an aircraft -- https://nci.edu/2021/06/08/the-most-common-causes-of-aviatio... https://www.faa.gov/data_research/research/med_humanfacs/oam...

Main reason pilot error is #1 cause is that hardware problems can be fixed once and for all, while pilots take care of all the exceptions.

Also, doing a CFIT while flying on autopilot is still a pilot error, because they gave the autopilot's orders.

Re: Airlines lobbying FAA to have only one pilot in the cockpit

#24

Post by daguava »

Flight law and procedure is painstakingly written in blood, and the thorough analysis of every plane crash is why aviation is so incredibly safe, there is no possible way this would ever be allowed.

I highly recommend checking youtube for crash analysis videos and series btw, the incredible detail these investigations go into is eye opening, and really gave me an appreciation for the field.

Re: Airlines lobbying FAA to have only one pilot in the cockpit

#25

Post by c0m »

pigtailgirl wrote: post #14
totalZero wrote: post #4

I'm not sure I'd want to travel on commercial aircraft if the regulators eliminate pilot redundancy.

-- interesting - total opposite for me - #1 cause of commercial aircraft accidents is pilot error - by a long shot - personally - looking forward to the day humans are not involved in flying an aircraft -- https://nci.edu/2021/06/08/the-most-common-causes-of-aviatio... https://www.faa.gov/data_research/research/med_humanfacs/oam...

Maybe this will be fine when the technology is there, but it's very obvious that doing this change today -- especially when it's being lobbied to be applied to cargo planes first (historically much older former passenger planes w/o modern creature comforts) -- is going only going to increase deaths by pilot error.

Re: Airlines lobbying FAA to have only one pilot in the cockpit

#26

Post by vultour »

imoverclocked wrote: post #13
paulpauper wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps they meant somewhere else in the plane

… and where exactly would this second pilot be? The flight deck remains locked from the inside during flight post-9/11. There are a lot of concerns regarding two pilots, not just failure of one of the pilots but also mal-intent of a single pilot. Eg: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanwings_Flight_9525

The cabin crew knows the code to open the door. The flight crew can block the request, but if no one in the cockpit is responding it will open.

Re: Airlines lobbying FAA to have only one pilot in the cockpit

#27

Post by jrockway »

teeray wrote: post #21
teeray wrote: post #16

Since we’re going to be talking about automation quite a bit here, I found Sully’s take on automation in the cockpit to be quite relevant: > “I’VE COME across a number of people over the years who think that modern airplanes, with all their technology and automation, can almost fly themselves. That’s simply not true. Automation can lower the workload in some cases. But in other situations, using automation when it is…

I’m going to pull another quote from that section that I think also supports the idea. There are specific cases cited in the book… I just don’t think copying an entire section of a book will be as helpful at getting the ideas out here: > “Dr. Wiener[0] worried, and I agree, that the paradox of automation is that it often lowers a pilot’s workload when that load is already low. And it sometimes increases the workload…

That makes a lot of sense.

Automation is more interesting in how it can enhance human capabilities. Humans don't need a whole lot of help keeping the wings straight and level on a clear day. But they do need help landing the airplane in dense fog, and two humans and three computers working together can actually do that. The computers can't do it by themselves, the humans can't do it by themselves, but together, they can!

Re: Airlines lobbying FAA to have only one pilot in the cockpit

#29

Post by defrost »

polar8 wrote: post #15
imoverclocked wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

… and where exactly would this second pilot be? The flight deck remains locked from the inside during flight post-9/11. There are a lot of concerns regarding two pilots, not just failure of one of the pilots but also mal-intent of a single pilot. Eg: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanwings_Flight_9525

The other pilot is working from home.

For the sake of the discussion this isn't an entirely ridiculous notion.

Here in W.Australia Rio Tinto manage and remote co-pilot otherwise fully automated 100 tonne Haulpak dump trucks (that can easily run over and crush a car or pickup truck) from 1,000 km away.

I'm fully in favour of a human pilot and a co-pilot (an advanced trainee even) for short haul flights that don't require shift work for the pilot (eg: long haul Australia -> Europe you'd want a pair of experienced pilots to tag team at least, + copilots and flight engineer) .. but there is an argument to made for emergency remote pilot capability.

The argument against that, of course, is terrorists remote flying a hostage filled bomb.

Re: Airlines lobbying FAA to have only one pilot in the cockpit

#30

Post by pigtailgirl »

p_l wrote: post #23
pigtailgirl wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

-- interesting - total opposite for me - #1 cause of commercial aircraft accidents is pilot error - by a long shot - personally - looking forward to the day humans are not involved in flying an aircraft -- https://nci.edu/2021/06/08/the-most-common-causes-of-aviatio... https://www.faa.gov/data_research/research/med_humanfacs/oam...

Main reason pilot error is #1 cause is that hardware problems can be fixed once and for all, while pilots take care of all the exceptions. Also, doing a CFIT while flying on autopilot is still a pilot error, because they gave the autopilot's orders.

-- https://www.faa.gov/data_research/research/med_humanfacs/oam... - page 6 tru 16 are interesting --
Post reply on HN