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

101–110 of 267 posts

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

#101

Post by tjpnz »

askvictor wrote: post #48
daguava wrote: post #24

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.

Perhaps the CEOs (in constant pursuit of profits and bonuses) don't care so much about safety, and are trying to make a play to get society to accept a lower level of safety in air transport? We accept huge amounts of deaths from road transport, preventable illnesses, etc. Air transport is possibly the exception (that is getting in the way of profits)

If CEOs faced real consequences they would care.

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

#102

Post by hef19898 »

akiselev wrote: post #37
fasthands9 wrote: post #6

> Prior to 2010, pilots needed just 250 hours to start flying for a commercial airline. The Airline Safety and Federal Aviation Administration Extension Act of 2010 raised this requirement from 250 hours to 1,500 hours. >co-pilots in foreign countries are required to have just 240 hours, with some of those hours occurring in a simulator. This is from a different article but feel like this is lower hanging fruit than…

The pilot shortage is all up and down the stack, including in GA [1], commercial, and military. There simply isn’t enough pilots anywhere in the pipeline. It doesn’t help that most PPLs tend towards wealthy professionals who sure as hell aren’t sitting in an aluminum tube nonstop six to twenty hours at a time. Instead of using pilots’ love of flying to siphon off recruits from other professions theyve used it to keep…

One of the problems is the way certain airlines, and commercial aviation in general, started to pay and employ pilots. Gone are the days of airline employed initial pilot training. Gone are the days, in some cases, of airline paid type rating training. Which turned the job of an airline pilot into quite a shitty one, especially considering the amount of responsibility pilots have.

Pushing for single pilot flight will only make it worse.

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

#104

Post by iHateStylo »

csours wrote: post #95

I'm kind of surprised that no one has mentioned the possibility of pilots having malicious intent.

Indeed wasn’t there a rule made specifically after the Germanwings suicide crash? I see it all the time: crew walks in, pilot goes to the toilet.

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

#105

Post by zweifuss »

rysertio wrote: post #68
WalterBright wrote: post #31

All you gotta do is watch a few episodes of "Aviation Disasters" to conclude that the pilot needs a backup - the copilot. After all, when the pilot goes to the potty, who is flying the airplane? The computer? LOL. When something unanticipated goes wrong, the computers are COMPLETELY USELESS because it wasn't programmed to deal with unanticipated problems. Me, I'll pay a bit extra for my flight to have 2 pilots. Pilot…

But would that pilot have to be in the plane to fly it? We have been using remote controlled killer drones for years now.

Yes, we can do it, but have a look at the data: https://www.dronetechuav.com/post/causes-of-uav-loss

I don't think that argument flies.

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

#106

Post by hef19898 »

pigtailgirl wrote: post #36
pessimizer wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After pilots are eliminated, the #1 cause of accidents will be autopilot error.

-- it will likely still be a human factor - maintenance/mechanical is the second cause after pilot error --

Think it through, get rid of human engineers designing those aircraft, get rid of human mechanics and engineers maintaining them, human pilots flying them and human managers driving all of that. While we are at it, get rid of human passengers, without those there won't be any dead people neither if the machines get it wrong.

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

#107

Post by varjag »

rysertio wrote: post #68
WalterBright wrote: post #31

All you gotta do is watch a few episodes of "Aviation Disasters" to conclude that the pilot needs a backup - the copilot. After all, when the pilot goes to the potty, who is flying the airplane? The computer? LOL. When something unanticipated goes wrong, the computers are COMPLETELY USELESS because it wasn't programmed to deal with unanticipated problems. Me, I'll pay a bit extra for my flight to have 2 pilots. Pilot…

But would that pilot have to be in the plane to fly it? We have been using remote controlled killer drones for years now.

Political cost of losing an UAV is extremely low.

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

#108

Post by gnopgnip »

bmitc wrote: post #97
teeray wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 general, I don't understand the push of humans to want to replace everything we do with machines. What's the point? What's the end goal? We just sit in a vat of embalming fluid consuming media with a feeding tube while machines whir about? Why can't enough ever be enough for humanity?

About 1/3rd of the cost of an airline ticket is labor. Many people in the travel industry would rather be at home with their families, traveling themselves, pursuing other hobbies instead of working

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

#109

Post by ajsnigrutin »

bmitc wrote: post #97
teeray wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 general, I don't understand the push of humans to want to replace everything we do with machines. What's the point? What's the end goal? We just sit in a vat of embalming fluid consuming media with a feeding tube while machines whir about? Why can't enough ever be enough for humanity?

Becase if we didn't, there'd be 95% of us still producing food manually and the other 5% would be blacksmiths and other supporting roles for food production.

Now, only a tiny percentage of people produce food, and the rest can be community managers on twitter.

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

#110

Post by ReptileMan »

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…

As the Boeing max fiasco showed sometimes the plane can decide to go where it wants while contradicting the pilot.
Post reply on HN