Future of Commercial Aviation?

[Boris Badenov]

Things will change, but not as fast as anyone thinks they will. When they do, they will be fraught with unexpected problems. Eventually the problems will be overcome, but the advancements will widely be viewed as a "bad idea" and young aviators will hearken back to the "good old days" when newhire F/Os made $23/hour and lived like rockstars.

 

[Jpax]

Listen, nothing personal but you have no idea what you're talking about.

Then please, oh wise one, inform me what I have so erred about in my $.02 opinion.

 

[Brian Z]

I feel it will be a while before we see pilotless planes. As it has been pointed out, humans all over the build equation and there needs to be a human to overide anything that will go wrong. A good example is the Mars mission a decade or so ago that crashed when they forgot the change the unit of measure from English to metric(or was it the other way around). A human pilot could have caught the error and saved the mission. My point is not that we should have manned Mars missions, but rather the human could have prevented a 800M loss.

Trains really are not the answer in America for travel. The distance is too vast between cities once you get off the east coast. Also, we just do not have the ifrastructure to support it like they do in Europe.

 

[Stomp16]

Then please, oh wise one, inform me what I have so erred about in my $.02 opinion.

Look at his stats, he doesn't seem to have much experience to base anything off of............................

 

[Sidious]

Blimps and algae fuel. But seriously I don't know what Im talking about. Seriously, its just a guess

 

[Jpax]

I feel it will be a while before we see pilotless planes. As it has been pointed out, humans all over the build equation and there needs to be a human to overide anything that will go wrong. A good example is the Mars mission a decade or so ago that crashed when they forgot the change the unit of measure from English to metric(or was it the other way around). A human pilot could have caught the error and saved the mission. My point is not that we should have manned Mars missions, but rather the human could have prevented a 800M loss.

No, you're wrong because you have no idea what you are talking about, according to Clearblue. He has already made that a point that he is the superior source of knowledge on this topic, though he has yet to share his almighty wealth.

 

[Clearblue]

Yeah, but you don't support the argument that "he doesn't know what he's talking about" with logical reasoning. Instead, you make a vague reference.

Except I didn't have an argument to back with logical reasoning, just an opposition to his. Also I didn't refer to anything at all, but that's just nit picking.

Before I come off as to much of a dick though (too late :cwm27 I should probably explain my post. With the exception of the two sentences where he explains his willingness to be passenger on a pilot-less aircraft, Jpax made some very definitive statements. Never seeing pilot-less aircraft, masses won't accept it, planes doing exactly what they are told, just flying into mountain sides.

I mean how can you say that people will never trust it. Humans can be conditioned to accept anything as normal. If in the future, a person has known airplanes to be able to fly themselves from when they were young, what reason do they have to think twice about it. Its part of human nature, how often do people find parts of other cultures strange. Yet people that grew up with it don't think twice about because it's just they way things are to them.

How do you know that pilot-less planes on this scale would be implemented without some sort of AI. Never having pilot-less planes? I just don't see how you can say that without being at the forefront of artificial intelligence or computer and systems research. (Or having a delorean with a flux capacitor) Hence the phrase "you don't know what you are talking about". Not to mention I think we can all agree it wouldn't just be a sudden shift to having no pilots. Also Jpax I'm interested in what you meant by the human vs robot race if you don't mind sharing.

With that said I will concede that my reaction was overly brash for a guy that in the end was just trying to share his opinion.

But hey who am I to say that I know what I'm talking about. I think I started a meme, yay I feel validated.

 

[Clearblue]

Then please, oh wise one, inform me what I have so erred about in my $.02 opinion.

No, you're wrong because you have no idea what you are talking about, according to Clearblue. He has already made that a point that he is the superior source of knowledge on this topic, though he has yet to share his almighty wealth.

Because I came off as being a prick first I'm not going to take that personally.

 

[Jpax]

Except I didn't have an argument to back with logical reasoning, just an opposition to his. Also I didn't refer to anything at all, but that's just nit picking.

Before I come off as to much of a dick though (too late :cwm27 I should probably explain my post. With the exception of the two sentences where he explains his willingness to be passenger on a pilot-less aircraft, Jpax made some very definitive statements. Never seeing pilot-less aircraft, masses won't accept it, planes doing exactly what they are told, just flying into mountain sides.

I mean how can you say that people will never trust it. Humans can be conditioned to accept anything as normal. If in the future, a person has known airplanes to be able to fly themselves from when they were young, what reason do they have to think twice about it. Its part of human nature, how often do people find parts of other cultures strange. Yet people that grew up with it don't think twice about because it's just they way things are to them.

How do you know that pilot-less planes on this scale would be implemented without some sort of AI. Never having pilot-less planes? I just don't see how you can say that without being at the forefront of artificial intelligence or computer and systems research. (Or having a delorean with a flux capacitor) Hence the phrase "you don't know what you are talking about". Not to mention I think we can all agree it wouldn't just be a sudden shift to having no pilots. Also Jpax I'm interested in what you meant by the human vs robot race if you don't mind sharing.

With that said I will concede that my reaction was overly brash for a guy that in the end was just trying to share his opinion.

But hey who am I to say that I know what I'm talking about. I think I started a meme, yay I feel validated.

". Never seeing pilot-less aircraft, masses won't accept it, planes doing exactly what they are told, just flying into mountain sides."

Never seeing pilotless aircraft is an opinion. I do not think masses will accept it, especially in our lifetime, also an opinion. You took what I said out of context about flying into the mountainside. Another member made a comment on that about the orbiter going into Mars, the unit was wrong-- kaboom. A pilot can correct that if he was on board. As for the human vs robot race, that was towards the argument of " I like the comfort of knowing there are two (or more) human souls up front in control that can think rationally" Basically, I would rather have a living, breathing, feeling person upfront, than a soulless android flying the aircraft around. A human pilot will (should) do what is in the best interests of the passengers. A machine-pilot would presumably just do whatever it is told, without any regard for the comfort of the passengers in the back. It doesn't feel turbulence, it doesn't see the scumbag flying VFR on an IFR altitude that's on a collision course for your aircraft, it will commence its takeoff roll when cleared even though there is another aircraft erroneously on the runway still. What was that incident where the airliner was cleared for takeoff even though there was the other airliner mistakenly taxiied onto the runway. The pilot cleared for takeoff refused to move, had that been a machine doing what it is told to do-- kaboom, again.

The entire thing is almost entirely composed of an opinion, or speculation, if you will.

 

[Tristan]

When it comes down to the decision making pilots make on a day to day basis, and the dynamic variables which the decisions have to be based on, a computer would not be able to deal with such circumstances, especially when it comes to weather. Just say an aircraft was flying from A to B, there was bad weather at point B, how could a program determine how long to hold for? Would it just be based on a forecast inter/tempo? What if the bad weather lasts more than an hour or less. Could a computer totally rely on weather radar information? What if a passenger gets sick and the aircraft needs to divert. What if there is a violent passenger on board? I can just see to many problems with a computer making these decisions. At what point would the computer decide to conduct a go-around procedure? How would it deal with ATC, I suppose they would be computers as well?

 

[Jpax]

When it comes down to the decision making pilots make on a day to day basis, and the dynamic variables which the decisions have to be based on, a computer would not be able to deal with such circumstances, especially when it comes to weather. Just say an aircraft was flying from A to B, there was bad weather at point B, how could a program determine how long to hold for? Would it just be based on a forecast inter/tempo? What if the bad weather lasts more than an hour or less. Could a computer totally rely on weather radar information? What if a passenger gets sick and the aircraft needs to divert. What if there is a violent passenger on board? I can just see to many problems with a computer making these decisions. At what point would the computer decide to conduct a go-around procedure? How would it deal with ATC, I suppose they would be computers as well?

Good points! Adding to the weather: icing! *speculation*What if an ice sensor fails, a pilot would respond to that if needed to-- higher, lower, etc. A computer would fly the aircraft to a stall.*speculation*

 

[Snuggle]

Airplanes controlled by A.I. will become a reality.

Hackers will become a bigger threat.

Eventually the A.I. will turn against Humans.

and in the end......

Will Smith will be our savior.

 

[ppragman]

Airplanes controlled by A.I. will become a reality.

Hackers will become a bigger threat.

Eventually the A.I. will turn against Humans.

and in the end......

Will Smith will be our savior.

He will also fight off the hoards of genetic mutants and aliens, before he destroys the corrupt old west.

 

[CoffeeIcePapers]

Not necessarily when you add up long term operating costs and per load costs and considering plenty of railroad right-aways already exist.

http://www.usatoday.com/travel/news/2007-07-11-amtrak-high-speed_N.htm

If it would take $7b just to shave 25 minutes from DC to NYC, imagine how much it would cost to restructure the entire country!

 

[Sheblerep]

I think that most of us are overlooking the most important aspects of aviation; the pilots. Sure, technology will advance as airplanes and their manufacturers develop new strategies in mass production of aircraft, but that will begin to strain the pilots of the aircraft. Economically, I believe, we are headed down a path that leads to heartache and disappointment in the form of lower wages, poorer benefits, and extreeme beurocratic involvement within the airline industry, filtering down to the regional market, and all the way to primary flight schools.

It's no surprise to see that we were already headed in that direction. Since the boom of aviation (Primarily large commercial opperators in the for of major airlines) there has been a consistant decrease in the price tickets as airlines compete with one another. The result of trying to turn a profit resulted in packing as many sardines in an airborne aluminium tube and also decreasing the wages for the support staff. Baggage handlers, gate agents, ramp agents, and pilots all have not sustained a real increase in pay for decades. In the 1970's, major airline captains were making $150,000 per year after being in the position for about 10 years. Now, it's very much the same but with no wage increase due to the increase in the cost of living and for inflation. Pilots now make about half of what they made just 30 years ago.

With the current economic situation, I feel that this trend will continue. More and more pilots get trained everyday, over-saturating an already full market pool of aviators. This over abundance of pilots will drive airlines to raise their minimum time requirements for new hires just to keep the amount of applicants at a reasonable level, but it will also decrease pay to help filter out those that can't afford the expensive life of a pilot. Benefits will be thrown out and pensions will be cut even more than they already have so the beurocrats in power of the airlines can cut more costs and become more competitive.

All in all guys, it looks like we have some hard times ahead as pilots unless the flight training market slows to a halt. There is more interest in aviation than ever before so I really don't see that happening. And if these aircraft can fly themselves, that spells even more trouble for the pilot community. It isn't a measure of weather people will get on a plane that has no pilot. They will board because the tickets are cheaper because there is no pilots to pay. And have no doubt that even if there is a short term loss due to these pilot-less abomonations, the CEO's of major airlines will still buy/install them just to see more profits in the long term. If there is profit to be made, the automated pilots will be instituted without concern for the public well being, without concern for the pilots and their families, and without remorse.

I hope I'm wrong. I want to fly more than half the students that I train. Realistically; get ready for an aviation market recession.

 

[Boris Badenov]

I think that most of us are overlooking the most important aspects of aviation; the pilots.

Hah! Spoken like a true pilot.

 

[Tangodelta29]

I think that most of us are overlooking the most important aspects of aviation; the pilots. Sure, technology will advance as airplanes and their manufacturers develop new strategies in mass production of aircraft, but that will begin to strain the pilots of the aircraft. Economically, I believe, we are headed down a path that leads to heartache and disappointment in the form of lower wages, poorer benefits, and extreeme beurocratic involvement within the airline industry, filtering down to the regional market, and all the way to primary flight schools.

It's no surprise to see that we were already headed in that direction. Since the boom of aviation (Primarily large commercial opperators in the for of major airlines) there has been a consistant decrease in the price tickets as airlines compete with one another. The result of trying to turn a profit resulted in packing as many sardines in an airborne aluminium tube and also decreasing the wages for the support staff. Baggage handlers, gate agents, ramp agents, and pilots all have not sustained a real increase in pay for decades. In the 1970's, major airline captains were making $150,000 per year after being in the position for about 10 years. Now, it's very much the same but with no wage increase due to the increase in the cost of living and for inflation. Pilots now make about half of what they made just 30 years ago.

With the current economic situation, I feel that this trend will continue. More and more pilots get trained everyday, over-saturating an already full market pool of aviators. This over abundance of pilots will drive airlines to raise their minimum time requirements for new hires just to keep the amount of applicants at a reasonable level, but it will also decrease pay to help filter out those that can't afford the expensive life of a pilot. Benefits will be thrown out and pensions will be cut even more than they already have so the beurocrats in power of the airlines can cut more costs and become more competitive.

All in all guys, it looks like we have some hard times ahead as pilots unless the flight training market slows to a halt. There is more interest in aviation than ever before so I really don't see that happening. And if these aircraft can fly themselves, that spells even more trouble for the pilot community. It isn't a measure of weather people will get on a plane that has no pilot. They will board because the tickets are cheaper because there is no pilots to pay. And have no doubt that even if there is a short term loss due to these pilot-less abomonations, the CEO's of major airlines will still buy/install them just to see more profits in the long term. If there is profit to be made, the automated pilots will be instituted without concern for the public well being, without concern for the pilots and their families, and without remorse.

I hope I'm wrong. I want to fly more than half the students that I train. Realistically; get ready for an aviation market recession.

Do people agree that being a pilot is going to be A LOT tougher in the future? I mean how impossible is it going to be to get a job in 5 to 10 years?




Thanks for all the replies!

 

[Tristan]

Well I never say never, but if there were fewer pilot jobs going around in the future it wouldn't be because robots were taking our jobs. The industry is in a slump at the moment, but things will pick up again (at the moment a lot of people might find that hard to believe). I'd say oil as a diminishing resource will make air travel more expensive. There will be counter-measures in the interim, i.e. cutting costs, reducing wages, more efficient engines/aircraft, but it will get to a point down the track where oil recourses won't keep up with demand and ticket prices will indicate this trend. Unless of course, they find an alternative source of energy to 'light the candles'.