Is Fred Smith (FDX) that ignorant?

Hacker15e said:
That was tried in the 50s, and never got off the ground (or the drawing board) because of the ridiculous weight of the powerplant.

Plus, think of the contamination area when one crashed.
Click to expand...

I know, but I bet much has changed with our knowledge of nuclear devices since 60 years ago. With Obama just presenting to the UN for a nuclear free world all that funding and some of the great nuclear minds could still be put to great use IMO. I am also a great fan of reintroducing the star wars program which if it succeeded could cut our defensive spending in half in future years. But I'm a radical with conflicting ideas I know that. :)


Edit:
MikeD said:
Didn't he write term paper or something similar about the concept of Fedex and overnight delivery service while he was a student at Yale long ago, and it was only deemed barely worthy of a "C" grade since it was deemed unattainable or overly ambitious?
Click to expand...

I refer you to my signature...Quotes by some of the most brilliant men alive should be studied by all IMO, this is just my favorite of thousands I have read through...
 
ATN_Pilot said:
A shame that it hasn't taught him anything....
Click to expand...

He knows more than you might think. The opinions he forms based on that knowledge sometimes coincide with mine, other times not. That doesn't mean they're not based on real knowledge. That's the part you are missing.

ATN_Pilot said:
With you writing stuff like this, I find it difficult to believe that you've been a line pilot in a very long time......
Click to expand...

You sure you want to take me on? I'll let that pass except to say those without any foundation in their arguments tend to resort to personal attacks.

After that, suffice to say that you might want to do some research into accident investigation. Denying that what I said is true is paramount to denying the Earth is is round. The truth is right there.


ATN_Pilot said:
The entire idea of a "technological singularity" is just a crazy theory, and one that is entirely dependent upon the creation of some sort of "super-intelligence" first. I think it's a bunch of BS, and so do most scientists. Only a few fringe scientists believe that this is a real concern.
Click to expand...

Again, not quite accurate. Perhaps only a few "fringe" think that humanity is doomed, but to think that the pace of computing power will not continue to increase at an exponential rate or that we will not achieve AI in the fairly near future is naive and ignores the reality of how close we are and the acceleration of technology that we have witnessed in the past century.
 
seagull said:
You sure you want to take me on? I'll let that pass except to say those without any foundation in their arguments tend to resort to personal attacks.
Click to expand...

It wasn't a personal attack, merely an observation. Anyone who would so minimize the importance of a human being at the controls of an airliner is usually not someone that spends their days (or nights) flying airliners.

After that, suffice to say that you might want to do some research into accident investigation. Denying that what I said is true is paramount to denying the Earth is is round. The truth is right there.
Click to expand...

I'm not denying that human mistakes cause accidents, but you're seemingly ignoring the much more important fact: human pilots stop far more accidents than they could ever dream of causing. Computers can simply not do this job.

Again, not quite accurate. Perhaps only a few "fringe" think that humanity is doomed, but to think that the pace of computing power will not continue to increase at an exponential rate or that we will not achieve AI in the fairly near future is naive and ignores the reality of how close we are and the acceleration of technology that we have witnessed in the past century.
Click to expand...

Physics will show you that computing power is not capable of continuing to increase exponentially for much longer, actually. I believe when I last read about it, we had about another 10-15 years of being able to expand computing power in the same size chips, and then after that, physics won't allow us to cram anymore into a chip, because electrons start to spontaneously jump across the pathways. Moore's law has a built-in dead end. We'll have to find another way to transmit data in computers that we haven't used yet, or will have to start increasing their size to increase computing power.

seagull said:
Some FDX ALPA reps are out of touch with the main stream of FDX pilots. Fortunately, most are not.
Click to expand...

Based on the conversations I've had with rank-and-file FDX pilots while jumpseating, I think it's safe to say that the average FDX pilot thinks Fred is a business genius, but an ass towards his pilots. Not to mention a union-buster that would make WalMart blush.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
It wasn't a personal attack, merely an observation. Anyone who would so minimize the importance of a human being at the controls of an airliner is usually not someone that spends their days (or nights) flying airliners.
Click to expand...

Or, perhaps, someone that has actually WORKED managing safety programs in addition to flying airplanes? You come across as young and new to the industry.

ATN_Pilot said:
I'm not denying that human mistakes cause accidents, but you're seemingly ignoring the much more important fact: human pilots stop far more accidents than they could ever dream of causing. Computers can simply not do this job.
Click to expand...

Add "utilizing technology available TODAY" and I would generally agree. Your first portion is inane, though, as without a human the aircraft would not fly, which, on its foundation, means zero accidents. Humans are fairly good at managing risk. That's a pilots REAL job, afterall...

ATN_Pilot said:
Physics will show you that computing power is not capable of continuing to increase exponentially for much longer, actually. I believe when I last read about it, we had about another 10-15 years of being able to expand computing power in the same size chips, and then after that, physics won't allow us to cram anymore into a chip, because electrons start to spontaneously jump across the pathways. Moore's law has a built-in dead end. We'll have to find another way to transmit data in computers that we haven't used yet, or will have to start increasing their size to increase computing power.
Click to expand...

Yawn. Same has been said about running out of oil since 1910. Again, you left out the key line at the end "with todays technology". The entire microchip concept didn't exist all that long ago.


ATN_Pilot said:
Based on the conversations I've had with rank-and-file FDX pilots while jumpseating, I think it's safe to say that the average FDX pilot thinks Fred is a business genius, but an ass towards his pilots. Not to mention a union-buster that would make WalMart blush.
Click to expand...

You would be wrong about that, but you can believe what you want. The main point here, regarding technology, is that you can bury your head in the sand all you want, but that doesn't change what technology will do. I'm not underestimating the importance of pilots TODAY at all. I'm just not so naive to believe that computers won't be capable in the future. I do not know at what point the average person will trust them well enough, but it will happen eventually. That's all.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
Computers can simply not do this job.



Physics will show you that computing power is not capable of continuing to increase exponentially for much longer, actually. I believe when I last read about it, we had about another 10-15 years of being able to expand computing power in the same size chips, and then after that, physics won't allow us to cram anymore into a chip, because electrons start to spontaneously jump across the pathways. Moore's law has a built-in dead end. We'll have to find another way to transmit data in computers that we haven't used yet, or will have to start increasing their size to increase computing power.
Click to expand...

I submit for your consideration;


<DT>"But what ... is it good for?" <DD>-- Engineer at the Advanced Computing Systems Division of IBM, 1968, commenting on the microchip. <DD> <DD>

<DT>"If I had thought about it, I wouldn't have done the experiment. The literature was full of examples that said you can't do this." <DD>-- Spencer Silver on the work that led to the unique adhesives for 3-M "Post-It" Notepads. <DD> <DD>

<DT>"You want to have consistent and uniform muscle development across all of your muscles? It can't be done. It's just a fact of life. You just have to accept inconsistent muscle development as an unalterable condition of weight training." <DD>-- Response to Arthur Jones, who solved the "unsolvable" problem by inventing Nautilus.<DD> <DD>

<DT>"Everything that can be invented has been invented."<DD>-- Charles H. Duell, Commissioner, U.S. Office of Patents, 1899. <DD>


<DT>"The concept is interesting and well-formed, but in order to earn better than a 'C,' the idea must be feasible." <DD>-- A Yale University management professor in response to Fred Smith's paper proposing reliable overnight delivery service. (Smith went on to found Federal Express Corp.)
</DD>
 
ATN_Pilot said:
A shame that it hasn't taught him anything.
Click to expand...

You go out flying and come back shot or full or shrapnel, and then maybe just maybe you can be in a position to judge him. He has done more in the air, and for aviation than just about anybody breathing today. That's the facts, and if it doesn't fit your worldview, sorry.:beer:
 
granlistillo said:
You go out flying and come back shot or full or shrapnel, and then maybe just maybe you can be in a position to judge him. He has done more in the air, and for aviation than just about anybody breathing today. That's the facts, and if it doesn't fit your worldview, sorry.:beer:
Click to expand...

Sorry, but I don't subscribe to the view that having been in the military (combat, even) makes you untouchable from any criticism.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
Sorry, but I don't subscribe to the view that having been in the military (combat, even) makes you untouchable from any criticism.
Click to expand...

Gotcha, I am not saying he is perfect, but he has learned a thing or two about the flyin' bidness. I do not subscribe to view that being on the other side of the table makes him evil. We will have to agree to disagree.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
You should talk to some of the FDX ALPA reps about what Fred really thinks about pilots.
Click to expand...

Let's not forget that FDX currently has the best pilot contract in the industry. Other things you probably didn't know though, were things like the company sending a corporate jet to help a family member of one of our (staunch union activist) pilots. Never, ever, disciplining a pilot for calling in too tired to fly, even when they were starting out after a number of days off. I could go on for pages, but the good stuff that happens at this company simply do NOT happen other places.
 
granlistillo said:
I do not subscribe to view that being on the other side of the table makes him evil.
Click to expand...

Neither do I. But I refer you to these references about him in particular:

http://www.americanrightsatwork.org.../the-anti-union-campaign-at-fedex-ground.html

http://www.gwu.edu/~action/2008/chrnothp08/changetowin073008pr.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-p-hoffa/the-arrogance-of-fedex_b_211937.html

That's just a sample.

We will have to agree to disagree.
Click to expand...

Sounds good.
 
seagull said:
Let's not forget that FDX currently has the best pilot contract in the industry. Other things you probably didn't know though, were things like the company sending a corporate jet to help a family member of one of our (staunch union activist) pilots. Never, ever, disciplining a pilot for calling in too tired to fly, even when they were starting out after a number of days off. I could go on for pages, but the good stuff that happens at this company simply do NOT happen other places.
Click to expand...

Not to mention that he created something out of nothing. HK and FS are the two aviation execs, that arguably built something from the ground up into something beautiful that employs thousands. Also, just about everyone I talk to, wants to end up at one of these two properties.
There are plenty of POS for us to aim our wrath besides two of the good ones, imho.
Working for Fred Smith would be an honor.
 
While human factors are the major cause of accidents, a healthy human has a significantly lower system failure rate than a computer. Besides, my car isn't even automated yet. I highly doubt planes will be any time soon. It is coming, as others have said. Not just in aviation but elsewhere in transportation. Modern cruise ships, for instance, have a two on deck bridge capability and engineer-less engine rooms, somewhat similar to the modern airliner. That's a huge change from even just 30 years ago. I think the only thing that would change the route towards automation is if base airliner technology changed drastically, say moving to hypersonic transports, advanced airships, or what have you. Technology change would be focused elsewhere rather than on automation. If base technology, especially using fossil fuels, doesn't change, I expect aviation as a viable form of mass transportation to die out in which case automation would not be a major concern of executives.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top