Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

[Jopax]

Yeah, but what if the tower people are in on it too!?

You need to give a higher still autorithy figure another code to override the override of the override.

[mainiac]

You need to give a higher still autorithy figure another code to override the override of the override.

Faith based air control?

[smjjames]

Yeah, but what if the tower people are in on it too!?

You need to give a higher still autorithy figure another code to override the override of the override.

And who would that be? God?

Also, that idea is sounding like it's becoming too labrynthine, plus they'd have to waste time contacting the person and who knows how long that could take.

[miauw62]

Yeah, but what if the tower people are in on it too!?

You need to give a higher still autorithy figure another code to override the override of the override.

And who would that be? God?

Also, that idea is sounding like it's becoming too labrynthine, plus they'd have to waste time contacting the person and who knows how long that could take.

God works in mysterious air corridors.

[MarcAFK]

Soooo... In that case just get rid of pilots altogether. Hurry up google, we need real autopilot.

[Sergarr]

Soooo... In that case just get rid of pilots altogether. Hurry up google, we need real autopilot.

But you just know there are going to be people going "hurr durr we want real HUMAN pilots because computers can make mistakes and humans don't because they're PROFESSIONALS herp derp"

[Vilanat]

There isn't a problem if one of the pilots gets a heart attack while the other is locked out, the code he punches in will open the doors unless the pilot inside the cockpit is intentionally overriding it, as was apparently the case here.

There is also no need for extra man power, simply have one of the veterans flight crew personnel attend the cockpit while the pilot goes for a dump. this is actually a procedure that several companies already use.

Edit: stupid me didn't notice it has been said already.

[Frumple]

What they really need to do is develop better-than-human autopilot and not tell anyone. Then, they can figure out which day has the most flights in the air, and simultaneously have every pilot and co-pilot parajump out of plane.

The reactions would be amazing.

_{and probably fatal in several cases but shut uuuuup}

[SirQuiamus]

What they really need to do is develop better-than-human autopilot and not tell anyone. Then, they can figure out which day has the most flights in the air, and simultaneously have every pilot and co-pilot parajump out of plane.

The reactions would be amazing.

_{and probably fatal in several cases but shut uuuuup}

Even with better-than-human autopilots, you would still need someone on board to keep watch in case the computer gets hacked. And once again, we have the problem of watching the watchmen.

[Sergarr]

What they really need to do is develop better-than-human autopilot and not tell anyone. Then, they can figure out which day has the most flights in the air, and simultaneously have every pilot and co-pilot parajump out of plane.

The reactions would be amazing.

_{and probably fatal in several cases but shut uuuuup}

Even with better-than-human autopilots, you would still need someone on board to keep watch in case the computer gets hacked. And once again, we have the problem of watching the watchmen.

Have another computer keeping watch over the first computer, then!

And then monitor the second computer from the air control room!

This plan cannot possibly backfire.

[SirQuiamus]

It's computers all the way down!!

[Frumple]

If that's what it takes to get better results than squishy human brainmeats, it sounds like a good idea t'me.

[SirQuiamus]

Besides hacker-terrorism, another obstacle to the adoption of auto-autopilots is that the average plane-passenger wants to have a human pilot on board. Even when people are told how much safer it would be to get rid of the human factor, they'll still insist on having someone in charge. That's the primary reason why we don't already have automated vehicles.     

[Sergarr]

Besides hacker-terrorism, another obstacle to the adoption of auto-autopilots is that the average plane-passenger wants to have a human pilot on board. Even when people are told how much safer it would be to get rid of the human factor, they'll still insist on having someone in charge. That's the primary reason why we don't already have automated vehicles.   

1) Already covered that in

Soooo... In that case just get rid of pilots altogether. Hurry up google, we need real autopilot.

But you just know there are going to be people going "hurr durr we want real HUMAN pilots because computers can make mistakes and humans don't because they're PROFESSIONALS herp derp"

2) Hacker-terrorism is a thing that can be neutralized (or reduced to the level where it has less effect than the current rate of pilots failing at their job) with the proper security measures. Of course it should also be tested throughly and stuff, but with the power of Google™, it should be possible.

[Erkki]

There are already "better than human" autopilots widely used from takeoff to landing... The machine already flies better. The crew are there for deciding what to do and for communication (to exaggerate a little).

Apparently many airlines just decided to from now on have at least 2 personnel in the cockpit at all times in many of their flights.