Airbus A320 Down

Sluggo63 said:
I agree with you (and you seem to be the expert here) that autonomous airliners are science fiction for now, and probably will be for a long time.
.
Click to expand...

Makg is a wannabe on anything to do with airliners, autonomous or not...
 
Cars are hard in decisions per second, city bus drivers make bazillions more decisions then airline pilots. Airplanes are easy. Let airplanes go humanless first. Besides the death of a single pedestrian is a quiet tragedy the death of an aluminum tube full of people is good TV news.
MAKG1 said:
You're missing the point.

Henning is not a tech expert. Far from it. He's a user with no experience in the field, who sometimes confuses the field with science fiction.

Those of us who actually do develop control systems aren't very quick to jump on the AI airliner bandwagon. Heck, I stare at the "almost there" Google autonomous cars every day out my office window. And I have for years now. It's no accident that they all have two people in them…

When you have working autonomous cars and then busses, you might consider thinking about airliners. But working autonomous cars are several years away if they ever come -- and I really don't think they will.

What is substantially more likely is autonomous assist, but we already have that.

As was said earlier, the issue is the failure modes. If you can't enumerate them somehow, you can't account for them.

I find it really hard to believe that an AI system could have averted the Air France problem. That, as for many other airliner accidents, was due to a failure in the automation. You don't solve that with more automation. You make it worse.
Click to expand...
 
If these folks of the future couldn't remove the human element from the cockpit, you better believe......"I ain't flyin on no autonomous airliner":no::hairraise::rofl:


..[two of my favorite sci-fi shows by the way]
 

Attachments

  • star trek.jpg
    star trek.jpg
    131.5 KB · Views: 15
  • BSG-CIC.jpg
    BSG-CIC.jpg
    194.8 KB · Views: 18
MAKG1 said:
...Those of us who actually do develop control systems aren't very quick to jump on the AI airliner bandwagon. Heck, I stare at the "almost there" Google autonomous cars every day out my office window. And I have for years now. It's no accident that they all have two people in them…
Click to expand...

This short summary of unsolved problems with Google's driverless car might give some insight into the magnitude of the problem:

http://www.techspot.com/news/57910-...dy-still-face-many-technological-hurdles.html
 
Henning said:
One year of industry pilot wages pays for the conversion.
Click to expand...
Like many not involved with it, you grossly underestimate the design, testing, validation, and verification required to certify flight critical software...and you're talking the entire commercial fleet.

Nauga,
and his design assurance level
 
Henning said:
Of course computers can screw up, but humans screw up at a much higher rate now. As soon as the insurance industry decides that actuarially pilots are the higher risk factor, they will be replaced. Guess what? They figured that out a couple of decades ago, the system of implementation has been in progress since, and we are closing in on that time.

This will have nothing to do with egos or abilities, it is strictly a financial decission by the people who have Strict Liability exposure. All you have to do is follow the money. Computers cost both the insurance industry and the operators less money than pilots, ergo pilots will be replaced by mechanization. First it was the slaves, next it was the factory worker, next it was the company switch board operators, secretarial pools, and Mail rooms. Office worker productivity increased and staffs reduced. Travelling salesmen, warehouse workers and fork lift operators. Even brain surgery is now done robotically. If you think being a bloody airline pilot is more difficult than being a brain surgeon, you're delusional.
When people get surgery now, they look for the robotic machines, and all the best surgeons are buying them. Take the hint.
Click to expand...
I'm not so sure I agree with that. Computers mess up far too frequently for my liking. The non-pilots I talk to generally believe that the two-pilot system is a good one.
 
Clark1961 said:
Makg is a wannabe on anything to do with airliners, autonomous or not...
Click to expand...

I don't think he's a wannabe when it come to control systems development, and that's a crucial task in coming up with a pilotless airliner.
 
Palmpilot said:
I don't think he's a wannabe when it come to control systems development, and that's a crucial task in coming up with a pilotless airliner.
Click to expand...

But......
He /She is from California... So any response needs to be considered suspect...:yes:.........:rolleyes:
 
Palmpilot said:
I don't think he's a wannabe when it come to control systems development, and that's a crucial task in coming up with a pilotless airliner.
Click to expand...

Think what ya like, he doesn't work on airliners today.
 
Henning said:
The decisions are all simple logic decisions with limited and with databasable field of options that is larger than the human mind can handle, yet a computer can refrence through in seconds, and with much greater accuracy than the human mind is capable of.

Cost of implementing is not an impediment, it will be a profitable investment at nearly any cost.

I am a pilot, and I am an airline service consumer, and I would prefer an autonomous airliner at this point. That the general public favors my opinion more than yours is something I would wager a significant amount on.
Click to expand...

BS.gif
 
nauga said:
Like many not involved with it, you grossly underestimate the design, testing, validation, and verification required to certify flight critical software...and you're talking the entire commercial fleet.

Nauga,
and his design assurance level
Click to expand...
Exactly. Most here are focusing on the ability to design a system for autonomous airline flight. Although I think that's still very far away, they aren't even mentioning the HUGE infrastructure modifications and improvements that will be needed to be made on a world-wide scale. Financially, it doesn't make sense at all. I'm not saying I'm important or irreplaceable... it's just that I'm cheap backup.
 
Henning said:
We have been piecing together all the disparate technological systems, and we are getting to the end of the game...the technology we have used to grow into a cohesive system...Right now all we are doing is the Beta on the components...
Click to expand...
What is your role in all of this?

Nauga,
indistinguishable from magic
 
Henning said:
The decisions are all simple logic decisions with limited and with databasable field of options that is larger than the human mind can handle, yet a computer can refrence through in seconds, and with much greater accuracy than the human mind is capable of.
Click to expand...
Ha

Henning said:
Cost of implementing is not an impediment, it will be a profitable investment at nearly any cost.
Click to expand...
Ha ha
 
N801BH said:
But......
He /She is from California... So any response needs to be considered suspect...:yes:.........:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

That's funny, I was thinking the exact same thing about people from Wyoming! :rofl:
 
Clark1961 said:
Think what ya like, he doesn't work on airliners today.
Click to expand...

And airline pilots are not experts on the design and validation of automated control systems.
 
Last edited:
Sluggo63 said:
Most here are focusing on the ability to design a system for autonomous airline flight...
Click to expand...
At the risk of sounding insulting (and I don't mean to be) I get the impression that most people here don't have any idea what goes into designing and implementing flight critical software. It's not a bunch of programmers throwing something together and "giving it a whirl." It is a very rigorous design and testing effort and not at all cheap.

Sluggo63 said:
...it's just that I'm cheap backup.
Click to expand...
Cheap, relatively autonomous, adaptive, with integrated sensors and actuators, and self-propelled to boot. We (and I use the term advisedly ;) ) occasionally refer to pilots as the cheapest and most adaptive flight control computer available. Unfortunately you have a high failure rate and the programming is sometimes spotty, but you still work well when we need cheap and relatively fast :D

Nauga,
who used to work with a pilot who referred to himself as a 'meat servo'.
 
Palmpilot said:
And airline pilots are not experts on the design and validation of automated control systems.
Click to expand...
No, we're not. But funny how both the experts on automated control systems, and the experts on airline flying are saying that this is a long way off and they are ignored.
 
Clark1961 said:
never said they were...so why would you bring this up?
Click to expand...

When you said that he doesn't work on airliners, you seemed to be implying that that was the only type of expertise that matters in this discussion. If that wasn't the point you intended to make, feel free to clarify.
 
Palmpilot said:
When you said that he doesn't work on airliners, you seemed to be implying that that was the only type of expertise that matters in this discussion. If that wasn't the point you intended to make, feel free to clarify.
Click to expand...

Purely your perception. Control systems covers a very wide field and to assume one person's expertise with control systems applies to large aircraft is foolhardy at best.
 
Sluggo63 said:
No, we're not. But funny how both the experts on automated control systems, and the experts on airline flying are saying that this is a long way off and they are ignored.
Click to expand...

I noticed that too.
 
Clark1961 said:
Purely your perception. Control systems covers a very wide field and to assume one person's expertise with control systems applies to large aircraft is foolhardy at best.
Click to expand...

Can you explain that a little more? Is there something about large aircraft that makes the task of designing and validating automated control systems easier?
 
Palmpilot said:
Can you explain that a little more? Is there something about large aircraft that makes the task of designing and validating automated control systems easier?
Click to expand...

If you think unspecified control systems experience somehow translates into aircraft control systems experience then I can't help you.
 
Clark1961 said:
If you think unspecified control systems experience somehow translates into aircraft control systems experience then I can't help you.
Click to expand...
Like it or not, the fundamentals are the same when it comes to closed-loop control, automation and autonomy. The 'plant' may be different and certainly the devil is in the details, but the foundation is there.

Nauga,
who will skip the litany of control jokes
 
Clark1961 said:
If you think unspecified control systems experience somehow translates into aircraft control systems experience then I can't help you.
Click to expand...

It sounds like you have no idea what the answer is to the question below:

Palmpilot said:
Is there something about large aircraft that makes the task of designing and validating automated control systems easier?
Click to expand...
 
Clark1961 said:
If you think unspecified control systems experience somehow translates into aircraft control systems experience then I can't help you.
Click to expand...

nauga said:
Like it or not, the fundamentals are the same when it comes to closed-loop control, automation and autonomy. The 'plant' may be different and certainly the devil is in the details, but the foundation is there.

Nauga,
who will skip the litany of control jokes
Click to expand...

:D :thumbsup:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top