Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Hangar Talk' started by FlyingTiger, Mar 24, 2015.
Already in everyday use.
Then why do we still need Doctors?
I mean, if we could eliminate all of these over paid Doctors we could get rid of all of these medical malpractice lawsuits and the thousands of deaths they cause each year.
I anticipate that within 20 years, some work done by physicians today will be automated.
You automate to get lower cost, not better quality. Home Depot didnt' switch to self checkout to improve customer experience.
I'd rather we got rid of a bunch of lawyers - a much better solution to that particular problem
Most of the arguments here are not taking into account huge advances in artificial intelligence that are projected to occur in the near future. Now of course it may be a pipe dream, but some in that field feel that it is coming. Our present technology makes it easy to make the case against a pilotless airliner. But a machine that can think, actually reason and make intelligent decisions could be a game changer. Time will tell.
I think that happens much sooner.
Actually the quality will go up considerably. Automation won't create a lot of the mistakes the Doctors make. I foresee a huge drop in malpractice as we get rid of the Doctors.
Very true. Use automation to eliminate lawyers. Have all documents produced in automation, let automation decide court cases without human interference.
As the robosigning scandal during the mortgage crisis demonstrated, plenty of legalwork is already automated.
Flight crews may only fly for a few minutes per flight. That might be true, but for me, unless the departure requires the use of the autopilot and there are some extenuating circumstances, I'll hand fly up into the mid twenties before hitting the AP button. For approach, depending on the weather, I'll click off the autopilot either passing through 10,000 or on downwind. That is more of a moving target depending on how fatigued I feel and what other external threats we're being faced with. I'm not alone in that. That's pretty much the norm form what I've seen.
And, also, the much bandied about statistic in the news that airliners ever land themselves is completely blown out of proportion. I'd say less than 1% of the flights I've flown have ended in an autoland.
Now to the bigger subject of the SHTF moments... we hear about the big "saves," Al Haynes and UA232, Sully Sullenberger and the Miracle on the Hudson, and the above mentioned Quantas flight from Singapore.
But I'm betting that so many more times each day, there is a crew somewhere in the world that "saves" the plane and passengers (or cargo) from when automation goes wrong. These flights aren't met by news reporters and posed in front of television cameras for the world to see. More than likely then land, look at each other, say "Well, that was effed up," make a logbook entry and go to the hotel.
Here's a recent post by one of my co-workers, with just another day at the office...
That's a bad day at the office, but I'm guessing these kind of failures happen multiple times each day. Maybe not this bad, but at least to the point where human intervention is required to interpret things when the sensors fail and the automation gets confused, or just gives up.
We're all pilots here... how many times have you done something in the cockpit because something didn't look or sound right. Your intuition took over and you were able to make a decision based on your experiences and senses and ability.
Many times I've asked "do you smell something?" Most of the times, it's our lunch burning, but twice, it hasn't been. We were able to stop what could have been a much worse situation from developing.
Some of you guys sound like you are the experts on future AI, sense-and-avoid systems and autonomous flight control. I'm way out of my league there, and I'll defer to your expertise.
But I think we are a long way off from taking the human completely out of the piloting loop and an even longer way off for it to make sense economically with little or no improvement in the safety of air travel.
That's my $0.02... worth about what you paid for it...
FA's would be thanking God!
Yeah - I wasn't trying to minimize the responsibilities of the flight crews that don't hand-fly much. There are reasons for and against. And the SHTF moments don't happen often, but was just an example I was trying to make.
You're right, we make decisions during every flight, the whole flight. Many times we don't even think about them. When you throw together all the dynamics of an aircraft in flight, weather, and every failure point possible (even the ones that nobody thought was possible), we are a long way from truly autonomous flights.
The reason we have the number of lawyers we do is that people want to sue people, they want criminals punished, and they want due process. It's supply and demand.
"It's hard to make predictions, especially about the future."
Please remember that there are some tasks which should not be automated:
That demand is driven by the success of frivolous lawsuits and the awards of multi-millions of dollars to people injured by their own lack of common sense. The billboards everywhere telling people that if an accident happens, they must call now and start their claim.
The entire system needs a makeover. Obviously I do not expect simplification of improvement of the system to come from lawyers; turkeys don't vote for Christmas, after all!
Clearly we need lawyers. It would be nice if we could get by with far fewer, though.
3D printing is more worriesome to me for my career future than any pilotless aircraft.
If juries stopped awarding those huge payouts, lawyers couldn't do a thing about it.
When I was young, the rules were changed to allow lawyers to advertise. I was in favor of it at the time. Now, I think it was a mistake.
Nah, somebody's gotta keep 'em honest!
Then why is it the lawyers who go ape whenever a cap on noneconomic damages goes through a state legislature ?
Maybe they set their fees as a percentage of the award.
What if rather than have a technological solution, the airlines simply assign permanent pilot pairings for aircraft crews. If you work with the same guy every day, you probably will get a sense as to what he's made of, and if anything drastic is going on. I know nothing about how feasible this is. I am sure there are some scheduling issues, but it seems they could be overcome. Just a thought.
I tend to agree, assuming you include judges in your definition of lawyers. They are the ones that don't throw out obviously frivolous suits. They are the ones that created the rules that make litigation so expensive such that the process is the punishment, and incentivize defendants to simply pay, no matter what, if the case gets past the summary judgment stage, which encourages more suits. They are the ones that are incredibly reluctant to award sanctions for frivolous law suits. They are the ones that have crafted remedies for every perceived wrong.
Interesting, they recovered a cellphone video of the last moments of the flight. Sadly it sounds like the passengers were well aware of impending doom, screams could be heard and what is being speculated as the pilot attempting to break down the door. Sad stuff.
I hope that a-hole is burning in hell.
THAT'S a real positive thing to say.
Invented a new control paradigm in, essentially, thirty seconds, succeed first try or they all die. There is no way to overstate what he did, and (of course) when it was crunch time, he stayed crouched at the throttles.
Of this are heroes made...
Why should anything positive be said about an SOB who decides to end his life and take almost 150 innocent people with him?
Roll your eyes all you want Greg, but there is nothing positive about it.
Don't forget to look at legislators who promote legislation which supports the plaintiffs' bar...
I didn't say there was anything positive about it. It is just that people are quick to condemn people with mental health issues.
Yes, it is a tragedy that should not have happened. I don't condone what he has done, but what about all the other people that might have had clues as to his mental health issues? Do they bear any responsibility? If so, condemn them, also.
The reason I keep bringing Denny up is that he is the real hero of United flight 232. Yes, Al Haynes was the Captain, but he was along for the ride.
Every time 232 is mentioned, and Denny is not, I will make that point.
You will now be returned to regularly scheduled programming.
Al Haynes was using the throttles to control the aircraft before Fitch entered the cockpit. He relinquished the throttles to Fitch after telling him the basics of what he had been doing.
Sounds like this bears repeating.
I did not know that detail.
I heard that too. Seems to me Al, Denny,the FO and a few FA's had a 1 hour special on PBS and they sat around told the entire story.....
I will see if I can find a U tube of it...
Depression does not absolve this man of his culpability. The general category of "mental health issues" is vast. Not every person with mental health issues is so far gone that they can't distinguish right from wrong. This guy had depression, and he was a narcissistic evil petty man. These are not mutually exclusive. I know people with depression that would never do such an evil thing.
I agree with everything you said EXCEPT the evil part. What the man did was evil. Was the man himself evil? You may say so because of his actions, but unless you are a mental health professional, you are just projecting your opinions. Just like I am projecting my opinions.
The man may have in fact been evil, but with mental health issues, there is more to it than what meets the eye.
https://youtu.be/DRdAWtGKhY0 This illustrates the accident well. The air crash investigation videos are really interesting
Maybe you could just get a tee shirt made or something....