Trump says: Airplanes are becoming far too complex to fly

Status
Not open for further replies.
FloridaPilot

FloridaPilot

Pattern Altitude
Joined
Mar 10, 2014
Messages
2,456
Location
Florida
Display Name
FloridaStudentPilot
Home Airfield
48X
As with many things trump, he makes some good points combined with some really stupid ones.

Sometimes we let tech to a little too far, but that makes it even more important to have a good pilot, because if you just have a paint by numbers systems guy, when somethings doesn’t do what it’s sposed to do, or something happens you didn’t train in the sim for, thats when you want a pilot and not a technician
 
another example of tech run amok was spotted in an rv (N/A ... recreational vehicle) board this morning. Someone asked what kind of grease gun he should get for his suspension on his trailer. I posted a $10 harbor freight gun, and someone else countered with a $250 battery powered gun. SMH ... 8 pumps once a year and I would find the battery dead every time I needed it.
 
I don't believe he was saying that he thought pilots weren't needed. Keep reading and he points out that he thinks they ARE needed. He was saying that technology is going to fast and to far and he doesn't like it.
 
James331 said:
As with many things trump, he makes some good points combined with some really stupid ones.

Sometimes we let tech to a little too far, but that makes it even more important to have a good pilot, because if you just have a paint by numbers systems guy, when somethings doesn’t do what it’s sposed to do, or something happens you didn’t train in the sim for, thats when you want a pilot and not a technician
Click to expand...
Sounds like the same point that Trump was making, but people keep quoting half of what he said instead of the full quote.

“Airplanes are becoming far too complex to fly. Pilots are no longer needed, but rather computer scientists from MIT. I see it all the time in many products. Always seeking to go one unnecessary step further, when often old and simpler is far better. Split second decisions are needed, and the complexity creates danger. All of this for great cost yet very little gain. I don’t know about you, but I don’t want Albert Einstein to be my pilot. I want great flying professionals that are allowed to easily and quickly take control of a plane!”
 
gkainz said:
another example of tech run amok was spotted in an rv (N/A ... recreational vehicle) board this morning. Someone asked what kind of grease gun he should get for his suspension on his trailer. I posted a $10 harbor freight gun, and someone else countered with a $250 battery powered gun. SMH ... 8 pumps once a year and I would find the battery dead every time I needed it.
Click to expand...
That's not tech run amok; I've ordered one of the electric guns, as my tractor with its implements has nearly 100 fittings.
 
Wheels said:
Sounds like the same point that Trump was making, but people keep quoting half of what he said instead of the full quote.

“Airplanes are becoming far too complex to fly. Pilots are no longer needed, but rather computer scientists from MIT. I see it all the time in many products. Always seeking to go one unnecessary step further, when often old and simpler is far better. Split second decisions are needed, and the complexity creates danger. All of this for great cost yet very little gain. I don’t know about you, but I don’t want Albert Einstein to be my pilot. I want great flying professionals that are allowed to easily and quickly take control of a plane!”
Click to expand...
Yes, sometimes the "whole story" is different from the [fake news] snippets we see.
 
Kenny Phillips said:
That's not tech run amok; I've ordered one of the electric guns, as my tractor with its implements has nearly 100 fittings.
Click to expand...

a tractor with 100 fittings ... appropriate use of tech ... a trailer suspension with 4 fittings? yeah, overkill
 
i have opinion but I will keep it to myself, just here to see how fast this goes downhill and locked ...lol
 
WannFly said:
i have opinion but I will keep it to myself, just here to see how fast this goes downhill and locked ...lol
Click to expand...
Well, it is definitely aviation related and so far, I haven't seen any real political debate, except for the references to how Trump is often misquoted or taken out of context. But maybe that is enough. Perhaps a moderator should step in and set some ground rules, since this thread seems to be borderline legitimate.
 
Why does anyone care about the totally uninformed opinions of a person that has no useful knowledge about aviation, flying, science or technology? (And many other things, for that matter.) Boeing has a software/documentation/training issue with the 737 Max 8 that should be sortable. By experts. For experts. If the feds want to help, they should be riding herd on the FAA to oversee that the appropriate safety fixes are applied in an appropriately urgent manner.

You can BS people. You can't BS the laws of physics, mathematics, or science.
 
FloridaPilot said:
Do you agree with this why\why not?

https://news.yahoo.com/trump-on-boe...iI6x0SMjLIr58qddWV8ciLrIzMBrAhCUl3uCsDcEkZOy4

He said: “Airplanes are becoming far too complex to fly,” Trump tweeted. “Pilots are no longer needed, but rather computer scientists from MIT. I see it all the time in many products. Always seeking to go one unnecessary step further, when often old and simpler is far better.”
Click to expand...

And the whole quote...... just to be fair.....

Airplanes are becoming far too complex to fly. Pilots are no longer needed, but rather computer scientists from MIT. I see it all the time in many products. Always seeking to go one unnecessary step further, when often old and simpler is far better. Split second decisions are....

needed, and the complexity creates danger. All of this for great cost yet very little gain. I don’t know about you, but I don’t want Albert Einstein to be my pilot. I want great flying professionals that are allowed to easily and quickly take control of a plane!
 
JOhnH said:
Well, it is definitely aviation related and so far, I haven't seen any real political debate, except for the references to how Trump is often misquoted or taken out of context. But maybe that is enough. Perhaps a moderator should step in and set some ground rules, since this thread seems to be borderline legitimate.
Click to expand...
I have faith that this will go downhill soon enough :cheers:
 
He has a point, but the tech is here to stay. I recently got my IR and on one of the attitude recoveries, my instructor had turned on the autopilot, effectively holding the unusual attitude. I fought with it about 3 seconds before I figured out to disconnect. He liked that, he said he's seen IR students fight for up to 30 seconds before realizing what is going on.
 
Wheels said:
Sounds like the same point that Trump was making, but people keep quoting half of what he said instead of the full quote.

“Airplanes are becoming far too complex to fly. Pilots are no longer needed, but rather computer scientists from MIT. I see it all the time in many products. Always seeking to go one unnecessary step further, when often old and simpler is far better. Split second decisions are needed, and the complexity creates danger. All of this for great cost yet very little gain. I don’t know about you, but I don’t want Albert Einstein to be my pilot. I want great flying professionals that are allowed to easily and quickly take control of a plane!”
Click to expand...

The full quote is just as uniformed and unhelpful as the snippet.
 
The tech, while making the aircraft more complex and expensive, has made flying much easier. Made flying safer also. Even on the ATC side, just the SA in the past 20 years on both sides has made ATC easier.

I get what he’s saying that he wants more stick and rudder skills but increasing complexity doesn’t necessarily take that away. For now, aircraft still require human interaction and hand eye coordination. At some point down the road, I have no doubt that in some commercial ops, the pilot won’t be necessary. Hopefully, I’ll be retired before then. Then again, as AOC stated yesterday, when my job is taken by automation, it’ll give me “more time to enjoy the world we live in.” :D
 
FloridaPilot said:
Do you agree with this why\why not?

https://news.yahoo.com/trump-on-boe...iI6x0SMjLIr58qddWV8ciLrIzMBrAhCUl3uCsDcEkZOy4

He said: “Airplanes are becoming far too complex to fly,” Trump tweeted. “Pilots are no longer needed, but rather computer scientists from MIT. I see it all the time in many products. Always seeking to go one unnecessary step further, when often old and simpler is far better.”
Click to expand...

I agree that you should include the next tweet that came like 30 seconds later where he said that what we need is pilots who can take control of an airplane. This tweet alone is incomplete of the thought.

He said it in a clumsy way, but it echos what many here have said - The standard for computer programmers of airplane flight controls is not the goal of getting it right - they must never get it wrong. They are not meeting that standard. When they get it wrong, the pilot can't be locked out of the flight controls.
 
Kenny Phillips said:
That's not tech run amok; I've ordered one of the electric guns, as my tractor with its implements has nearly 100 fittings.
Click to expand...
I built miles of hydraulic hoses last year. That's what happens when the miners don't pay attention to how they operate a drill, bolter, truck or loader..:rolleyes:
 
I'm with @Velocity173 - the automation is part of what has made commercial aviation so astronomically safe in the US. Even in the "dangerous" countries it's usually much much safer than any alternative means of transport.

It's a convenient sample, but the last hull loss fatal by a US carrier (Colgan at Buffalo) happened not because the crew were locked out by the automation but because they weren't locked out by the automation, and actively fought a stick pusher that was trying to save everyone's lives.

You could make a meta-level argument that the underlying stick and rudder skills are missing because of dependence on automation, but if true that's not really the automation's fault; it's the training regimen.

Anyway, without making a political point, I think if anyone's committed themselves to divining the carefully considered and well-informed underlying position in any couple of 280-character tweets, least of all from someone famous for being, shall we say, "impulsive" on Twitter, you're on a fool's errand.
 
JOhnH said:
Well, it is definitely aviation related and so far, I haven't seen any real political debate, except for the references to how Trump is often misquoted or taken out of context. But maybe that is enough. Perhaps a moderator should step in and set some ground rules, since this thread seems to be borderline legitimate.
Click to expand...
Keep your discussion limited to the contents of the tweet, not about who wrote it, since any number of people could have written the same thing. So far most are doing a good job.
 
bflynn said:
I agree that you should include the next tweet that came like 30 seconds later where he said that what we need is pilots who can take control of an airplane. This tweet alone is incomplete of the thought.

He said it in a clumsy way, but it echos what many here have said - The standard for computer programmers of airplane flight controls is not the goal of getting it right - they must never get it wrong. They are not meeting that standard. When they get it wrong, the pilot can't be locked out of the flight controls.
Click to expand...
Even more to the point -- the airplane and weather will give the pilot quite enough opportunities to try and figure out WTF is going on, take control, and act to correct the situation. The systems and software should never contribute to that. We can rightly expect pilots to be experts in many subjects. Computer science and the nuances of programming should not, in my humble opinion, be included in that requirement.

That's not an argument against software and technology in the cockpit -- it's an argument that such systems must never be allowed to be able to present their own problems. It's a tall order, yes; these are really, really expensive airplanes. I don't think it's unreasonable.
 
jordane93 said:
Or maybe Yahoo should post the whole tweet in context to what he said. But that’s not good news right;)

IBTL!!
Click to expand...

Why report news when you can make it??!
 
Well, he is not wrong, but gives in to the typical desire of the politicians to "do something" about any manufactured crisis. In this sense Trump is not far removed from the people who gave us the 1,500 hour rule.
 
DaleB said:
The systems and software should never contribute to that. We can rightly expect pilots to be experts in many subjects. Computer science and the nuances of programming should not, in my humble opinion, be included in that requirement.
Click to expand...
Big iron pilots have been partly systems managers for some time. I agree they don't have to understand CompSci or Programming but they do have to be up to the challenge of understanding how complex systems behave and interact. And I think they generally are - it may be that what went wrong (at least in Lion Air, Ethiopian who knows) is partly related to Boeing, by their own admission, intentionally keeping those details from crews. Some crews were reportedly not impressed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top