Not to say that we don’t need pilots anymore, but that pretty much all the mechanics to fly a plane can be automated now, no? Also, with drone technology you can technically fly a plane remotely and it’s two lives saved in the event of a rare disaster and it would enable the FAA to better investigate if it was caused by human error vs. technical difficulties.
In: Engineering
Computer tend to be good at repeatably handling relatively normal, simple situations, even better than humans can. They don’t get distracted or bored and they can respond much quicker and more precisely. But they are much worse than humans at handling unusual or unexpected situations, and computers are basically incapable of dealing with problems that arise from the computer itself.
A human pilot in the cockpit can handle a wide variety of problematic situations better than an autopilot could and the human can also take over if there are issues with the autopilot itself. As a simple example, a human pilot is able to physically look outside to judge things like the altitude or location of the airplane in a way that even the most sophisticated autopilot can’t. It’s relatively easy to make an autopilot that can fly a plane in normal conditions, but it’s much harder to make an autopilot able to compensate for a broken sensor that makes it think the plane is higher than it actually is.
Remote technology has a similar problem. It’s fine in normal situations, but what if there is a signal interruption or other issue with the plane itself? When it’s an unmanned vehicle it’s maybe worth the trade off, but when there are a couple hundred humans on board, you want the pilot in the loop to have as many options as possible. Basically, having an actual human in the plane able to fly it on their own opens up a lot of options for dealing with emergency situations that an autopilot or remote pilot wouldn’t have.
Latest Answers