Man vs. Machine

[scoobs]

Call me crazy but there in no way I would get on a plane without somebody controlling it.

[Doug Taylor]

Me neither. Knowing what goes on the scenes behind the cockpit, I'd be scared crapless to have some Microsoft (or Apple) software engineer programming artificial intelligence routines to decide when to take 15 right for weather or to slow an extra 10 knots because he thinks ATC is full of crap about the spacing on traffic ahead.

The first accident that occurs in a pilotless aircraft would kill any airline that doesn't use real pilots.

I'm not buying it.

[Realms09]

Originally Posted by DE727UPS

Those UAV's are actually flown by remote control.

Obviously there must be a human in the causal chain somewhere, or we have a Matrix/SkyNet situation on our hands. The goal is to make humans more productive, not eliminate them. It is just that the function of said human may not be very pilot-like. Some UAV's are flown by remote control in that someone deals with a Microsoft-Flight-Simulator-like interface to control the aircraft. An operator in this system could be considered a ground-bound pilot. However, other UAV systems are operated with much less interaction from operators, i.e., destination input only (I believe but am not certain that the GlobalHawk crossed the Pacific in such a manner). Monitoring this vehicle would be much like the job of an aircraft dispatcher, flight follower, mass transit system overseer, or an IT systems manager. If this appeals to you, I'm sure many of these jobs are available today without the need to wait for freighter automization.