Cirrus' private jet can land itself, no pilot needed

[bob10]

Not for me. I like to see a pilot in control. Self driving cars still crash.


Cirrus''' $2 Million Vision Jet Now Lands Itself, No Pilot Needed | WIRED (https://www.wired.com/story/cirrus-garmin-vision-jet-autoland-safe-return/?bxid=5cc9e26e3f92a477a0ea0693&cndid=52475003&esrc=subscribe-page&source=EDT_WIR_NEWSLETTER_0_DAILY_ZZ&utm_brand=wired&utm_campaign=aud-dev&utm_mailing=WIR_Daily_110119&utm_medium=email&utm_source=nl&utm_term=list1_p1)

[Homestar]

You realise large passenger planes have (and do) land themselves for years now? Still have Pilots but they can if needed and hopefully some of the Pilots here can tell us how often this happens?

[4bee]

If that is the big Red Button on the Port wingtip it would be a bit of a bastid to get to.[biggrin][biggrin][wink11]

[Hugh Jars]

I don't know if that system will ever be approved, especially in controlled airspace. The aircraft can't just go off and do what it wants without a clearance in what might be very densely populated airspace. Further (and only one scenario), what if it's making it's landing approach and the runway's occupied? Is it going to land over (or into) the occupying aircraft? Making pre-recorded radio broadcasts doesn't cut it. That assumes the radio is on the correct frequency and all aircraft in the airspace are monitoring. I go to places now where other pilots cant (or won't) use the radio.

I can think of dozens of other scenarios that would preclude this sort of thing.

Autoland is nothing new. It's been a round since the 60s. To be able to carry it out requires the aircraft, the crew and the airport to be qualified. All very complex and sone quite stringent requirements, too.

For the crew alone to become autoland qualified requires at least 4 hours in the simulator, carrying out around 20 or so scenarios. Only one of those involves a normal situation. So you can gather there are a lot of things that can go wrong.

One thing a computer is incapable of doing is critical reasoning. And that is why there will always be humans at the controls for the foreseeable future [bigsmile1]

[Hugh Jars]

Homestar,

In Oz, we don't need to do autoland very often (operationally). Fortunately, the weather here is good for the most part. Generally some (autoland qualified) pilots will go their whole careers without doing one in anger.

But in terms of recency, etc, we get checked every sim session (every 6 months for my company), plus we'll routinely carry out practice autolands during normal line flights at those airports that are approved. That number varies per pilot, as there's only a handful of airports in Oz that are approved, and you might go a couple of months without landing at one. Also, it depends on arrival traffic density at the airport. If the weather's good, ATC process arrivals at a much higher rate than when low-vis (autoland) procedures are in progress. So, to do an autoland generally requires the aircraft to fly slower on the appproach. That's not something you want to do without ATC knowing first, as you could reduce separation with the following traffic, which is undesirable.

[4bee]

I go to places now where other pilots cant (or won't) use the radio.


But why HJ? One's own safety is at stake not to mention a few score of Pax & Crew.


How is this allowed to happen? I'm one of the old school/olde fashioned who prefers to have one of you or your qualified colleagues up front thinking & acting for me & bugger the rough landing if it occurs.[bigsad]

[101RRS]

One thing a computer is incapable of doing is critical reasoning. And that is why there will always be humans at the controls for the foreseeable future [bigsmile1]

Yes - you only have to look at the Sydney Metro which constantly decides to do it own thing causing issues and safety concerns - and is just a driverless train not a pilotless aircraft.

[4bee]

Yeah, they could have one of the redundant Drivers just sitting there & overseeing the controls & operation. That would save a heap of money.:rolleyes: Not.[biggrin]

Has the lack of a 'proper' Driver caused any accidents yet?

[Old Farang]

Hmm! Well the long standing joke about pilotless aircraft of the future is:

The flight crew will consist of one man and one dog. The man is there to feed the dog and the dog is there to bite the man if he attempts to touch any of the controls. [biggrin]

[Bigbjorn]

And there is the old one about the Qantas pilot who submitted a fault report "auto landing operation rather rough on this aircraft". The reply from engineering "auto landing not fitted to this aircraft".

[JDNSW]

As Hugh points out - while it may be technically possible for the aircraft to land itself, and perhaps there may be a few circumstances where this could be useful, I have trouble seeing it being legally accepted.

I am reminded of a conversation I had with the skipper of a survey ship about fifty years ago after observing him steering the ship to keep to a preplanned track by keeping a needle centred in a display. He commented that it would be easier and would keep a more accurate track if the output of the navigation system was interfaced to the autopilot. He replied that they had suggested this, but there insurer had absolutely forbidden this on the grounds that it would encourage lack of attention on the part of the watchkeeping officer.

[Hugh Jars]

But why HJ? One's own safety is at stake not to mention a few score of Pax & Crew.


How is this allowed to happen? I'm one of the old school/olde fashioned who prefers to have one of you or your qualified colleagues up front thinking & acting for me & bugger the rough landing if it occurs.[bigsad]
Hi 4bee,

The issue of radio use is complex. you can break it down to 2 reasons - intentional and unintentional. Fortunately, unintentional is more common in my experience. the reasons can range from incorrect frequency tuned, radio not on, etc. Generally human factors stuff, which happens in every industry.

The intentional non-user is rare, but potentially a significant threat. Reasons like a blunt refusal to use the radio, to not transmitting to avoid landing charges. Just really poor airmanship from people who shouldn't be flying.

Some are concerned about their radio work (not using correct phraseology). When I was an instructor, I used to tell my students "if you can't think of the correct phraseology, just speak in plain English". The important thing is that we know the other traffic is there - preferably sooner than later, so that we can make a separation plan if necessary. A lot of trainees are foreign students. That makes it even harder for them, especially when they may only have a limited grasp of the English language.

There's nothing worse than going into an uncontrolled airport where pilots don't talk to you. Having some bloke (not using his radio) turn in front of you on final can ruin your day. Going around in a B737 and recovering back into the circuit has a whole bunch of extra risks, especially if there's traffic in the circuit. And yes, I've had to do it a couple of times. I hate paperwork.

[4bee]

Just really poor airmanship from people who shouldn't be flying.

Thanks HJ, that simpifies it & is probably the root cause.:BigThumb:

[Fourgearsticks]

[QUOTE=Hugh Jars;2949017]Hi 4bee,
There's nothing worse than going into an uncontrolled airport where pilots don't talk to you. Having some bloke (not using his radio) turn in front of you on final can ruin your day. Going around in a B737 and recovering back into the circuit has a whole bunch of extra risks, especially if there's traffic in the circuit. And yes, I've had to do it a couple of times. I hate paperwork.[/QUOTEI
Some examples of overusing and abuse of radio.
A fellow inbound gives 8 calls from inbound to landed and clear with no traffic (I would give one inbound and another joining), as well as people doing circuits on a remote field making 5 calls every lap and nobody within 5o miles on the standard (Stupid) CASA proceedure of having most uncontrolled airfields in Australia on the same frequency.
Also some medium twins pusing their way into circuits, calling 5 mile final then taking 9 minutes to be on short final thinking they have the absolute rite to do push in.

A common one, Ultralight inbound calling "All stations Smallville......................ahhhhh............ ..32-7474 a blue and white airborne edge delta trike mark.................... 3 is 19.7 nautical miles to the southeast on the 137 radial estimating Smallville at 0327 Zulu planning to join number one midfield crosswind for 33 left circuit.......................all stations...............................Small...... ....ville."
I think overuse of radio is as bigger problem as no use.
CASA making nearly every airfield (Uncontrolled) in Australia use the same radio frequecy is typical of their "No idea" approach to GA.
I might add the regional Dash 8's are the most courteous I have struck, good onya Hugh.