We have researched the top pilotless planes. Hence, this article on pilotless planes name picks and shoes like converse but more comfortable. So Will Pilots Be Automated?
Automation won’t replace pilots for several decades, but it will reduce their salary and working conditions. … Automating a flight is far less difficult than automated driving. If you don’t believe me, then consider how long we’ve had self-flying aircraft. They’ve had old military fighters flying as drones for decades.
Will Pilots Be Automated
Examining The Rules
Airliners are designed according to a strict set of rules intended to ensure safety of flight, first and foremost. The requirements that an aircraft must meet in order to be certified to fly are listed in part 25 of the Code of Federal Regulations otherwise known as the Federal Aviation Regulations or FAR’s. The section that is most pertinent to our discussion is 25.1309 Equipment, Systems, and Installations. This section of the FAR’s specifies:
“The Airplane systems and associated components, considered separately and in relation to other systems must be designed so that – (1) The occurrence of any failure condition which would prevent the continued safe flight and landing of the airplane is extremely improbable.”
Determining whether or not a proposed design meets this requirement requires failure analysis. How that must be done is spelled out in another document, the Advisory Circular (AC) 25.1309-1. It’s worth noting that the current released version of this document is 25.1309-1A. But the latest not-as-of-yet officially published draft is the B version. Since the FAA and EASA are accepting the use of the B version in aircraft certification programs. it is the one I’m going to reference.
The AC goes on to classify various failures into five possible categories:
- No Safety Effect
Each failure condition has a probability associated with it that spells out the likelihood of a failure occurring. Let’s look at what the one we are most concerned with means. A catastrophic failure is one that would result in fatalities, usually with the loss of the aircraft. Such failures must be shown by analysis to be Extremely Improbable which means that the odds of such a failure occurring are no worse than 10–9 (1 chance in a billion).
Consider then an automated airliner. Clearly a failure of the automation that flies the airplane is going to be classified as a catastrophic event because it’s almost certainly going to result in a crash with fatalities. Which means that the automation is going to have to be shown to have a chance of failure that is extremely improbable. That’s going to include its ability to deal with various system malfunctions that can be expected to occur.
If you could limit the range of probable malfunctions to the more normal types of events like an engine failure on takeoff you could certainly program a system that could react properly to such an event and safely fly the airplane back around to a landing. The problem comes when such systems are inevitably exposed to the messy real world. It’s simply not going to be possible to program an automated system that never needs human oversight or decision making. The range of variables is simply too high. Which means on some level you’re going to have to have humans in the loop.
A Single Pilot Solution?
This raises the question of how you do that. One proposal is to go to a single pilot airliner where the pilot is essentially there to supervise the automation and deal with the unexpected. There are however, numerous problems with this idea. First and foremost, the human body isn’t sufficiently reliable. Pilot incapacitations, although rare, do occur and people have died at the controls. It’s one of the principle reasons that airliners and large aircraft are not already operated single pilot.
Second, you do have to consider the possibility of pilot suicide. With only one pilot in the plane, there is nothing to stop an unbalanced individual from taking others with him.
Third, is the issue of proficiency. Flying is a perishable skill that if not practiced regularly can be lost. The industry is already working to address issues of automation dependency and a single pilot airliner is only going to make that worse. Because remember the single pilot isn’t there to fly the airplane, he’s there in case the automation fails to take control.
Fourth, is the issue of qualifications. When you have only one pilot in the airplane, you’re going to need people with more experience and even more rigid training than what is required today. But if future airliners are only flown by one person how will we be able to produce the next generation of pilots to have that experience?
Lastly, even with a very highly trained single pilot the sort of event that is going to dump the airplane in his lap really needs two pilots to manage. The workload when your facing major systems failures just gets too high. It’s why Cockpit Resource Management, which trains crews to act as a team, has proven so successful at reducing the accident rate from the days when the Captain was god on high not to be questioned.
Remote Systems Prone To Errors, Hacking
So, if an automated airliner with a single pilot onboard isn’t the answer, what about some system of remote control like what is being used with drones right now? It would certainly address issues of incapacitation and suicide for example. A remote pilot would also in theory be able to respond to the unexpected. The major problem there comes with the data link and its associated systems. We have to remember that if they fail the results could be catastrophic, which means the chance of it failing must be less than 10–9. There is another problem to consider too the moment we allow remote control of an airliner, hacking. If you have the ability to remotely control an airliner there will be people who will want to exploit that for evil means. Which means the chance of that data link being hacked must also be shown to be less than 10–9. I feel pretty comfortable stating that a data link that is reliable and un-hackable doesn’t exist and isn’t likely to exist possibly ever.
Consider too that even if you developed a link that was believed to be reliable and secure enough, what would happen if it was compromised? You’d have to immediately ground the entire fleet and its possible that it might never fly again. Imagine the effect if your automated airliner became as common as the 737 is today and you suddenly had to ground the world wide fleet, perhaps permanently.
“Black Swan” Events
Finally, we have to discuss the probability of a black swan type of event. A black swan event is an unpredictable event beyond the bounds of what is normally expected possibly with severe consequences. Qantas 32 was such an event in that the shrapnel from the engine did so much damage and disabled so many systems that it was well outside the bounds of anything that had been considered. Continental flight 120 was another such event.
In this case the 757 was flying from Anchorage to Seattle with one of its generators inoperative. Mid-flight while over water off the coast of Alaska at night the remaining engine driven generator failed. That left the APU carrying the electrical load which it should have been able to do. Until a few minutes later when it overheated and shut down. At this point the last line of defense an emergency backup generator powered by aircraft hydraulic power should have come on but it too failed leaving the crew with nothing more than battery power. Certifying an automated airliner means creating a system that is robust enough to handle such events. The problem is that by definition a black swan event is unpredictable, which again argues that you’re going to on some level have to have a human in the loop.
When you have an accident in which pilot error plays a role it’s understandable that people would look to eliminate the source of such errors. It seems easy to conclude that the computer would not have made the same mistakes and the accident would not have happened. This of course ignores events where the automated systems have failed and the difference between success and failure was a well-trained crew at the controls. The real question that the MAX crashes give rise to isn’t automation it’s one of pilot training and proficiency. But, that’s a larger subject for another day.
pilotless planes name
Top 10 Luxury Helicopters in the World
Most people have heard of personal and charter jets, but luxury helicopters are the genuine gems. Not only are these aircraft comparatively less expensive, but helicopters can approach places that bulky jets can’t. Having a private or commercial helicopter is expedient, more environment friendly, and a symbol of status. Celebrities including Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie and Donald Trump own a luxury helicopter, and this slot market has grown considerably in recent years due to demand from the rich.
They are well-appointed with all the newest technology, and interior seating marks that are designed in fine Italian leather upholstery.
Therefore the list of top 10 luxury helicopters is given below:
1. Augusta Westland AW119 Ke Koala:
The Koala is chiefly used by law enforcement, but it can easily provide accommodation to a group of corporate directors traveling on business. It has a VIP services quite adequately, with premium leather upholstery and seating for about 6 passengers and 2 operators. The Koala reaches a top speed of 166 mph (267 km/h) and a range of 618 miles (995 km). Price ranges from $1.8 to $3 million.
2. Eurocopter Hermès EC 135:
Though this brand of luxury helicopters is not suitable for long distant trips, is has a class apart built. The typical EC 135 will cost you a mere $4.2 million, but the one with the interior design from the best in class designer will cost you up to $6 million. The top speed is 178 mph, but the range is just 395 miles.
3. Augusta Westland AW109 Grand Versace VIP:
Augusta Westland teamed up with the Italian fashion house Versace to produce a super luxury interior for this fancier version of the AW109. The top speed is about 177 mph and a range of 599 miles. The mere difference is that all 599 of those miles will be more luxurious for the VIP passengers. Hence, will cost you $6.3 million price tag and the helicopter is fully covered in Versace leather, design and exterior.
4. Eurocopter Mercedes-Benz EC 145:
If you’re a Mercedes fan, now you can fly your preferred brand helicopter too. A regular EC 145 costs about $5.5 million, so the Mercedes version is going to cost anywhere around $7 million. But it’s totally worth it. No other Mercedes can go 153 mph while flying 17,000 feet above the ground. It has all the luxury of the famous German sports.
5. Eurocopter EC 175:
The EC 175 made its wonderful first appearance at the Paris Air Show in 2009. The chief feature of the EC 175 is that it can hold 16 passengers contentedly inside. The top speed reaches 178 mph (286 km/h), with a range of 345 miles (555 km). It costs whooping $7.9 million.
6. Eurocopter EC 155:
This is a luxurious chopper. Its top speed is an impressive 200 mph with a range of 533 miles. It can seat as many as 13 passengers; this spacious EC 155 aircraft will cost you $10 million.
7. Sikorsky S-76C:
The Sikorsky S-76C is more generally known as Black Hawk. The massive interior is large sufficient to fit up to a dozen passengers, but the seating occupies 4 passengers in Black Hawk model. It reaches a top speed of 178 mph (286 km/h) and has a range of 473 miles (761 km). It would cost you a $12.95 million.
8. Augusta Westland AW139:
The AW139 is appropriate for law enforcement, armed patrol and firefighters. It has a capacity to seat 8 passengers. The AW139 can reach an unbelievable top speed of 193 mph (310 km/h), with a range of 573 miles (922 km). It carries a beautiful interior costing you a hefty $14.5 million.
9. Bell 525 Relentless:
Like the Gulfstream 650 jet, the Bell 525 Relentless helicopter isn’t on the market currently. This chopper is going to cost $15 million. They predicted that the seating will be for 16, a top speed of 162 mph, and a range of 460 miles. This bright yellow Relentless with amazing seating will cost you a fortune.
10. Sikorsky S-92 VIP Configuration:
The S-92 can safely accommodate 9 passengers in its extensive interior cabin. The prices vary exponentially if you plan on decking the interiors with gold or crystal. The top speed of the S-92 is around 194 mph (312 km/h), with a range of 594 miles (956 km). The prices range from $17 million to $32 million.
Helicopter charter can be the most stress-free travel familiarity you will ever have. Which includes being able to travel outside of airports to reach vital meetings or even other flights in a different airport. Though rich class can afford these luxury helicopters, they are worth the investment.