Race to the bottom
I live operate in a country where they cant even make a proper rule set after years of trying.
That aside, are you telling me that as a pilot you have never had to decide on a course of action for which no rule or procedure existed to guide you?
Race to the Bottom...Well....this is sure to evoke some heated and emotional discussion amongst Board Executives and C-Suites around the country - long overdue 
Treasurer Jim Chalmers says the ability for employers to apply to cancel enterprise bargaining agreements is one of the reasons behind slow wage growth in Australia - The Sydney Morning Herald (12 July 2022)
The ACTU welcomes today's commitment from Workplace Relations Minister Tony Burke to stop employers using the threat of EBA terminations as a bargaining tactic. - The Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) (8 August 2022)
Treasurer Jim Chalmers says the ability for employers to apply to cancel enterprise bargaining agreements is one of the reasons behind slow wage growth in Australia - The Sydney Morning Herald (12 July 2022)
The ACTU welcomes today's commitment from Workplace Relations Minister Tony Burke to stop employers using the threat of EBA terminations as a bargaining tactic. - The Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) (8 August 2022)
Last edited by RealSatoshi; 17th Aug 2022 at 06:12.
Between ILS airport pairs, the technology has long been here to fully automate. Now consider the immense complications of the Tesla autopilots being able to manoeuvre in a totally random environment. In contrast, the aircraft autopilot in a highly controlled environment is simplistic. Check out the Piper M600 Emergency auto land by Garmin. I’m not even sure it needs an ILS to guide it to touchdown. All this in a tin pot GA single. Imagine what Airbus and Boeing could do if they put their minds to it.
Everything an airline pilot does is either rule driven or can be made rule driven. And thus ripe for automation.
Pilot salaries are merely an annoyance to management. Their biggest constraint is rostering and complying with those pesky flight and duty limitations. And this is why automation is inevitable.
On the positive side bush flying in PNG and offshore Heli ops will be the last to be pilotless.
Everything an airline pilot does is either rule driven or can be made rule driven. And thus ripe for automation.
Pilot salaries are merely an annoyance to management. Their biggest constraint is rostering and complying with those pesky flight and duty limitations. And this is why automation is inevitable.
On the positive side bush flying in PNG and offshore Heli ops will be the last to be pilotless.
For vanilla normal ops, no doubt flight could be fully automated, but how often do you get a perfectly standard ILS to ILS day? Hows automation going to deal with the countless variances that in my view, require a decision based on inputs that aren't easily translatable to a machine? Strange smell on the flight deck? Dangerous weather return vs just heavy precip? Alarming noise during the t/o roll? On the 787 there are dozens of unannunciated checklists, ones that are only executed after a human decision because the aircraft has no idea what is wrong. or even that anything is wrong at all.
I think there is far, far more than needs to be developed for automated flight to occur, and I suspect its a long way off at this stage. My examples are just a drop in the bucket of the challenges that automated flight faces. And given the development time in aviation.. well.
Two reasons why pilots will always be on flight decks of RPT aircraft:
1. The public need someone to trust for their safely and to keep them informed and secure in an environment they don’t understand. Without people to trust up front, they won’t get onboard.
2. Aviation law needs someone to be held responsible when things don’t go as designed. Without a PIC to be held responsible, the law will need to hold the operators ( ie CEOs) responsible for technical operations they will not comprehend. Then CEOs will have to employ staff who can comprehend these operations to fill this gap - ie….probably pilots. (!!??)
1. The public need someone to trust for their safely and to keep them informed and secure in an environment they don’t understand. Without people to trust up front, they won’t get onboard.
2. Aviation law needs someone to be held responsible when things don’t go as designed. Without a PIC to be held responsible, the law will need to hold the operators ( ie CEOs) responsible for technical operations they will not comprehend. Then CEOs will have to employ staff who can comprehend these operations to fill this gap - ie….probably pilots. (!!??)
Two reasons why pilots will always be on flight decks of RPT aircraft:
1. The public need someone to trust for their safely and to keep them informed and secure in an environment they don’t understand. Without people to trust up front, they won’t get onboard.
2. Aviation law needs someone to be held responsible when things don’t go as designed. Without a PIC to be held responsible, the law will need to hold the operators ( ie CEOs) responsible for technical operations they will not comprehend. Then CEOs will have to employ staff who can comprehend these operations to fill this gap - ie….probably pilots. (!!??)
1. The public need someone to trust for their safely and to keep them informed and secure in an environment they don’t understand. Without people to trust up front, they won’t get onboard.
2. Aviation law needs someone to be held responsible when things don’t go as designed. Without a PIC to be held responsible, the law will need to hold the operators ( ie CEOs) responsible for technical operations they will not comprehend. Then CEOs will have to employ staff who can comprehend these operations to fill this gap - ie….probably pilots. (!!??)
