Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Honeywell Developing A Ground Autopilot System  
User currently offlineg500 From United States of America, joined Oct 2011, 1029 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 5 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 4463 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

According to the WSJ, Honeywell is engeenering an autopilot system that would guide the aircraft on the tarmac-taxiways as well as flight. The system is long ways off but Honeywell sounds very optimstic about it.

The article on the wsj.com

20 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineTangowhisky From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 931 posts, RR: 7
Reply 1, posted (2 years 5 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 4357 times:

This could be very useful during poor weather landings and ramp operations in such conditions. I am sure they will find a way allowing safe negotiations between aircraft.


Only the paranoid survive
User currently offlinestrfyr51 From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 1412 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (2 years 5 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 4327 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

That's always been a part of the autoland system architecture .
Were there an electronic path with ground sensors to follow, a CAT3 Airplane would take itself to it's gate and park,
But the ground equipment investment to do that with a Ground Traffic control system built in to activate the brakes and throttle up to get the airplane moving again after it stops??
I doubt will EVER see the light of day. EVER!!
Couldn't you see an airplane taking instructions from ground control? United 123 take Charlie to Yankee, hold short of the outer to let company pass then take the outer to 19R and hold short as youre third in line behind Southwest and American.
It could happen, I doubt it though because of the complexity of the tasks.. It's good thought I admit.


User currently offlineg500 From United States of America, joined Oct 2011, 1029 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (2 years 5 months 21 hours ago) and read 4103 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I still don't know how to feel about it. i think there is such a thing as too much automation.

If you have to rely on the autopilot for taxi due to poor visibility, should you be flying?

on the other hand, this could decrease runway incursions during fair weather


User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 4, posted (2 years 5 months 17 hours ago) and read 3964 times:

Quoting g500 (Reply 3):
If you have to rely on the autopilot for taxi due to poor visibility, should you be flying?

Today you're allowed to fly in zero/zero weather...(on autopilot or not). Why should it be *more* restrictive to operate on the ground? The worst thing that can happen on the ground is you stop where you are and sort out what's going on.

Tom.


User currently offlineGoBoeing From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 2725 posts, RR: 15
Reply 5, posted (2 years 5 months 16 hours ago) and read 3884 times:

Ha!

The latest software update to the Honeywell FMS in my plane is filled with bugs and errors.

Good luck to them!

Seriously, this stuff is very far away.

In the last 40 years, we're still cruising around at M.80 and at the same altitudes. More efficient engines and wings yield more range along with bigger gas tanks but other than consolidating the flight engineer into the captain and first officer, very little progress appears to have been made.

Lots and lots of improvements but very little real innovation, the way I see it.


User currently offlinestrfyr51 From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 1412 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (2 years 5 months 16 hours ago) and read 3884 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Many Airports have ground mapping radar, How hard is it to targer flights when you already KNOW the transponder code??
Obscured weatehr on the ground is only a problem for airplanes like the 747 where the capt' Can't see the ground in front of him.
But that could be settled with ground radar for taxi spacing as long as ALL the airlines adopt a STRICT taxi speed for ground operations.


User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 7, posted (2 years 5 months 15 hours ago) and read 3826 times:

Quoting GoBoeing (Reply 5):
In the last 40 years, we're still cruising around at M.80 and at the same altitudes.

Translation: the laws of physics haven't changed in the last 40 years.

Quoting GoBoeing (Reply 5):
More efficient engines and wings yield more range along with bigger gas tanks but other than consolidating the flight engineer into the captain and first officer, very little progress appears to have been made.

*Huge* material advances (powder metallurgy, single-crystal, plastic composites). *Huge* safety advances (TCAS, EGPWS, envelope protection, FBW, ETOPS). *Huge* avionics advances (AFDX, integrated avionics, software fixes for physical problems). Doubly huge safety improvement (order of magnitude reduction in accidents despite order of magnitude increase in flights).

Quoting GoBoeing (Reply 5):
Lots and lots of improvements but very little real innovation, the way I see it.

Tons of innovation; it's just not in configuration so it's not immediately visible to passengers.

Tom.


User currently offlinePPVRA From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8976 posts, RR: 39
Reply 8, posted (2 years 5 months 15 hours ago) and read 3814 times:

Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 2):

I don't know about retroffiting, but it's not like there aren't ground vehicles out there that are entirely autonomous. . .



"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31712 posts, RR: 56
Reply 9, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3594 times:

Depends on how the selection control will shift......Who has the master switch in this case.If The ground station can overide,it can be a safety hazard if misused or taken over.If the Aircraft needs to hand over control to ground then someone should be able to do so in the Aircraft.


Think of the brighter side!
User currently offlineredflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4376 posts, RR: 28
Reply 10, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 3438 times:

Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 2):
I doubt will EVER see the light of day. EVER!!

I imagine the engineer on a steam locomotive back in the turn of the last century would have spoken those very words if told that one day there might be engineer-less trains moving people around.

I'm just sayin'...

 



My other home is a Piper Cherokee 180C
User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 14139 posts, RR: 63
Reply 11, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks ago) and read 3379 times:

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 4):
Quoting g500 (Reply 3):
If you have to rely on the autopilot for taxi due to poor visibility, should you be flying?

Today you're allowed to fly in zero/zero weather...(on autopilot or not). Why should it be *more* restrictive to operate on the ground? The worst thing that can happen on the ground is you stop where you are and sort out what's going on.

Tom.

Then they´ll have to put a similar system into each and every vehicle moving on an airport. On some airports you can even move by bicycle (HHN comes to mind, where OPS regularly use bikes to go to the planes). Ok, normally aircraft (selfpowered or being towed) have right of way, the next in priority would be emergency vehicles on call, followed by everybody else. But just imagine the chaos. I´ve seen aircraft being forced to a full sop by a dozy van driver.

Jan


User currently offlineflipdewaf From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2006, 1578 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 3346 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qz4NcTnQedo

EEEEEEAAAAAAASSSSSSSSSYYYYYY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Fred


User currently offlinebond007 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 5454 posts, RR: 8
Reply 13, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 3233 times:

Quoting redflyer (Reply 10):
I imagine the engineer on a steam locomotive back in the turn of the last century would have spoken those very words if told that one day there might be engineer-less trains moving people around.

... and even driver-less trains!

Quoting g500 (Reply 3):
I still don't know how to feel about it. i think there is such a thing as too much automation.

Interesting that folks think this is more scary than FBW, autopilots, and a CATIII autoland!

Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 2):
Couldn't you see an airplane taking instructions from ground control? United 123 take Charlie to Yankee, hold short of the outer to let company pass then take the outer to 19R and hold short as youre third in line behind Southwest and American.

No, I couldn't, because that's what they say to human pilots not computer systems. A simple data-link would work quite nicely.

Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 2):
It could happen, I doubt it though because of the complexity of the tasks

Just the things computers like and are very good at doing. If Google can make autonomous cars ....

Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 2):
But the ground equipment investment to do that with a Ground Traffic control system built in to activate the brakes and throttle up to get the airplane moving again after it stops??

We're not talking pilotless aircraft ... not in this thread anyway!

Jimbo



I'd rather be on the ground wishing I was in the air, than in the air wishing I was on the ground!
User currently offlinebuckfifty From Canada, joined Oct 2001, 1316 posts, RR: 19
Reply 14, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 3170 times:

I think EFB with a moving airport map display will be a simpler and less complex solution than what all this entails. Most pilots get into trouble in low vis situations not because they don't know how to taxi, but because they don't know where they are. Having EFB's on every aircraft will reduce the stress in LVO ops, and perhaps prevent a few readback mistakes too.

User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 15, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 3161 times:

Quoting buckfifty (Reply 14):

I think EFB with a moving airport map display will be a simpler and less complex solution than what all this entails.

You don't even need an EFB...Boeing has (and I think Airbus has) integrated airport moving map with own-ship position display into the ND.

Tom.


User currently offlinebuckfifty From Canada, joined Oct 2001, 1316 posts, RR: 19
Reply 16, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 3144 times:

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 15):

You don't even need an EFB...Boeing has (and I think Airbus has) integrated airport moving map with own-ship position display into the ND.

That is nice to know, I have heard of the A350's coming with such a system as standard. But I am not sure about the cost or even the engineering required to retrofit such a system back into older frames (Airbus and their optional extras), but I do know that certain EFB systems can be implemented into any aircraft without much hassle. Well, I am no engineer, I imagine the term 'hassle' to be quite relative.


User currently offlinebueb0g From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2010, 672 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 3029 times:

Quoting redflyer (Reply 10):
I imagine the engineer on a steam locomotive back in the turn of the last century would have spoken those very words if told that one day there might be engineer-less trains moving people around.

I'm just sayin'...
Quoting bond007 (Reply 13):
... and even driver-less trains!

That's what he meant.

Quoting bond007 (Reply 13):
Interesting that folks think this is more scary than FBW, autopilots, and a CATIII autoland!


Well FBW is just replacing mechanical control inputs with electronic ones, and a CATIII autoland makes sense because once a plane's in the air, it has to be able to land. Although it's nice to be able to taxi, it doesn't have to. That's a major reason we haven't seen auto-takeoff on commercial airliners; if the weather is bad enough for that, you don't go - you never *have* to take off.

Quoting bond007 (Reply 13):
No, I couldn't, because that's what they say to human pilots not computer systems. A simple data-link would work quite nicely.

The input would still be going through the pilots.

But still, I'm not sure about the economics on this. How often does a plane land in CATIII conditions and is then grounded because it's unable to taxi? How much money is lost by this? Probably very little. The cost of development and implementation of this technology probably outweighs any savings it makes, and with the incursion alert systems that are currently being deployed, the safety benefit is negligible too.

Never say never, but it does seem a shaky case.



Roger roger, what's our vector, victor?
User currently offlinesweair From Sweden, joined Nov 2011, 1833 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 3024 times:

Would a EM launcher work for airliners, like the new catapults being developed for carriers, say you could have 50% of the energy needed at takeoff from a sort of catapult device in the ground. Also could you have these EM tugs pulling airframes to and from the gate out to the runway?

User currently offlinebond007 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 5454 posts, RR: 8
Reply 19, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 2991 times:

Quoting bueb0g (Reply 17):
Well FBW is just replacing mechanical control inputs with electronic ones

Yes, and I should have said "and associated systems". My point was the technology required for automatic taxiing is far less complex than that already implemented in other aircraft/aviation systems.

Quoting bueb0g (Reply 17):
and a CATIII autoland makes sense

Again, I wasn't arguing the usefulness, rather the technology... and ILS technology is many decades old.

Quoting bueb0g (Reply 17):
if the weather is bad enough for that, you don't go

As already mentioned, takeoff is not the real issue, it's the taxiing.

Actually, this system is as much for use in good visibility as bad. One of the reasons for implementing such a system is to direct aircraft to the correct runway via the correct route, and reduce the number of runway incursions.

Quoting bueb0g (Reply 17):
The input would still be going through the pilots.

Not sure what you mean by that. It would be via a datalink directly from ATC to the aircraft (similar to PDC). Sure, the pilots would obviously see the information, but they wouldn't be inputting the taxi instructions manually. In fact the D-TAXI message service is already defined AFAIK.

Quoting strfyr51 (Reply 2):
But the ground equipment investment to do that with a Ground Traffic control system built in to activate the brakes and throttle up to get the airplane moving again after it stops??

The idea of this system is that it will also used with electric drives on the landing gear.

Jimbo



I'd rather be on the ground wishing I was in the air, than in the air wishing I was on the ground!
User currently offlinefaro From Egypt, joined Aug 2007, 1620 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (2 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 2961 times:

FWIW, got a grand total of 0 posts on this thread, lol:

Fully Automated Taxiing (by faro Feb 28 2010 in Tech Ops)


Faro



The chalice not my son
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Honeywell Developing A Ground Autopilot System
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Auto Land System Control From Ground posted Fri Jun 23 2006 06:14:41 by Yanksn4
737 Wing Anti Ice On The Ground? posted Thu Jul 12 2012 13:52:14 by smartt1982
AA Ground Staff Question posted Thu Jul 5 2012 01:15:58 by irregking
Segment Revenue Vs System Revenue posted Thu May 10 2012 18:06:38 by coffeepilot
Lift Distribution Control System posted Fri May 4 2012 15:19:25 by trex8
Why Does Autopilot Not Have Control Of Rudder? posted Mon Apr 30 2012 16:00:40 by smartt1982
Bird Strike Ground Safety Checks posted Fri Apr 13 2012 02:49:57 by tim171080
Ground Effect Question posted Thu Mar 29 2012 10:57:39 by sprout5199

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format