Moosefire
Posts: 91
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2018 12:47 pm

Re: B 797 - One pilot cockpit?

Tue May 21, 2019 11:32 pm

ss278 wrote:
Actually its being designed for one pilot and one dog.

The pilot's job is only to monitor the instruments. The dog's job is to bite the pilot if it even appears that he/she is going to touch something.


Man, never heard that one before...
MD-11F/C-17A Pilot
 
ewt340
Posts: 785
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:22 pm

Re: B 797 - One pilot cockpit?

Wed May 22, 2019 12:54 am

BoeingGuy wrote:
ewt340 wrote:
Yeah no, did you see what happen to MAX? I won't trust Boeing to implement this technology these days.


That’s kind of a naive statement. You mean Boeing is incapable of implementing technology such as the 777X and other highly successful airplanes?


Yes, that's what I meant. I think that's pretty self explanatory. We got problems with the battery on B787 that got grounded for months worldwide. Now the deadly MAX.
Hope there is nothing wrong with B777X but I won't count my blessing when I step on their aircraft.

Any normal functional human being right now would look at Boeing with a side eye. You should too. This could be the end of them if people keep defending them.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 17908
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: B 797 - One pilot cockpit?

Wed May 22, 2019 2:42 am

UPS757Pilot wrote:
From the CNBC article:

"Boeing Research and Technology Vice-President Charles Toups said in February that one-pilot jets would likely begin with cargo flights and it would be a “couple of decades” before passengers would be convinced of their safety."

So will there be a cargo version of the 797 at the beginning?

No, spun up over a mis-read. Eventually we will have automation. Multi spectrum cameras are really a navigation game changer.
There should be more autonomy, but we aren't ready for non combat autonomous.

This is weird to write as I'm a huge fan. But by 797 EIS? :no:

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
sierrakilo44
Posts: 195
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 1:38 am

Re: B 797 - One pilot cockpit?

Wed May 22, 2019 3:33 am

Boeing won’t even be considering single pilot ops for the 797 or NMA given the need for those aircraft to be developed reasonably soon (after the MAX fiasco). They aren’t going to contribute trillions into research and development of autonomous flight systems with no benefit.

For everyone else in the automation sphere it looks as if Aviation is off their radar. It looks like Silicon Valley is concentrating on the automation of low skilled low paid jobs first like retail, fast food, and trucking. Democratic presidential nominee Andrew Yang explains:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yeLNKACo9Sg
 
afgeneral
Posts: 91
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2016 2:43 pm

Re: B 797 - One pilot cockpit?

Wed May 22, 2019 9:28 am

Surely they would first automate / reduce cabin crews before the pilots if it were possible, right?

They can't even do that.
 
afgeneral
Posts: 91
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2016 2:43 pm

Re: B 797 - One pilot cockpit?

Wed May 22, 2019 9:34 am

jeffrey0032j wrote:
I would want this thread to be passed down to future generations as a reminder of how people today predict their times. Perhaps some laughter over outright backwards views such as "there will never be a single pilot/pilotless plane because manufacturer X crashed 2 planes" and praise for those who advocate a more rational and gradual approach (by any manufacturer).

A lot of people here are jumping the gun, nobody is suggesting that it will happen tomorrow or within 10 years. Maybe its the manufacturer's name, but then again the manufacturer is now shown to be trying to do something advanced (even though its a rumour), and the same people screaming 60 year old planes are attacking it.


OR maybe it going to be more like "look, they thought we'd all have flying cars and moon bases by the year 2000"
 
Passedv1
Posts: 643
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 3:40 am

Re: B 797 - One pilot cockpit?

Wed May 22, 2019 9:45 am

Single pilot in the next 20 years...doubt it. Pilotless airliners...that is hilarious. We are not even close to this happening. Silly engineers! This is 50 years out at a minimum.

Engineers need data, and all you see is an incredible amount of safely completed flights with a spattering of accidents, and of those accidents you see a certain percentage that are caused by//exaserbated by the flight crew.

What you don’t see in the data are the times the pilots saved the day. My last flight a taxing airplane crossed the glide slope beam with the a/p coupled and the airplane pitched down hard. It wasn’t a big deal but I clicked off the computer and landed the jet. Woohoo.

Those on here saying that we could just skip the single pilot step show some incredible nievety about airliine operations.

Let’s just start with landing the airplane...in order for any of this to work the computer needs to be able to land the airplane without any help from the outside...including cat3 ILS’s. First problem is most airports don’t have them. Next problem is even if they do have them, they require so much protection they would bring the NAS to a halt if every landing required 5 miles in-trail in good or bad weather. Next problem is that the auto pilots can’t land up to the certified limits of the airplane so this would decrease the capability of airplanes...not good for flight completions.

I don’t know of any airliner that can auto-land using only on-board sensors, up to the airplanes x-wind and t-wind limits.

Has anybody looked at the Air Force’s drone safety record? That would not be acceptable for airliners.

If we go for single pilot with a diversion if the pilot becomes incapacitated? Do we have data about how often this would happen. There are a lot of unreported events in this category. I once had to give up control after a laser strike. That would be a diversion.

I have a canary in the coal mine with this issue. When I see the long haul freight trains go to a driverless operatio on a widespread basis, then I’ll start to believe. Until then, I am positive that we are decades away at least.

And then we have the FAA. An agency full of burecracts more interested in protecting their jobs then the aviation industry being on the cutting edge of technology. They are still having trouble letting go of VHF radio transmissions and paper charts. Even if the airplane were being built TODAY, we would be 20 years away from any airline getting FAA approval. We’ll see BBJ’s and freighters single pilot for 20+ years first. Then we’ll see airlines using two pilots with on ground back-up for a few years.

Doubt me, go ask somebody who was invilved tell you how crazy it was for the FAA to sign off on airline pilots using electronic representations of paper charts on a computer screen. It took the airlines YEARS to finally get the FAA to relent. It was then YEARS of having both paper charts and electronic charts. It is only in the last 5 years-ish that any airline has been able to have electronic charts without paper back ups. Single pilot with an on-ground back-up in 20 years! HaHaHaHaHa!
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 7075
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: B 797 - One pilot cockpit?

Wed May 22, 2019 10:26 am

RobertPhoenix wrote:
Will people fly on an aircraft without a pilot ?


There will be pilotless single passenger drone air taxis, then four passenger air taxis ...

Back to single pilot
There are single pilot 9 seat aircraft The logical progression would be single pilot 19-seat, 42-seat, 72-seat, 90 seat...before 200 seat aircraft.

Jumping directly to 200+ seat aircraft is the only issue I have.

A single pilot B1900D/ATR-42/ATR-72 size aircraft would be a game changer for airline economics.
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 11733
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: B 797 - One pilot cockpit?

Wed May 22, 2019 10:40 am

WorldFlier wrote:
Aesma wrote:
WorldFlier wrote:

I believe we are done here. Either you need a backup or you don't need a single person. The risk of failure is too high because if there's an issue with the pilot, what are the odds that there isn't an issue with the ground link?

Too high.


The default is the plane flies itself. With necessary redundant computers, using separate software stacks so that a bug can't affect all the computers, etc.

The pilot is there as a backup, basically to reassure passengers.

Ground link's only purpose is for when the pilot is sabotaging the flight, to override him/her.

So it's true, there would be no need for any pilot.


If the ground link can override the pilot, so can a hacker...and Commercial airplanes surely won't have the same level of security as a military drone.

That is definitely not something you want. The cost "savings" will be outweighed by R&D and the first system failure where ISIS (or a state actor pretending to be ISIS) takes over an airplane via satellite uplink...


The override could just be that the aircraft lands at the nearest safe airport, present in its database (not an airport controlled by terrorists). No actual control from the ground.

I think military drones already do this if contact with the ground is lost ?
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
WorldFlier
Posts: 314
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2015 2:10 pm

Re: B 797 - One pilot cockpit?

Wed May 22, 2019 1:33 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
RobertPhoenix wrote:
Will people fly on an aircraft without a pilot ?


There will be pilotless single passenger drone air taxis, then four passenger air taxis ...

Back to single pilot
There are single pilot 9 seat aircraft The logical progression would be single pilot 19-seat, 42-seat, 72-seat, 90 seat...before 200 seat aircraft.

Jumping directly to 200+ seat aircraft is the only issue I have.

A single pilot B1900D/ATR-42/ATR-72 size aircraft would be a game changer for airline economics.


Game changer?

Let's say a regional pilot costs $100k (fully loaded) per year and works about a thousand hours. That's $100 per hour, regardless of the number of pilots as pilots are paid per hour and not salaried, right?

Your plane flies 12 hours per day and makes 8 flights and has 50 seats with 75% load factor.

That's $1,200 for the pilot spread over 300 passengers. $4 per passenger is "game changing" - surely you cannot be serious.

That becomes even cheaper at higher utilization and capacity factor and way cheaper at 76-seaters (which is the new 50-seater).
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 7075
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: B 797 - One pilot cockpit?

Wed May 22, 2019 1:53 pm

WorldFlier wrote:

Game changer?

Let's say a regional pilot costs $100k (fully loaded) per year and works about a thousand hours. That's $100 per hour, regardless of the number of pilots as pilots are paid per hour and not salaried, right?

Your plane flies 12 hours per day and makes 8 flights and has 50 seats with 75% load factor.

That's $1,200 for the pilot spread over 300 passengers. $4 per passenger is "game changing" - surely you cannot be serious.

That becomes even cheaper at higher utilization and capacity factor and way cheaper at 76-seaters (which is the new 50-seater).


Agree with your math, but I don't see a booming 19-seat market if it is that cheap.

Another anecdotal observation of mine, airlines are starting service with B737/A320s to new airports in the emerging markets, where a B1900D/ATR72/Q400 would be a logical choice. My suspicion is the crew cost.

About $4/pax, a cold sandwich probably costs the same, yet airlines universally cut complimentary food to save cost.
 
FluidFlow
Posts: 260
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:39 am

Re: B 797 - One pilot cockpit?

Wed May 22, 2019 1:54 pm

WorldFlier wrote:
dtw2hyd wrote:
RobertPhoenix wrote:
Will people fly on an aircraft without a pilot ?


There will be pilotless single passenger drone air taxis, then four passenger air taxis ...

Back to single pilot
There are single pilot 9 seat aircraft The logical progression would be single pilot 19-seat, 42-seat, 72-seat, 90 seat...before 200 seat aircraft.

Jumping directly to 200+ seat aircraft is the only issue I have.

A single pilot B1900D/ATR-42/ATR-72 size aircraft would be a game changer for airline economics.


Game changer?

Let's say a regional pilot costs $100k (fully loaded) per year and works about a thousand hours. That's $100 per hour, regardless of the number of pilots as pilots are paid per hour and not salaried, right?

Your plane flies 12 hours per day and makes 8 flights and has 50 seats with 75% load factor.

That's $1,200 for the pilot spread over 300 passengers. $4 per passenger is "game changing" - surely you cannot be serious.

That becomes even cheaper at higher utilization and capacity factor and way cheaper at 76-seaters (which is the new 50-seater).


Thats not how it works or how it will be seen. If you spin this up, you have 365 days a year makes already 438'000$. If you operate 50 aircraft, you are already up to 21'900'000$. So if you do not change the ticket price and cut half the costs for the pilots the airline can increase profit by almost 22 million dollars. Now check the profitability of airlines. An additional 22mio would be welcomed everywhere.
 
WorldFlier
Posts: 314
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2015 2:10 pm

Re: B 797 - One pilot cockpit?

Wed May 22, 2019 2:06 pm

FluidFlow wrote:
WorldFlier wrote:
dtw2hyd wrote:

There will be pilotless single passenger drone air taxis, then four passenger air taxis ...

Back to single pilot
There are single pilot 9 seat aircraft The logical progression would be single pilot 19-seat, 42-seat, 72-seat, 90 seat...before 200 seat aircraft.

Jumping directly to 200+ seat aircraft is the only issue I have.

A single pilot B1900D/ATR-42/ATR-72 size aircraft would be a game changer for airline economics.


Game changer?

Let's say a regional pilot costs $100k (fully loaded) per year and works about a thousand hours. That's $100 per hour, regardless of the number of pilots as pilots are paid per hour and not salaried, right?

Your plane flies 12 hours per day and makes 8 flights and has 50 seats with 75% load factor.

That's $1,200 for the pilot spread over 300 passengers. $4 per passenger is "game changing" - surely you cannot be serious.

That becomes even cheaper at higher utilization and capacity factor and way cheaper at 76-seaters (which is the new 50-seater).


Thats not how it works or how it will be seen. If you spin this up, you have 365 days a year makes already 438'000$. If you operate 50 aircraft, you are already up to 21'900'000$. So if you do not change the ticket price and cut half the costs for the pilots the airline can increase profit by almost 22 million dollars. Now check the profitability of airlines. An additional 22mio would be welcomed everywhere.


It's still $4 per passenger on a 50 seater, and yes that adds up to a lot of money. It's $2.63 on a 76 seater. It's $1 per passenger on a 737-8-200. - Good Airlines should be able to squeeze a dollar elsewhere much more easily. Bad airlines shouldn't be flying with 1 pilot.

If your fleet's "average" airplane has 125 seats, then it's $1.60 per passenger to remove 1 pilot.

It's risk versus reward.

First your airline have to convince the manufacturer to design the cockpit, communications, and safety procedures.

Then you have to pass this by the FAA (easy peasy, as Boeing demonstrated), but now CAAC and the Europeans will be scrutinizing everything closely...

Then you have to have other airlines order this plane or it becomes prohibitively expensive as: (Cost to Develop)/(# of Frames Ordered) is the incremental cost of this technology, plus profit.

So if you assume that the Europeans and Chinese won't order this plane (they won't), your cost per frame just skyrocketed.


I'm sorry, but I don't see this hapenning on anything bigger than a 50-seater (where it makes sense), but who is going to pay to develop all of the necessary stuff to make this work? Surely not the manufacturer.
Last edited by WorldFlier on Wed May 22, 2019 2:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
WorldFlier
Posts: 314
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2015 2:10 pm

Re: B 797 - One pilot cockpit?

Wed May 22, 2019 2:09 pm

WorldFlier wrote:
FluidFlow wrote:
WorldFlier wrote:

Game changer?

Let's say a regional pilot costs $100k (fully loaded) per year and works about a thousand hours. That's $100 per hour, regardless of the number of pilots as pilots are paid per hour and not salaried, right?

Your plane flies 12 hours per day and makes 8 flights and has 50 seats with 75% load factor.

That's $1,200 for the pilot spread over 300 passengers. $4 per passenger is "game changing" - surely you cannot be serious.

That becomes even cheaper at higher utilization and capacity factor and way cheaper at 76-seaters (which is the new 50-seater).


Thats not how it works or how it will be seen. If you spin this up, you have 365 days a year makes already 438'000$. If you operate 50 aircraft, you are already up to 21'900'000$. So if you do not change the ticket price and cut half the costs for the pilots the airline can increase profit by almost 22 million dollars. Now check the profitability of airlines. An additional 22mio would be welcomed everywhere.


It's still $4 per passenger on a 50 seater, and yes that adds up to a lot of money. It's $2.63 on a 76 seater. It's $1 per passenger on a 737-8-200. - Good Airlines should be able to squeeze a dollar elsewhere much more easily. Bad airlines shouldn't be flying with 1 pilot.

So if your "average" airplane has about 125 passengers, it's $1.60 per passenger.

However, it's risk versus reward.

First your airline have to convince the manufacturer to design the cockpit, communications, and safety procedures.

Then you have to pass this by the FAA (easy peasy, as Boeing demonstrated), but now CAAC and the Europeans will be scrutinizing everything closely...

Then you have to have other airlines order this plane or it becomes prohibitively expensive as: (Cost to Develop)/(# of Frames Ordered) is the incremental cost of this technology, plus profit.

So if you assume that the Europeans and Chinese won't order this plane (they won't), your cost per frame just skyrocketed.


I'm sorry, but I don't see this hapenning on anything bigger than a 50 seater (which it actually might make sense for)
 
FluidFlow
Posts: 260
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:39 am

Re: B 797 - One pilot cockpit?

Wed May 22, 2019 2:11 pm

WorldFlier wrote:
FluidFlow wrote:
WorldFlier wrote:

Game changer?

Let's say a regional pilot costs $100k (fully loaded) per year and works about a thousand hours. That's $100 per hour, regardless of the number of pilots as pilots are paid per hour and not salaried, right?

Your plane flies 12 hours per day and makes 8 flights and has 50 seats with 75% load factor.

That's $1,200 for the pilot spread over 300 passengers. $4 per passenger is "game changing" - surely you cannot be serious.

That becomes even cheaper at higher utilization and capacity factor and way cheaper at 76-seaters (which is the new 50-seater).


Thats not how it works or how it will be seen. If you spin this up, you have 365 days a year makes already 438'000$. If you operate 50 aircraft, you are already up to 21'900'000$. So if you do not change the ticket price and cut half the costs for the pilots the airline can increase profit by almost 22 million dollars. Now check the profitability of airlines. An additional 22mio would be welcomed everywhere.


It's still $4 per passenger on a 50 seater, and yes that adds up to a lot of money. It's $2.63 on a 76 seater. It's $1 per passenger on a 737-8-200. - Good Airlines should be able to squeeze a dollar elsewhere much more easily. Bad airlines shouldn't be flying with 1 pilot.

However, it's risk versus reward.

First your airline have to convince the manufacturer to design the cockpit, communications, and safety procedures.

Then you have to pass this by the FAA (easy peasy, as Boeing demonstrated), but now CAAC and the Europeans will be scrutinizing everything closely...

Then you have to have other airlines order this plane or it becomes prohibitively expensive as: (Cost to Develop)/(# of Frames Ordered) is the incremental cost of this technology, plus profit.

So if you assume that the Europeans and Chinese won't order this plane (they won't), your cost per frame just skyrocketed.


I'm sorry, but I don't see this hapenning on anything

The Europeans and Chinese can actually build this aircraft as well if they see the market and then the FAA can or cannot approve it.

And there is another big cost factor: training. Many airlines have their own, very costly, training program. It is not only the actual cost of labor. The total cost is way higher than the 100$ per pilot.

The first one pilot aircraft will probably be build, certified and flown in china and I guess never exported, but it will show the possibilities and the Us and Europeans will shortly after develop them too.
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 3072
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: B 797 - One pilot cockpit?

Wed May 22, 2019 2:18 pm

There are a variety of ways to ensure safety. ETOPS for going over areas with no alternate landing sites and increased levels of maintenance. Number of passengers on the Puget Sound ferries is occasionally reduced if a neighboring route has a boat out of service and can't divert to help rescue should an accident happen. Ferry routes are closed under certain weather conditions. (central Puget Sound ferries can cope with about everything)

Single pilot planes will likely require higher levels of maintenance, positive confirmation of appropriate weather conditions (better and more timely information than pilots now receive) , confirmation of appropriate alternate landing sites. And all of this as a single pilots are certified for certain flights and certain sizes. i.e., 25 passenger flying 500 miles but only on approved routes.
Last edited by frmrCapCadet on Wed May 22, 2019 2:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
WorldFlier
Posts: 314
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2015 2:10 pm

Re: B 797 - One pilot cockpit?

Wed May 22, 2019 2:19 pm

FluidFlow wrote:
WorldFlier wrote:
FluidFlow wrote:

Thats not how it works or how it will be seen. If you spin this up, you have 365 days a year makes already 438'000$. If you operate 50 aircraft, you are already up to 21'900'000$. So if you do not change the ticket price and cut half the costs for the pilots the airline can increase profit by almost 22 million dollars. Now check the profitability of airlines. An additional 22mio would be welcomed everywhere.


It's still $4 per passenger on a 50 seater, and yes that adds up to a lot of money. It's $2.63 on a 76 seater. It's $1 per passenger on a 737-8-200. - Good Airlines should be able to squeeze a dollar elsewhere much more easily. Bad airlines shouldn't be flying with 1 pilot.

However, it's risk versus reward.

First your airline have to convince the manufacturer to design the cockpit, communications, and safety procedures.

Then you have to pass this by the FAA (easy peasy, as Boeing demonstrated), but now CAAC and the Europeans will be scrutinizing everything closely...

Then you have to have other airlines order this plane or it becomes prohibitively expensive as: (Cost to Develop)/(# of Frames Ordered) is the incremental cost of this technology, plus profit.

So if you assume that the Europeans and Chinese won't order this plane (they won't), your cost per frame just skyrocketed.


I'm sorry, but I don't see this hapenning on anything

The Europeans and Chinese can actually build this aircraft as well if they see the market and then the FAA can or cannot approve it.

And there is another big cost factor: training. Many airlines have their own, very costly, training program. It is not only the actual cost of labor. The total cost is way higher than the 100$ per pilot.

The first one pilot aircraft will probably be build, certified and flown in china and I guess never exported, but it will show the possibilities and the Us and Europeans will shortly after develop them too.



You're correct on pilot training, but the cost of pilot training can be outsourced as in the USA (the pilots incur debt to become Pilots, it's the "American Way"). Again, much easier than developing this challenge.

The Chinese want full employment. They even "dig ditches, fill them up and dig them up again" - I can't see them doing this.

The Europeans might develop this, but Airbus has just come out and basically said "Thanks Boeing, now we're gonna get scrutinized" and I'm sure after the A380 boondoggle they want to drop another couple billion on a White Elephant.

There's way too much stacked against removing pilots from larger planes, and much lower hanging fruit for people savings (like taking out a flight attendant @ United).
 
FluidFlow
Posts: 260
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:39 am

Re: B 797 - One pilot cockpit?

Wed May 22, 2019 2:28 pm

WorldFlier wrote:
FluidFlow wrote:
WorldFlier wrote:

It's still $4 per passenger on a 50 seater, and yes that adds up to a lot of money. It's $2.63 on a 76 seater. It's $1 per passenger on a 737-8-200. - Good Airlines should be able to squeeze a dollar elsewhere much more easily. Bad airlines shouldn't be flying with 1 pilot.

However, it's risk versus reward.

First your airline have to convince the manufacturer to design the cockpit, communications, and safety procedures.

Then you have to pass this by the FAA (easy peasy, as Boeing demonstrated), but now CAAC and the Europeans will be scrutinizing everything closely...

Then you have to have other airlines order this plane or it becomes prohibitively expensive as: (Cost to Develop)/(# of Frames Ordered) is the incremental cost of this technology, plus profit.

So if you assume that the Europeans and Chinese won't order this plane (they won't), your cost per frame just skyrocketed.


I'm sorry, but I don't see this hapenning on anything

The Europeans and Chinese can actually build this aircraft as well if they see the market and then the FAA can or cannot approve it.

And there is another big cost factor: training. Many airlines have their own, very costly, training program. It is not only the actual cost of labor. The total cost is way higher than the 100$ per pilot.

The first one pilot aircraft will probably be build, certified and flown in china and I guess never exported, but it will show the possibilities and the Us and Europeans will shortly after develop them too.



You're correct on pilot training, but the cost of pilot training can be outsourced as in the USA (the pilots incur debt to become Pilots, it's the "American Way"). Again, much easier than developing this challenge.

The Chinese want full employment. They even "dig ditches, fill them up and dig them up again" - I can't see them doing this.

The Europeans might develop this, but Airbus has just come out and basically said "Thanks Boeing, now we're gonna get scrutinized" and I'm sure after the A380 boondoggle they want to drop another couple billion on a White Elephant.

There's way too much stacked against removing pilots from larger planes, and much lower hanging fruit for people savings (like taking out a flight attendant @ United).



I agree with you and it will not start with the big players anyway. They never pioneer anything just scale it up and make profit out of it. It will be done by smaller manufacturers and designed for special markets first. The Chinese will be happy when some small airports somewhere in the country get served. It will probably generate more jobs than it will cost in the beginning. In the long term it is really hard to predict.
 
TwinStarRocket
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2018 7:24 pm

Re: B 797 - One pilot cockpit?

Thu May 23, 2019 4:47 pm

UpNAWAy wrote:
We could of course fly without pilots now, the technology is there and ultimately it would be safer. Just as autonomous cars would reduce accidents by 90+% so might autonomous aircraft.

The hard part is not the technology but the getting there...regulatory, legal, public acceptance, etc. It will take generations for those reasons.


No, it isn't. Do you know how many times in a 4 day trip I have to save my A320 from its self? Computers can't think, they can't reason, they can't reset themselves, and the MCDU's upfront rarely even communicate each other correctly. Popping circuit breakers and resetting computers is Aviation 101 and something I've had to do for 20 years in Lear's, Citation's, and now the Airbus.

There is no technology that can monitor itself, realize that it's wrong, and then reset itself. Single pilot, or no pilot, is a really, really bad idea and would do nothing to improve safety or efficiency.
 
Ziyulu
Posts: 620
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2016 10:35 am

Re: B 797 - One pilot cockpit?

Thu May 23, 2019 5:30 pm

Just design a plane where another plane can come to the rescue and take over. Like piggy backing.
 
VSMUT
Posts: 2894
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: B 797 - One pilot cockpit?

Thu May 23, 2019 7:37 pm

WorldFlier wrote:
dtw2hyd wrote:
RobertPhoenix wrote:
Will people fly on an aircraft without a pilot ?


There will be pilotless single passenger drone air taxis, then four passenger air taxis ...

Back to single pilot
There are single pilot 9 seat aircraft The logical progression would be single pilot 19-seat, 42-seat, 72-seat, 90 seat...before 200 seat aircraft.

Jumping directly to 200+ seat aircraft is the only issue I have.

A single pilot B1900D/ATR-42/ATR-72 size aircraft would be a game changer for airline economics.


Game changer?

Let's say a regional pilot costs $100k (fully loaded) per year and works about a thousand hours. That's $100 per hour, regardless of the number of pilots as pilots are paid per hour and not salaried, right?

Your plane flies 12 hours per day and makes 8 flights and has 50 seats with 75% load factor.

That's $1,200 for the pilot spread over 300 passengers. $4 per passenger is "game changing" - surely you cannot be serious.

That becomes even cheaper at higher utilization and capacity factor and way cheaper at 76-seaters (which is the new 50-seater).


We are talking regional turboprops here (or similar small aircraft). The pilots who would be cut away would be the first officers. On a regional turboprop, that's the really green and inexperienced pilots for the most part. Now I can't speak for the US here, but in my first job as an ATR FO I earned a mere 35.000 USD. I can attest from my own experience and contacts that wages for ATR FOs around Europe range from anywhere between 24.000 USD and 55.000 USD per year, before taxes. Head into Asia and Africa, and they will be even lower.

100.000 USD is a massive salary, something even captains dream about.

So the savings will be really minuscule, not even factoring the extra cost of the systems required.
 
grbauc
Posts: 1426
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2015 9:05 pm

Re: B 797 - One pilot cockpit?

Thu May 23, 2019 11:10 pm

Heinkel wrote:
Bricktop wrote:
Not. A. Chance.


May be not from Boeing. They are sometimes so old school. (Control yokes, no FBW, etc...)

I'm quite sure, that in the next 20 years we'll have the "one pilot flght deck" with a second pilot on the ground. And most of the time the computer will fly the a/c. The pilot on the flight deck is only there for the peace of mind of the pax. Don't touch the controls.

When I did my first flight on a B737 in 1971, it had a three-man-cockpit. Real longhaul a/c had four or five. And today? Two-person flight deck is standard and safety has increased. The statistics don't lie.

The next logical step is to go to one pilot. To build and operate a fully autonomous a/c is much easier than a fully autonomous car. The trafic in the air is much less dense and well guided and controlled. No uncontrolled pedestrians, children, push bikes, wildlife etc.

So I'm quite sure, that we'll have autonomous a/c earlier than autonomous cars. May be in some countries they'll let a so called pilot on the flight deck. Like they let a fireman / stoker on diesel locomotives.



I think your right... Wouldn't the crowded airports LAX, JFK and LHR to name a few be the only place that a human is needed? for taxi?
 
strfyr51
Posts: 3885
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: B 797 - One pilot cockpit?

Thu May 23, 2019 11:32 pm

the B797 single Pilot? It's a "Pipe Dream" ! The Citation 2 SP was a concept but the MEL (Minimum Equipment List) would be SO restrictive on an airliner as to make in uneconomical to fly.
 
grbauc
Posts: 1426
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2015 9:05 pm

Re: B 797 - One pilot cockpit?

Thu May 23, 2019 11:52 pm

747megatop wrote:
kiowa wrote:
It would be much safer and more economic to cut the US Senate and Congress by 50% and then outsource the remaining 50% to another country with cheaper labor.

While at it, why not cut 50% of board of directors and upper management of companies?




I agree. Companies have lost site of there purpose or well need to refocus there sole reasons for existing to include the well being of mankind or more so to provide a benefit to society and its employees. The Drive for Larger returns and lack of moral responsibility.

Amazon I love there convince but worry for the future.(I'm self described conservative/Libertarian bus wise)

Amazon makes small business have to use them to be competitive and then copy's there product with there own if it meets Certain criteria.
(Dog beds By Sheri) Way over priced.

My dogs love her dog bed so much they would fight over it. So I ordered another one a year later and now amazon has there own branded version of it for way cheaper. It's not enough to get businesses to use your platform now you have to copy there products to grab more of the pie.

Airfares are has cheap or cheaper then 20 yr's ago.
 
grbauc
Posts: 1426
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2015 9:05 pm

Re: B 797 - One pilot cockpit?

Fri May 24, 2019 12:20 am

UPS757Pilot wrote:
From the CNBC article:

"Boeing Research and Technology Vice-President Charles Toups said in February that one-pilot jets would likely begin with cargo flights and it would be a “couple of decades” before passengers would be convinced of their safety."

So will there be a cargo version of the 797 at the beginning?


This seems plausible.
Not sure on 797 being designed with that intent, but they can outfit existing cargo planes?
 
BoeingGuy
Posts: 6312
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:01 pm

Re: B 797 - One pilot cockpit?

Fri May 24, 2019 3:50 am

strfyr51 wrote:
the B797 single Pilot? It's a "Pipe Dream" ! The Citation 2 SP was a concept but the MEL (Minimum Equipment List) would be SO restrictive on an airliner as to make in uneconomical to fly.


That’s why it’s not going to happen. The article was totally bogus and incorrect. Imagine that.

The Boeing concept for the NMA is, and always has been for two pilots.
 
Waterbomber2
Posts: 417
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 3:44 am

Re: B 797 - One pilot cockpit?

Fri May 24, 2019 6:52 am

TwinStarRocket wrote:
UpNAWAy wrote:
We could of course fly without pilots now, the technology is there and ultimately it would be safer. Just as autonomous cars would reduce accidents by 90+% so might autonomous aircraft.

The hard part is not the technology but the getting there...regulatory, legal, public acceptance, etc. It will take generations for those reasons.


No, it isn't. Do you know how many times in a 4 day trip I have to save my A320 from its self? Computers can't think, they can't reason, they can't reset themselves, and the MCDU's upfront rarely even communicate each other correctly. Popping circuit breakers and resetting computers is Aviation 101 and something I've had to do for 20 years in Lear's, Citation's, and now the Airbus.

There is no technology that can monitor itself, realize that it's wrong, and then reset itself. Single pilot, or no pilot, is a really, really bad idea and would do nothing to improve safety or efficiency.


You and I both know that automation can do what you do faster and without making mistakes.

Circuit breakers can be popped on electronic command, checklists and calculations can be run faster and more accurately by an automatic system.

The fact is that on longer flights, pilots spend more time doing nothing than doing something.

Pilot error is the single dominant cause of accidents.

The technology is here, you can resist it and hope to keep your flying job, but flying is one of the most toxic jobs in the world between cosmic radiations, low pressure, irregular work times, jet lag, oil and fuel fumes, stress.

You have to ask yourself if this is good or bad for you guys.
 
FluidFlow
Posts: 260
Joined: Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:39 am

Re: B 797 - One pilot cockpit?

Fri May 24, 2019 7:22 am

TwinStarRocket wrote:

There is no technology that can monitor itself, realize that it's wrong, and then reset itself. Single pilot, or no pilot, is a really, really bad idea and would do nothing to improve safety or efficiency.



You hopefully know that this statement is not correct. Most technology actually monitors itself or even better most of the time technology is actually used to monitor other technology. Also a lot of technology knows when something is wrong and switches it self off for self preservation.

Nuclear power plant have emergency shut down procedures that are fully automatic.
Cars monitor about every thing possible and let you know that something is not correct, for example low fuel, or low oil stands, high water temperature. They just do not switch off the car as that would be too dangerous.
Wind turbines monitor them self and when the wind is too strong they decouple the fan from the generator (automatically) to prevent damage to the generator.
Your computer monitors the temperature of the processor and if it gets too hot it will reduce the computation power and if it is till to hot your computer will switch itself off.
The list goes on and on.

The reason why automation is safer than manual procedures is, that the computer never over or underestimates a situation, it just does what it is told to do.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos