Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

  • 1
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 6284
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Thu Apr 30, 2020 2:02 pm

Flying-Tiger wrote:
strfyr51 wrote:
that might well be ok for outside the USA bot were one to crash with fatalities in the USA? The loss of life would not start to compare with the lawsuits. were the airplanes to have a drone copilot? someone NOT on the airplane who could also fly in an emergency? That might also work . But? At what cost?


Why not? The idea is acutally a pretty good one. You certainly won´t need to have a 1:1 ratio. What about having a "flight ops" center monitoring all flights of a specific single pilot type, manned by type-rated pilots? Say one pilot on the ground monitors 5 flight and is available to these five flight to chip in remotely if needed. Maybe have a full flight simulator next door which can have live feed from the flight in trouble, where an on-ground pilot takes over?

The cruise industry established something similar after the Costa Concordia accident of Italy, all the major cruise lines now at minimum remotely monitor what is happening on a vessel´s bridge resp. they are able to take over full control if necessary as far as I´m aware.


That’d be more expensive than just putting the second pilot in the seat.
 
embraer175e2
Topic Author
Posts: 291
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 12:47 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Fri May 01, 2020 9:43 pm

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Flying-Tiger wrote:
strfyr51 wrote:
that might well be ok for outside the USA bot were one to crash with fatalities in the USA? The loss of life would not start to compare with the lawsuits. were the airplanes to have a drone copilot? someone NOT on the airplane who could also fly in an emergency? That might also work . But? At what cost?


Why not? The idea is acutally a pretty good one. You certainly won´t need to have a 1:1 ratio. What about having a "flight ops" center monitoring all flights of a specific single pilot type, manned by type-rated pilots? Say one pilot on the ground monitors 5 flight and is available to these five flight to chip in remotely if needed. Maybe have a full flight simulator next door which can have live feed from the flight in trouble, where an on-ground pilot takes over?

The cruise industry established something similar after the Costa Concordia accident of Italy, all the major cruise lines now at minimum remotely monitor what is happening on a vessel´s bridge resp. they are able to take over full control if necessary as far as I´m aware.


That’d be more expensive than just putting the second pilot in the seat.

That would be like re-introducing a "flight engineer" on each flight of also smaller planes.Indeed to expensive. Not really reasonable for modern day aviation.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 6284
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Fri May 01, 2020 11:33 pm

You don’t have an idea how expensive making an autonomous airplane is gonna be compared to having an young pilot. In your scenario, they’d be a pilot on the ground plus the plane would have to be certified to land without pilot input at every destination. How do you account for the pilot being incapacitated below 200’ which has happened and probably happens a few times a year. The assessment on pilot failure is 10E-5, so you need two to have the required safety.

After the regulators are starting to accept it, the companies will have to put up the funding for the ground component, then the pilots unions (pretty much a worldwide factor) will have to agree, then the public would have accept it. I suspect, the pilots refusing would bring the public on board with refusing. Despite a lot of dreams single pilot airliners over 19 seats are a long ways off.
 
embraer175e2
Topic Author
Posts: 291
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 12:47 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Fri May 01, 2020 11:42 pm

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
You don’t have an idea how expensive making an autonomous airplane is gonna be compared to having an young pilot. In your scenario, they’d be a pilot on the ground plus the plane would have to be certified to land without pilot input at every destination. How do you account for the pilot being incapacitated below 200’ which has happened and probably happens a few times a year. The assessment on pilot failure is 10E-5, so you need two to have the required safety. Despite a lot of dreams single pilot airliners over 19 seats is a long ways off.

Only the us military fly drones. Pilotless aircraft. Not yet in civil aviation. Will take a long time too.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 6284
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Sat May 02, 2020 12:45 am

Yes, and you should see the accident rate.
 
embraer175e2
Topic Author
Posts: 291
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 12:47 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Sat May 02, 2020 12:56 am

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Yes, and you should see the accident rate.

Is it high?
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 6284
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Sat May 02, 2020 2:09 am

Very, But they’re stretching the technology so there’s that. A friend “flew” Global Hawks, crashed remotely due to system failure. There’s a lot to piloting than sitting there watching the autopilot that is based on crew CRM. That isn’t going away by removing a pilot.
 
airlineworker
Posts: 189
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2019 1:20 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Sat May 02, 2020 2:23 am

Has anybody brought up the idea of the E-170 being made into the E170E2? Would it exceed the 86,000 lb weight limit? While having less seats, it would offer fuel savings and allow Embraer to remain a major supplier of RJ's.
 
bigb
Posts: 1130
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 4:30 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Sat May 02, 2020 2:45 am

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Very, But they’re stretching the technology so there’s that. A friend “flew” Global Hawks, crashed remotely due to system failure. There’s a lot to piloting than sitting there watching the autopilot that is based on crew CRM. That isn’t going away by removing a pilot.


And ADM.
 
User avatar
FiscAutTecGarte
Posts: 143
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2019 6:40 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Sat May 02, 2020 3:22 am

airlineworker wrote:
Has anybody brought up the idea of the E-170 being made into the E170E2? Would it exceed the 86,000 lb weight limit? While having less seats, it would offer fuel savings and allow Embraer to remain a major supplier of RJ's.


This thread is 9 pages long... some of us discussed this a few pages back..
learning never stops...

FischAutoTechGarten is the full handle and it reflects my interest. It's abbreviated to fit A.net short usernames.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 5038
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Sat May 02, 2020 3:58 am

Flying-Tiger wrote:
strfyr51 wrote:
that might well be ok for outside the USA bot were one to crash with fatalities in the USA? The loss of life would not start to compare with the lawsuits. were the airplanes to have a drone copilot? someone NOT on the airplane who could also fly in an emergency? That might also work . But? At what cost?


Why not? The idea is acutally a pretty good one. You certainly won´t need to have a 1:1 ratio. What about having a "flight ops" center monitoring all flights of a specific single pilot type, manned by type-rated pilots? Say one pilot on the ground monitors 5 flight and is available to these five flight to chip in remotely if needed. Maybe have a full flight simulator next door which can have live feed from the flight in trouble, where an on-ground pilot takes over?

The cruise industry established something similar after the Costa Concordia accident of Italy, all the major cruise lines now at minimum remotely monitor what is happening on a vessel´s bridge resp. they are able to take over full control if necessary as far as I´m aware.

Ain't gonna Happen~ why not go back to Ab Inito pilots in the right seat?
 
strfyr51
Posts: 5038
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Sat May 02, 2020 4:07 am

32andBelow wrote:
embraer175e2 wrote:
Insertnamehere wrote:
Surprising that Embraer didn't take into account how they designed themselves out of the U.S. Regional market which buys their jets in droves. Unless we see some sort of exception to scope clauses specifically for the E2's I doubt that we will see many if any stateside.

Offtopic: but could we see an E2 ever of the E145 to bring down some of the technologies from its larger E-jet counterparts?


These manufacturers are not really interested in an upgrade of any 50 seat jet.

Perhaps they should focus on what their customers want/need instead of making airplanes none of the major airlines can even buy

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^6
Embraer can build what they want, Thery just can't force the US Airlines into a fight they don't need nor want, Should this covid thing get any worse? there will be Layoffs and downsizing. The E2? if not already off the table? Will NEVER See the table for it TO be rejected.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20309
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Sat May 02, 2020 2:16 pm

FiscAutTecGarte wrote:
airlineworker wrote:
Has anybody brought up the idea of the E-170 being made into the E170E2? Would it exceed the 86,000 lb weight limit? While having less seats, it would offer fuel savings and allow Embraer to remain a major supplier of RJ's.


This thread is 9 pages long... some of us discussed this a few pages back..

More specifically, a more E1-190 length E2-170.

Everyone should recall the E2-175 was stretched to 32.4m from 31.5m of the E175and has 5m greater wingspan. 31m vs. 26m. These improvements are good, if scope is ignored.

Since the first introduction of the E2-175 and since the launch of the M90, there has been some hope of scope change. It isn't happening from what I see.

So Embraer needs to do what Mitsubishi did and create a compromise aircraft that meets customer needs a la M100 which received a wingspan shrink from 29.2m to 27.8m and a body shrink from 35.8m to 34.5 (cargo in tail instead of below, to M100 must be longer for same cabin) as well as a shrink in cargo volume from 640ft^3 down to 480ft^3 (moved pressure bulkhead to increase cabin space).

Lightsaber
Winter is coming.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1812
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Sat May 02, 2020 3:41 pm

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Flying-Tiger wrote:
strfyr51 wrote:
that might well be ok for outside the USA bot were one to crash with fatalities in the USA? The loss of life would not start to compare with the lawsuits. were the airplanes to have a drone copilot? someone NOT on the airplane who could also fly in an emergency? That might also work . But? At what cost?


Why not? The idea is acutally a pretty good one. You certainly won´t need to have a 1:1 ratio. What about having a "flight ops" center monitoring all flights of a specific single pilot type, manned by type-rated pilots? Say one pilot on the ground monitors 5 flight and is available to these five flight to chip in remotely if needed. Maybe have a full flight simulator next door which can have live feed from the flight in trouble, where an on-ground pilot takes over?

The cruise industry established something similar after the Costa Concordia accident of Italy, all the major cruise lines now at minimum remotely monitor what is happening on a vessel´s bridge resp. they are able to take over full control if necessary as far as I´m aware.


That’d be more expensive than just putting the second pilot in the seat.

How would it be more expensive?
Flyinf-Tiger talked about a 5:1 ratio, which sounds reasonnable; so, for 5 flights, you'd have 5 pilots in the air + 1 on the ground (total 6) instead of 5 pilots + 5 co-pilots (total 10). 40% reduction in workers,
 
Raventech
Posts: 208
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 10:25 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Sat May 02, 2020 5:30 pm

WayexTDI wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Flying-Tiger wrote:

Why not? The idea is acutally a pretty good one. You certainly won´t need to have a 1:1 ratio. What about having a "flight ops" center monitoring all flights of a specific single pilot type, manned by type-rated pilots? Say one pilot on the ground monitors 5 flight and is available to these five flight to chip in remotely if needed. Maybe have a full flight simulator next door which can have live feed from the flight in trouble, where an on-ground pilot takes over?

The cruise industry established something similar after the Costa Concordia accident of Italy, all the major cruise lines now at minimum remotely monitor what is happening on a vessel´s bridge resp. they are able to take over full control if necessary as far as I´m aware.


That’d be more expensive than just putting the second pilot in the seat.

How would it be more expensive?
Flyinf-Tiger talked about a 5:1 ratio, which sounds reasonnable; so, for 5 flights, you'd have 5 pilots in the air + 1 on the ground (total 6) instead of 5 pilots + 5 co-pilots (total 10). 40% reduction in workers,


It would be expensive because of the absolutely massive amount of infrastructure on top of R&D required to build a secure remote command and control system for an aircraft. There is no way any of heck any part of the public internet can be used to so each operator would have to build out its own radio systems throughout the country or launch their own satellites and build all the back haul to their operation center. Then all system would need to be air gapped from the company network.

It gets expensive because every carrier has to do their own system in the area they intend to operate. They can't pool their systems in a shared matter because one airlines mistake could ground your aircraft. From a risk perspective I don't see any airline willing to accepting their competitors mistake interrupting their ability to operate.

In case wondering why these systems can't touch the internet even though it would make setting up the this system quite easy. It is because it would require a level of system security that I don't believe is practically attainable. The more complex a system is, the more security holes you end up having. I also don't see a practical way to rapidly patch, certify, and deploy zero day exploits to aircraft. Worse case scenario is a zero day is discovered and made public, which would mean all the airlines reliant on this system would either have to revert to 2 pilot ops or be grounded until the patch is developed and deployed.

Also the last thing. Isn't the entire point of 2 pilots and CRM is to have 2 people with situational awareness of the aircraft so that they act as a check on each other. Cruise ships are not fast and there is time for the remote monitoring person to get their bearings on the situation when they switch to that ship. There isn't that kind of time on an aircraft. I don't think we could count on someone being able to keep situational awareness of 2 airplanes let alone 5. Pretty much I don't believe this system can work until aircraft are smart enough for autonomous operations.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20309
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Sat May 02, 2020 6:29 pm

Raventech wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:

That’d be more expensive than just putting the second pilot in the seat.

How would it be more expensive?
Flyinf-Tiger talked about a 5:1 ratio, which sounds reasonnable; so, for 5 flights, you'd have 5 pilots in the air + 1 on the ground (total 6) instead of 5 pilots + 5 co-pilots (total 10). 40% reduction in workers,


It would be expensive because of the absolutely massive amount of infrastructure on top of R&D required to build a secure remote command and control system for an aircraft. There is no way any of heck any part of the public internet can be used to so each operator would have to build out its own radio systems throughout the country or launch their own satellites and build all the back haul to their operation center. Then all system would need to be air gapped from the company network.

It gets expensive because every carrier has to do their own system in the area they intend to operate. They can't pool their systems in a shared matter because one airlines mistake could ground your aircraft. From a risk perspective I don't see any airline willing to accepting their competitors mistake interrupting their ability to operate.

In case wondering why these systems can't touch the internet even though it would make setting up the this system quite easy. It is because it would require a level of system security that I don't believe is practically attainable. The more complex a system is, the more security holes you end up having. I also don't see a practical way to rapidly patch, certify, and deploy zero day exploits to aircraft. Worse case scenario is a zero day is discovered and made public, which would mean all the airlines reliant on this system would either have to revert to 2 pilot ops or be grounded until the patch is developed and deployed.

Also the last thing. Isn't the entire point of 2 pilots and CRM is to have 2 people with situational awareness of the aircraft so that they act as a check on each other. Cruise ships are not fast and there is time for the remote monitoring person to get their bearings on the situation when they switch to that ship. There isn't that kind of time on an aircraft. I don't think we could count on someone being able to keep situational awareness of 2 airplanes let alone 5. Pretty much I don't believe this system can work until aircraft are smart enough for autonomous operations.

That infrastructure is being built for next generation UAS.

I'm been involved in flight testing where the pilot over riding the software was the risk. I've seen the latest software in action. This needs UAS level software, not drone software. If you don't understand the difference, ask.

Lightsaber
Winter is coming.
 
Raventech
Posts: 208
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 10:25 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Sat May 02, 2020 7:41 pm

lightsaber wrote:
Raventech wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
How would it be more expensive?
Flyinf-Tiger talked about a 5:1 ratio, which sounds reasonnable; so, for 5 flights, you'd have 5 pilots in the air + 1 on the ground (total 6) instead of 5 pilots + 5 co-pilots (total 10). 40% reduction in workers,


It would be expensive because of the absolutely massive amount of infrastructure on top of R&D required to build a secure remote command and control system for an aircraft. There is no way any of heck any part of the public internet can be used to so each operator would have to build out its own radio systems throughout the country or launch their own satellites and build all the back haul to their operation center. Then all system would need to be air gapped from the company network.

It gets expensive because every carrier has to do their own system in the area they intend to operate. They can't pool their systems in a shared matter because one airlines mistake could ground your aircraft. From a risk perspective I don't see any airline willing to accepting their competitors mistake interrupting their ability to operate.

In case wondering why these systems can't touch the internet even though it would make setting up the this system quite easy. It is because it would require a level of system security that I don't believe is practically attainable. The more complex a system is, the more security holes you end up having. I also don't see a practical way to rapidly patch, certify, and deploy zero day exploits to aircraft. Worse case scenario is a zero day is discovered and made public, which would mean all the airlines reliant on this system would either have to revert to 2 pilot ops or be grounded until the patch is developed and deployed.

Also the last thing. Isn't the entire point of 2 pilots and CRM is to have 2 people with situational awareness of the aircraft so that they act as a check on each other. Cruise ships are not fast and there is time for the remote monitoring person to get their bearings on the situation when they switch to that ship. There isn't that kind of time on an aircraft. I don't think we could count on someone being able to keep situational awareness of 2 airplanes let alone 5. Pretty much I don't believe this system can work until aircraft are smart enough for autonomous operations.

That infrastructure is being built for next generation UAS.

I'm been involved in flight testing where the pilot over riding the software was the risk. I've seen the latest software in action. This needs UAS level software, not drone software. If you don't understand the difference, ask.

Lightsaber


I'm confused. I'm not arguing for drone software, I don't think its practical in airliners. My argument was that they would need UAS to make such a thing practical.
 
embraer175e2
Topic Author
Posts: 291
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 12:47 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Sat May 02, 2020 11:10 pm

airlineworker wrote:
Has anybody brought up the idea of the E-170 being made into the E170E2? Would it exceed the 86,000 lb weight limit? While having less seats, it would offer fuel savings and allow Embraer to remain a major supplier of RJ's.

That would give you only 950 miles of range. That's not enough endurance to cover a great part of routes for rjs in the US.
 
JoseSalazar
Posts: 257
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2019 3:18 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Sat May 02, 2020 11:16 pm

embraer175e2 wrote:
airlineworker wrote:
Has anybody brought up the idea of the E-170 being made into the E170E2? Would it exceed the 86,000 lb weight limit? While having less seats, it would offer fuel savings and allow Embraer to remain a major supplier of RJ's.

That would give you only 950 miles of range. That's not enough endurance to cover a great part of routes for rjs in the US.

Good. That would force them to be “regional” jets again.
 
airlineworker
Posts: 189
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2019 1:20 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Sun May 03, 2020 12:46 am

embraer175e2 wrote:
airlineworker wrote:
Has anybody brought up the idea of the E-170 being made into the E170E2? Would it exceed the 86,000 lb weight limit? While having less seats, it would offer fuel savings and allow Embraer to remain a major supplier of RJ's.

That would give you only 950 miles of range. That's not enough endurance to cover a great part of routes for rjs in the US.


I feel 950 miles would cover most of the routes the E-175 flies today. Less than 950 miles, HPN-ORD, ISP-ATL, CAE-DTW, MSN-DFW, etc. I choose smaller cities that would normally have regional jet service. I think the airlines would snap them up being many already fly the E-175 and they would share commonality. I still don't know if the weight savings would be enough to clear 86,000 lbs.
 
embraer175e2
Topic Author
Posts: 291
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 12:47 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Sun May 03, 2020 2:07 am

airlineworker wrote:
embraer175e2 wrote:
airlineworker wrote:
Has anybody brought up the idea of the E-170 being made into the E170E2? Would it exceed the 86,000 lb weight limit? While having less seats, it would offer fuel savings and allow Embraer to remain a major supplier of RJ's.

That would give you only 950 miles of range. That's not enough endurance to cover a great part of routes for rjs in the US.


I feel 950 miles would cover most of the routes the E-175 flies today. Less than 950 miles, HPN-ORD, ISP-ATL, CAE-DTW, MSN-DFW, etc. I choose smaller cities that would normally have regional jet service. I think the airlines would snap them up being many already fly the E-175 and they would share commonality. I still don't know if the weight savings would be enough to clear 86,000 lbs.

Do you think that the airlines want this? A 850 miles regional jet? Not commonly practical.
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 2256
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Sun May 03, 2020 2:19 am

lightsaber wrote:
Raventech wrote:

It would be expensive because of the absolutely massive amount of infrastructure on top of R&D required to build a secure remote command and control system for an aircraft. There is no way any of heck any part of the public internet can be used to so each operator would have to build out its own radio systems throughout the country or launch their own satellites and build all the back haul to their operation center. Then all system would need to be air gapped from the company network.

It gets expensive because every carrier has to do their own system in the area they intend to operate. They can't pool their systems in a shared matter because one airlines mistake could ground your aircraft. From a risk perspective I don't see any airline willing to accepting their competitors mistake interrupting their ability to operate.

In case wondering why these systems can't touch the internet even though it would make setting up the this system quite easy. It is because it would require a level of system security that I don't believe is practically attainable. The more complex a system is, the more security holes you end up having. I also don't see a practical way to rapidly patch, certify, and deploy zero day exploits to aircraft. Worse case scenario is a zero day is discovered and made public, which would mean all the airlines reliant on this system would either have to revert to 2 pilot ops or be grounded until the patch is developed and deployed.

Also the last thing. Isn't the entire point of 2 pilots and CRM is to have 2 people with situational awareness of the aircraft so that they act as a check on each other. Cruise ships are not fast and there is time for the remote monitoring person to get their bearings on the situation when they switch to that ship. There isn't that kind of time on an aircraft. I don't think we could count on someone being able to keep situational awareness of 2 airplanes let alone 5. Pretty much I don't believe this system can work until aircraft are smart enough for autonomous operations.

That infrastructure is being built for next generation UAS.

I'm been involved in flight testing where the pilot over riding the software was the risk. I've seen the latest software in action. This needs UAS level software, not drone software. If you don't understand the difference, ask.

Lightsaber


Besides for Cruise ships, any marine traffic would be an excellent 1st generation for the 2nd generation doing Aviation. Railroads also, every train in the US has an engineer and conductor . There is a mining company railroad in Australia that is running autonomous trains quite long distances. I'd rather have at least one person on board.
 
strfyr51
Posts: 5038
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Sun May 03, 2020 3:02 am

WayexTDI wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Flying-Tiger wrote:

Why not? The idea is acutally a pretty good one. You certainly won´t need to have a 1:1 ratio. What about having a "flight ops" center monitoring all flights of a specific single pilot type, manned by type-rated pilots? Say one pilot on the ground monitors 5 flight and is available to these five flight to chip in remotely if needed. Maybe have a full flight simulator next door which can have live feed from the flight in trouble, where an on-ground pilot takes over?

The cruise industry established something similar after the Costa Concordia accident of Italy, all the major cruise lines now at minimum remotely monitor what is happening on a vessel´s bridged resp. they are able to take over full control if necessary as far as I´m aware.


That’d be more expensive than just putting the second pilot in the seat.

How would it be more expensive?
Flyinf-Tiger talked about a 5:1 ratio, which sounds reasonnable; so, for 5 flights, you'd have 5 pilots in the air + 1 on the ground (total 6) instead of 5 pilots + 5 co-pilots (total 10). 40% reduction in workers,

Talking about it and Doing it? Are two entirely different things! What or Whom is going to push legislation to Do that?
Years ago I worked for an airline that FLEW DHC-7's a Notoriously slow airplane. The Pilots came up with a solution to fly at takeoff power to altitude rather than throttle back at the 5 minute mark, We went through engines it seems like every other week until PWC saw the evidence because Management didn't know what some pilots were doing. for 2 months I had engines stacked up outside my shop's door and we were leasing engines.
The Practice came to a halt when the Chief Pilots had to come in an run test flights on every airplane that had a engine change for an over-temped engine. and su=ince the work was done on midnight shift? the Practice came to a damn quick Halt!!
 
strfyr51
Posts: 5038
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Sun May 03, 2020 3:18 am

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
You don’t have an idea how expensive making an autonomous airplane is gonna be compared to having an young pilot. In your scenario, they’d be a pilot on the ground plus the plane would have to be certified to land without pilot input at every destination. How do you account for the pilot being incapacitated below 200’ which has happened and probably happens a few times a year. The assessment on pilot failure is 10E-5, so you need two to have the required safety.

After the regulators are starting to accept it, the companies will have to put up the funding for the ground component, then the pilots unions (pretty much a worldwide factor) will have to agree, then the public would have accept it. I suspect, the pilots refusing would bring the public on board with refusing. Despite a lot of dreams single pilot airliners over 19 seats are a long ways off.

Right now a CAT 3 certification for an airline is not something every airline can do with 2 pilots in the cockpit, Fewer airlines can even certify for CAT 3B landings due to equipment or the costs of training for 2 pilots. If there was only ONE pilot on Board a passenger Airliner? Every airplane would be required to make an Autoland Approach even in Bright sunshine with unlimited visibility! Do you remember some time ago when an Asian Airline's 777 wound up biting the dust at SFO? They bit the dust because the pilots couldn't fly an Autoland Approach because SFO's Microwave landing system was out of service, and Lo and Behold? They were Never taught to fly a visual approach manually in the 777. So? do you really think the FAA is going to go for what you're asking in light of that? And what added equipment might they remove from the MEL to account for single pilot operation? It would be so much more expensive? As not be wconomical, And a ATP check-ride? Would become a ride through HELL!!
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 2256
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Sun May 03, 2020 5:18 am

Devilfish wrote:
frmrCapCadet wrote:
A 25 seater, obviously none now available, but some of the first hybrid planes may be small enough. They likely would be a lot cheaper to build and maintain.

We may have to wait quite a while yet for that. Meanwhile.....

https://www.flightglobal.com/airframers ... 33.article



embraer175e2 wrote:
The chances for using a Polish aircraft for pax flying in the us are very small. This is my true opinion.

Cessna may have a better shot at it...albeit unpressurized for now..... :airplane:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dCLFgpRlITw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbiyAUKVQu8


The SkyCourier is approaching first flight, doing taxi tests.

https://www.flightglobal.com/business-a ... 81.article

This looks like a real workhorse. It could do very well among isolated towns like in the islands, Alaska, BC. FedEX will have as many of these as Caravans alone. Short hop island - passenger traffic by day, freight at night with same plane.
 
Dmoney
Posts: 134
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2020 9:53 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Sun May 03, 2020 9:25 am

Can they not just fly ATR's? Whaaaa turbo prop etc but when the choice is no regional service to nowheresville USA or a modern turboprop they'll take the obvious option. I don't understand the whining. The answer is obvious.
 
embraer175e2
Topic Author
Posts: 291
Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2017 12:47 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Mon May 04, 2020 12:11 am

strfyr51 wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:

That’d be more expensive than just putting the second pilot in the seat.

How would it be more expensive?
Flyinf-Tiger talked about a 5:1 ratio, which sounds reasonnable; so, for 5 flights, you'd have 5 pilots in the air + 1 on the ground (total 6) instead of 5 pilots + 5 co-pilots (total 10). 40% reduction in workers,

Talking about it and Doing it? Are two entirely different things! What or Whom is going to push legislation to Do that?
Years ago I worked for an airline that FLEW DHC-7's a Notoriously slow airplane. The Pilots came up with a solution to fly at takeoff power to altitude rather than throttle back at the 5 minute mark, We went through engines it seems like every other week until PWC saw the evidence because Management didn't know what some pilots were doing. for 2 months I had engines stacked up outside my shop's door and we were leasing engines.
The Practice came to a halt when the Chief Pilots had to come in an run test flights on every airplane that had a engine change for an over-temped engine. and su=ince the work was done on midnight shift? the Practice came to a damn quick Halt!!

How illegal from those pilots to do that!
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1812
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Mon May 04, 2020 12:39 am

strfyr51 wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:

That’d be more expensive than just putting the second pilot in the seat.

How would it be more expensive?
Flyinf-Tiger talked about a 5:1 ratio, which sounds reasonnable; so, for 5 flights, you'd have 5 pilots in the air + 1 on the ground (total 6) instead of 5 pilots + 5 co-pilots (total 10). 40% reduction in workers,

Talking about it and Doing it? Are two entirely different things! What or Whom is going to push legislation to Do that?
Years ago I worked for an airline that FLEW DHC-7's a Notoriously slow airplane. The Pilots came up with a solution to fly at takeoff power to altitude rather than throttle back at the 5 minute mark, We went through engines it seems like every other week until PWC saw the evidence because Management didn't know what some pilots were doing. for 2 months I had engines stacked up outside my shop's door and we were leasing engines.
The Practice came to a halt when the Chief Pilots had to come in an run test flights on every airplane that had a engine change for an over-temped engine. and su=ince the work was done on midnight shift? the Practice came to a damn quick Halt!!

Sorry, I fail to see how your story links with what was said.

But, to maybe go with your argument: who would have thought that long-range widebody airplanes would be down to 2 human in the cockpit, effectively replacing the Flight Engineer with a stack of computers? This is a similar approach.
We are talking about autonomous cars (which I completely disagree with, since they want to make them non-overridable from the inside); going to 1 in-cockpit pilot + 1 remote pilot is a similar approach as well.
 
WayexTDI
Posts: 1812
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2018 4:38 pm

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Mon May 04, 2020 12:42 am

Raventech wrote:
WayexTDI wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:

That’d be more expensive than just putting the second pilot in the seat.

How would it be more expensive?
Flyinf-Tiger talked about a 5:1 ratio, which sounds reasonnable; so, for 5 flights, you'd have 5 pilots in the air + 1 on the ground (total 6) instead of 5 pilots + 5 co-pilots (total 10). 40% reduction in workers,


It would be expensive because of the absolutely massive amount of infrastructure on top of R&D required to build a secure remote command and control system for an aircraft. There is no way any of heck any part of the public internet can be used to so each operator would have to build out its own radio systems throughout the country or launch their own satellites and build all the back haul to their operation center. Then all system would need to be air gapped from the company network.

It gets expensive because every carrier has to do their own system in the area they intend to operate. They can't pool their systems in a shared matter because one airlines mistake could ground your aircraft. From a risk perspective I don't see any airline willing to accepting their competitors mistake interrupting their ability to operate.

In case wondering why these systems can't touch the internet even though it would make setting up the this system quite easy. It is because it would require a level of system security that I don't believe is practically attainable. The more complex a system is, the more security holes you end up having. I also don't see a practical way to rapidly patch, certify, and deploy zero day exploits to aircraft. Worse case scenario is a zero day is discovered and made public, which would mean all the airlines reliant on this system would either have to revert to 2 pilot ops or be grounded until the patch is developed and deployed.

Also the last thing. Isn't the entire point of 2 pilots and CRM is to have 2 people with situational awareness of the aircraft so that they act as a check on each other. Cruise ships are not fast and there is time for the remote monitoring person to get their bearings on the situation when they switch to that ship. There isn't that kind of time on an aircraft. I don't think we could count on someone being able to keep situational awareness of 2 airplanes let alone 5. Pretty much I don't believe this system can work until aircraft are smart enough for autonomous operations.

That's why you have smart people who can do an ROI: if such a system, 1 pilot in plane and 1:5 pilot on the ground cost over the next 5 years (or whatever the company agrees) less than the cost of 2 pilots in plane, then it's a go finance-wise.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 6284
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Mon May 04, 2020 1:06 am

May accountants never get operational control of flight.
 
bkmbr
Posts: 267
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2020 2:27 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Mon May 04, 2020 2:26 am

JayinKitsap wrote:
The SkyCourier is approaching first flight, doing taxi tests.

https://www.flightglobal.com/business-a ... 81.article

This looks like a real workhorse. It could do very well among isolated towns like in the islands, Alaska, BC. FedEX will have as many of these as Caravans alone. Short hop island - passenger traffic by day, freight at night with same plane.


I imagine that in the USA this airplane will be a hit, especially in Alaska, but worldwide I`m curious to se how it will performe against the L410NG
 
Flying-Tiger
Posts: 4058
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 1999 5:35 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Mon May 04, 2020 10:11 am

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
May accountants never get operational control of flight.


We´re absolutely happy since centuries to have cars, trucks, busses and trains run by one "pilot" without an engineer on board. Any mind you, a bus in the city or even an overland coach seats between 50 and 150 people, more than what is considered a regional jet today. And even if you only move in two dimensions opposed to three in the air: the amount of other traffic is only a fraction of what happens on land, the risk of collision and other nasty things is existent, too. Already today there are quite a few single pilot ops with passengers on board, thus discussing the idea if expanding this envelop to encompass lager capacity planes is nothing out of the ordinary.

WayexTDI wrote:
That's why you have smart people who can do an ROI: if such a system, 1 pilot in plane and 1:5 pilot on the ground cost over the next 5 years (or whatever the company agrees) less than the cost of 2 pilots in plane, then it's a go finance-wise.


Correct. The ration 1:5 was only an idea, can be 1:3 or 1:10, whatever is reasonable and acceptable to authorities. A flight sim will be needed anyway for training purposed, thus combining both might be an opportunity.

I´m not saying that this idea will fly, but to simply say "won´t work because of xyz" is jumping too short IMO.
Flown: A319/320/321,A332/3,A343/346, A359, A380,AT4,AT7,B712, B732/3/4/5/7/8/9,B742/4,B752/3, B762/763,B772/77W,CR2/7/9/K,ER3/4,E70/75/90/95, F50/70/100,M11,L15,SF3,S20, AR8/1, 142/143,... 330.860 miles and counting.
 
airlineworker
Posts: 189
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2019 1:20 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Mon May 04, 2020 2:00 pm

Drifting off topic.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 6284
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Mon May 04, 2020 2:16 pm

Flying-Tiger wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
May accountants never get operational control of flight.


We´re absolutely happy since centuries to have cars, trucks, busses and trains run by one "pilot" without an engineer on board. Any mind you, a bus in the city or even an overland coach seats between 50 and 150 people, more than what is considered a regional jet today. And even if you only move in two dimensions opposed to three in the air: the amount of other traffic is only a fraction of what happens on land, the risk of collision and other nasty things is existent, too. Already today there are quite a few single pilot ops with passengers on board, thus discussing the idea if expanding this envelop to encompass lager capacity planes is nothing out of the ordinary.

WayexTDI wrote:
That's why you have smart people who can do an ROI: if such a system, 1 pilot in plane and 1:5 pilot on the ground cost over the next 5 years (or whatever the company agrees) less than the cost of 2 pilots in plane, then it's a go finance-wise.


Correct. The ration 1:5 was only an idea, can be 1:3 or 1:10, whatever is reasonable and acceptable to authorities. A flight sim will be needed anyway for training purposed, thus combining both might be an opportunity.

I´m not saying that this idea will fly, but to simply say "won´t work because of xyz" is jumping too short IMO.


A solo bus driver has infinitely more choices to handle incapacitation that does a pilot. The consequences of hitting a car at 25 mph are far less than in a plane. No one, not even the military flies or is considering flying pax with one pilot
 
User avatar
SQ22
Moderator
Posts: 1908
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2012 9:29 am

Re: Embraer hopes E175-E2 jet efficiency helps modify scope clauses

Mon May 04, 2020 4:23 pm

Thread went off topic and will be locked.
  • 1
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9

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