this post was submitted on 25 Dec 2023
157 points (91.5% liked)

Technology

71717 readers
4896 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
L4s@hackingne.ws
157
A cargo plane flew 50 miles with no pilot onboard using a semi-automated system. An aviation expert says the technology could address the pilot shortage. (news.yahoo.com)
submitted 2 years ago by L4s@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
34 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

A cargo plane flew 50 miles with no pilot onboard using a semi-automated system. An aviation expert says the technology could address the pilot shortage.::The flight system allows a plane to be remote operated by a pilot on the ground, which could streamline pilot airline operations in the future.

all 39 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] randon31415@lemmy.world 124 points 2 years ago (4 children)

This will be done more and more until the first crash. Then everyone will freak out and everything will be grounded. The engineers will point out that statistically the flights done this way were safer ( 1 million miles were flown by AI in the last 3 years with only one incident. The same done by commercial pilots would have caused 3.5 incidents!)

Then other incidents will be dredged up. Some won't be actual incidents, some won't be the fault of the AI, and some will be because a human overrid AI control. However, the public will firmly be on the side of only humans should fly planes. Laws will be drafted. Then loopholes for "drones" will be made. A decade later these loopholes will be large enough to fly a 737 through.

No one will remember why they were put in place in the first place, but one political party will be firmly against removing the laws. It will take another generation for them to finally be removed, and by that point computers will be so far integrated with humans that biological humans might be banned from flying under the law if things didn't change.

Hopefully, people will look back on this and say, lol, no, that post was edited in 2035, but good try.

[–] Agent641@lemmy.world 24 points 2 years ago

Can you tell us the lotto numbers please?

[–] SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago (1 children)

However, the public will firmly be on the side of only humans should fly planes. Laws will be drafted. Then loopholes for “drones” will be made.

That part could just as well go another way:

The transportation and large sellers of packages, like Amazon, strongly lobbied the government. Now any victim of a crash with automated planes gets a standard payout from the insurance. A class action lawsuits from family members of the victims was eventually decided in favor of the corporations.

[–] BearOfaTime@lemm.ee 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I've read your life is only worth $10k.

I have nothing to back that up, but if anyone finds the source of that quote, I'd be interested.

Yea, no thanks on automation. In the end I'm still dead by another human's mistake. So I'd rather have a pilot on board.

I've seen how bad aircraft automation is already. Much of it shouldn't even be in the air currently. It's already overridden pilot commands łor at least ignored inputs as outside parameters), crashing planes.

[–] adj16@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago

😆

I think you’re spot on

[–] SociallyAwkwardLinux@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

I'd read this book.

[–] 18107@aussie.zone 12 points 2 years ago

Adequate for cargo flights, not happening any time soon for passenger flights. Aviation safety is very strict and slow to change.

[–] SendMePhotos@lemmy.world 10 points 2 years ago (1 children)

To address the pilot pay, in my own opinion I think that flying is reasonably paid. Most entry level jobs (in my area) range between 70-90k. This is comfortable for the most part and above all common jobs.

The main issue for me is the training costs. I would still be headed towards the aviation industry if I wasn't held back by the financial debt that I would incur.

[–] Shirasho 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Pilots are paid bank BECAUSE the training is so expensive. If you make the training cheaper the compensation will drop with it. Of course lowering the barrier to entry is a good thing, but don't expect the compensation to remain high.

[–] SendMePhotos@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

You right. But like, ironically, I can't do the training with a family to care for.

When I asked around to the other flight students on how they are paying for it, it was 45% GI Bill, 50% daddy/grandparents paying for it, and the rest were paying bit by bit or finally making enough money to afford it.

[–] Canadian_Cabinet@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It also depends if you go with a school or an independent instructor. I spent a good chunk of cash getting my PPL before I decided to change careers because of how expensive every step towards my ATP would be

[–] SendMePhotos@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Yeah, I went 141 and est total cost was over 150k but that has government assistance for a portion where I didn't have to pay up front.

Part 61 is absolutely cheaper overall but you have to pay up front with no assistance.

[–] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago

I don't want to fly with an automated pilot. I want someone with skin in the game.

[–] JoMiran@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

I have an uncle that quit being a pilot because being a trucker paid much better. I not stating an opinion, just a fact. Do with it what you will.

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Fallout New Vegas is the best video game of all time. I'm not stating a fact, just an opinion. Do with it what I will.

[–] CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social 4 points 2 years ago

So, basically just a really big drone?

[–] bloopernova@programming.dev 3 points 2 years ago

Not a single Terminator 2 quote. I am disappoint.

[–] Coreidan@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Never going to happen

[–] 1984@lemmy.today 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

You know what else could fix the pilot shortage?

Decent wages and much lower training costs.

[–] A_A@lemmy.world -4 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I have only three digits to reply to this : 911

[–] GeneralVincent@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Wait are you in support or against AI airplanes? Because mentioning an event where terrorists successfully overpowered human pilots doesn't seem to be a great argument against AI pilots. More like an argument against human pilots.

[–] A_A@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Sorry my comment was confusing and maybe my idea wasn't that clear either. 911, which was an attack on the United States using airplanes, happed in part, I think, because there wasn't enough protections. Also I feel that computer systems are much more vulnerable to attacks than physical systems where pilots and other people can protect critical infrastructures. With this in mind, I was trying to hint that automating airplanes this way could lead to more catastrophs.

[–] GeneralVincent@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago

Wait are you in support or against AI airplanes? Because mentioning an event where terrorists successfully overpowered human pilots doesn't seem to be a great argument against AI pilots. More like an argument against human pilots.