Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

40 passengers, 1 pilot

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 3WE
    replied
    Originally posted by ATLcrew View Post

    Even more than trying to make the word rhubarb sound sexy.
    Hot strawberry rhubarb pie, with vanilla ice cream...

    You're welcome.

    Leave a comment:


  • ATLcrew
    replied
    Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
    This is more fantasy than Santa.
    Even more than trying to make the word rhubarb sound sexy.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gabriel
    replied
    Originally posted by kent olsen View Post
    You all remember back in the 60's, the airlines went to Boeing/Douglas and said can you produce a two pilot aircraft? That would save us money, no Flight Engineer.

    Well I've always felt that we will see a one pilot aircraft in the near future. As it is most everything except taxiing and takeoff and some landings are done by electronics anyway. In an emergency the #1 flight attendant could be trained to make a coupled landing or on freighters you could have some guy on the ground behind his computer who could take control.

    Only time will tell.
    Time will tell YES unequivocally. The question is not if, but when. First one pilot. Then no pilot. Eventually, not even a backup pilot on the ground.
    Planes have already completed experimental gate-to-gate fully autonomous flights.

    Leave a comment:


  • Evan
    replied
    Originally posted by Nick L View Post

    The only problem with one pilot is what if he gets incapacitated then no one can fly the plane
    Bus.

    There are systems now that can autoland if a general aviation solo pilot becomes incapacitated. But systems rely on sensors which must have plenty of redundancy. The trouble is, these sensors are exposed to a common environment. If something in the environment damages or disabled one sensor, it will probably do so for all of them. Any reliable autoland system must have multiple means of determining flight parameters if every sensor of one means fails. An example of this is using AoA sensor data and engine RPM data to approximate airspeed when all airspeed data sensors fail. GBAS and advancements in AI using synthetic vision and infrared has the potential to make autoland systems virtually failproof, but the supporting infrastructure and adoption are further off than some of these aircraft concepts would like it to be.

    Leave a comment:


  • Nick L
    replied
    Originally posted by Evan View Post
    You have to take these concept aircraft with a healthy eye-roll, but I found it interesting that the concept here was a flying bus, hence a single pilot 'bus driver'. What do the regs say about that?

    https://newatlas.com/aircraft/keleko...ing-evtol-bus/
    The only problem with one pilot is what if he gets incapacitated then no one can fly the plane

    Leave a comment:


  • TeeVee
    replied
    though i'm not especially good at it yet, i pilot a DJI Mavic Mini. clearly the software is far better than i will ever be in all likelihood. i'm not advocating a company like DJI produce people carrying drones, but the technology is so insanely good and keeps getting better. and yeah, the mavic will fly itself back to a homepoint and land by itself.

    yeah, technology fails sometimes, but it just may be that humans fail more often.

    there's also the undeniable fact that advanced fighters are designed to be unstable and uncontrollable without the computer, or so i've read. so we already rely on tech to control uncontrollable aircraft.

    Leave a comment:


  • kent olsen
    replied
    You all remember back in the 60's, the airlines went to Boeing/Douglas and said can you produce a two pilot aircraft? That would save us money, no Flight Engineer.

    Well I've always felt that we will see a one pilot aircraft in the near future. As it is most everything except taxiing and takeoff and some landings are done by electronics anyway. In an emergency the #1 flight attendant could be trained to make a coupled landing or on freighters you could have some guy on the ground behind his computer who could take control.

    Only time will tell.

    Leave a comment:


  • Evan
    replied
    Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
    And by the way, when flying horizontally, what is the aspect ratio of that wing? Yes, that's what I thought, supper inefficient again. And it is going to fly at 300 MPH?
    Would you like some lift with that drag? I can imagine this thing snap rolling in high speed turbulence.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gabriel
    replied
    Ridiculous design. 40K pounds of thrust in these "large fans" but still very small compared to what a helicopter rotor for that weight would be. Yo can accelerate a lot of air a bit or a little air a lot. Accelerating a little air a lot not only is much less efficient, but it also hard to manage in a VTOL aircraft. You already saw the damage that Ospreys tend to cause, that will be a breeze compared to this hurricane. And then you are carrying the motors, batteries and electrical system capable of providing 40K pounds of thrust but use only a fraction of that when flying horizontally. And by the way, when flying horizontally, what is the aspect ratio of that wing? Yes, that's what I thought, supper inefficient again. And it is going to fly at 300 MPH?

    This is more fantasy than Santa.

    Leave a comment:


  • 3WE
    replied
    Or 4 (ok, 4-6) trips on Cape Air with pistons mixture throttle prop cowl flaps and no autopilot.

    Leave a comment:


  • Evan
    started a topic 40 passengers, 1 pilot

    40 passengers, 1 pilot

    You have to take these concept aircraft with a healthy eye-roll, but I found it interesting that the concept here was a flying bus, hence a single pilot 'bus driver'. What do the regs say about that?

    https://newatlas.com/aircraft/keleko...ing-evtol-bus/
Working...
X