Airbus A320 Down

RotorAndWing said:
Now, for a real improvement we need computers that will take an Xray of a human and read it with pin point accuracy. Think of all the malpractice of Doctors this will eliminate! :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Already in everyday use.
 
Last edited:
RotorAndWing said:
Then why do we still need Doctors?
Click to expand...

I anticipate that within 20 years, some work done by physicians today will be automated.

I mean, if we could eliminate all of these over paid Doctors we could get rid of all of these medical malpractice lawsuits and the thousands of deaths they cause each year.
Click to expand...

You automate to get lower cost, not better quality. Home Depot didnt' switch to self checkout to improve customer experience.
 
RotorAndWing said:
Then why do we still need Doctors?

I mean, if we could eliminate all of these over paid Doctors we could get rid of all of these medical malpractice lawsuits and the thousands of deaths they cause each year.

Right?
Click to expand...

I'd rather we got rid of a bunch of lawyers - a much better solution to that particular problem :D
 
Most of the arguments here are not taking into account huge advances in artificial intelligence that are projected to occur in the near future. Now of course it may be a pipe dream, but some in that field feel that it is coming. Our present technology makes it easy to make the case against a pilotless airliner. But a machine that can think, actually reason and make intelligent decisions could be a game changer. Time will tell.
 
weilke said:
I anticipate that within 20 years, some work done by physicians today will be automated.
Click to expand...

I think that happens much sooner.

weilke said:
You automate to get lower cost, not better quality. Home Depot didnt' switch to self checkout to improve customer experience.
Click to expand...

Actually the quality will go up considerably. Automation won't create a lot of the mistakes the Doctors make. I foresee a huge drop in malpractice as we get rid of the Doctors.
 
RotorAndWing said:
Very true. Use automation to eliminate lawyers. Have all documents produced in automation, let automation decide court cases without human interference.
Click to expand...

legalzoom.com ?
 
Matthew said:
One of the limitations of any kind of automation is that it can only react within the parameters in which it was designed. That's why many systems will throw an alarm or go into alternate law, "conditions have just exceeded my ability to control them...your airplane."

As soon as the first "unable, say intentions" comes across, automation quickly reaches its limit.

The AF flight went into the ocean when the automation couldn't understand the inputs. Turns out the humans in that case weren't any better. Automation would have failed completely in Sioux City because it could not have been designed to have reacted to a situation so far outside anything a designer would have considered. The flight crew adapted, improvised, and overcame. We have a very long way to go before automation can do that.

Airliner, and GA, automation has come along at an incredible pace, Moore's Law is working. In cases now, an airline flight crew may hand fly for only a few minutes per flight. Maybe, in the near future, the aircraft will taxi, takeoff, cruise and land unassisted - under human command and supervision. But a human will still have to be part of the loop, even if it's just for the SHF moments.
Click to expand...
Flight crews may only fly for a few minutes per flight. That might be true, but for me, unless the departure requires the use of the autopilot and there are some extenuating circumstances, I'll hand fly up into the mid twenties before hitting the AP button. For approach, depending on the weather, I'll click off the autopilot either passing through 10,000 or on downwind. That is more of a moving target depending on how fatigued I feel and what other external threats we're being faced with. I'm not alone in that. That's pretty much the norm form what I've seen.

And, also, the much bandied about statistic in the news that airliners ever land themselves is completely blown out of proportion. I'd say less than 1% of the flights I've flown have ended in an autoland.

Now to the bigger subject of the SHTF moments... we hear about the big "saves," Al Haynes and UA232, Sully Sullenberger and the Miracle on the Hudson, and the above mentioned Quantas flight from Singapore.

But I'm betting that so many more times each day, there is a crew somewhere in the world that "saves" the plane and passengers (or cargo) from when automation goes wrong. These flights aren't met by news reporters and posed in front of television cameras for the world to see. More than likely then land, look at each other, say "Well, that was effed up," make a logbook entry and go to the hotel.

Here's a recent post by one of my co-workers, with just another day at the office...
Today I learned firsthand why water in the E&E compartment of MD10/11 is bad. This is a snapshot from a/c xxx after we leveled off and were able to get several systems back online. The amount of alerts, CAWS warnings, and DU's shutting on and off was stressful, to say the least. All while having to hand fly, no auto throttles, climbing-out in IMC from EWR. Once we started the descent, another flurry of alerts and failures began as water sloshed forward. Temporarily lost all VHF comm, SAT comm wasn't available, and all navaid tuning ability was lost... Plus intermittent, erroneous Level 3 "Cabin Smoke" alerts, just to keep your attention. Cargo door and cabin door were downwind while loading was in progress, I saw very little water inside cabin door, it's something I've always payed attention to when it's raining. Not sure what we could have done differently...
Click to expand...
abnormal.jpg


That's a bad day at the office, but I'm guessing these kind of failures happen multiple times each day. Maybe not this bad, but at least to the point where human intervention is required to interpret things when the sensors fail and the automation gets confused, or just gives up.

We're all pilots here... how many times have you done something in the cockpit because something didn't look or sound right. Your intuition took over and you were able to make a decision based on your experiences and senses and ability.

Many times I've asked "do you smell something?" Most of the times, it's our lunch burning, but twice, it hasn't been. We were able to stop what could have been a much worse situation from developing.

Some of you guys sound like you are the experts on future AI, sense-and-avoid systems and autonomous flight control. I'm way out of my league there, and I'll defer to your expertise.

But I think we are a long way off from taking the human completely out of the piloting loop and an even longer way off for it to make sense economically with little or no improvement in the safety of air travel.

That's my $0.02... worth about what you paid for it...
10422950_10152534042312914_3391310852543885879_n.jpg
 
Sluggo63 said:
Flight crews may only fly for a few minutes per flight. That might be true, but for me, unless the departure requires the use of the autopilot and there are some extenuating circumstances, I'll hand fly up into the mid twenties before hitting the AP button. For approach, depending on the weather, I'll click off the autopilot either passing through 10,000 or on downwind. That is more of a moving target depending on how fatigued I feel and what other external threats we're being faced with. I'm not alone in that. That's pretty much the norm form what I've seen.

And, also, the much bandied about statistic in the news that airliners ever land themselves is completely blown out of proportion. I'd say less than 1% of the flights I've flown have ended in an autoland.

Now to the bigger subject of the SHTF moments... we hear about the big "saves," Al Haynes and UA232, Sully Sullenberger and the Miracle on the Hudson, and the above mentioned Quantas flight from Singapore.

But I'm betting that so many more times each day, there is a crew somewhere in the world that "saves" the plane and passengers (or cargo) from when automation goes wrong. These flights aren't met by news reporters and posed in front of television cameras for the world to see. More than likely then land, look at each other, say "Well, that was effed up," make a logbook entry and go to the hotel.

Here's a recent post by one of my co-workers, with just another day at the office...
abnormal.jpg


That's a bad day at the office, but I'm guessing these kind of failures happen multiple times each day. Maybe not this bad, but at least to the point where human intervention is required to interpret things when the sensors fail and the automation gets confused, or just gives up.

We're all pilots here... how many times have you done something in the cockpit because something didn't look or sound right. Your intuition took over and you were able to make a decision based on your experiences and senses and ability.

Many times I've asked "do you smell something?" Most of the times, it's our lunch burning, but twice, it hasn't been. We were able to stop what could have been a much worse situation from developing.

Some of you guys sound like you are the experts on future AI, sense-and-avoid systems and autonomous flight control. I'm way out of my league there, and I'll defer to your expertise.

But I think we are a long way off from taking the human completely out of the piloting loop and an even longer way off for it to make sense economically with little or no improvement in the safety of air travel.

That's my $0.02... worth about what you paid for it...
10422950_10152534042312914_3391310852543885879_n.jpg
Click to expand...

Yeah - I wasn't trying to minimize the responsibilities of the flight crews that don't hand-fly much. There are reasons for and against. And the SHTF moments don't happen often, but was just an example I was trying to make.

You're right, we make decisions during every flight, the whole flight. Many times we don't even think about them. When you throw together all the dynamics of an aircraft in flight, weather, and every failure point possible (even the ones that nobody thought was possible), we are a long way from truly autonomous flights.
 
Katamarino said:
I'd rather we got rid of a bunch of lawyers - a much better solution to that particular problem :D
Click to expand...

The reason we have the number of lawyers we do is that people want to sue people, they want criminals punished, and they want due process. It's supply and demand.
 
PaulS said:
Most of the arguments here are not taking into account huge advances in artificial intelligence that are projected to occur in the near future. Now of course it may be a pipe dream, but some in that field feel that it is coming. Our present technology makes it easy to make the case against a pilotless airliner. But a machine that can think, actually reason and make intelligent decisions could be a game changer. Time will tell.
Click to expand...

"It's hard to make predictions, especially about the future."
 
Palmpilot said:
The reason we have the number of lawyers we do is that people want to sue people, they want criminals punished, and they want due process. It's supply and demand.
Click to expand...

That demand is driven by the success of frivolous lawsuits and the awards of multi-millions of dollars to people injured by their own lack of common sense. The billboards everywhere telling people that if an accident happens, they must call now and start their claim.

The entire system needs a makeover. Obviously I do not expect simplification of improvement of the system to come from lawyers; turkeys don't vote for Christmas, after all!

Clearly we need lawyers. It would be nice if we could get by with far fewer, though.
 
Katamarino said:
That demand is driven by the success of frivolous lawsuits and the awards of multi-millions of dollars to people injured by their own lack of common sense.
Click to expand...

If juries stopped awarding those huge payouts, lawyers couldn't do a thing about it.

The billboards everywhere telling people that if an accident happens, they must call now and start their claim.
Click to expand...

When I was young, the rules were changed to allow lawyers to advertise. I was in favor of it at the time. Now, I think it was a mistake.
 
Palmpilot said:
If juries stopped awarding those huge payouts, lawyers couldn't do a thing about it.
Click to expand...

Then why is it the lawyers who go ape whenever a cap on noneconomic damages goes through a state legislature ?
 
weilke said:
Then why is it the lawyers who go ape whenever a cap on noneconomic damages goes through a state legislature ?
Click to expand...

Maybe they set their fees as a percentage of the award.
 
What if rather than have a technological solution, the airlines simply assign permanent pilot pairings for aircraft crews. If you work with the same guy every day, you probably will get a sense as to what he's made of, and if anything drastic is going on. I know nothing about how feasible this is. I am sure there are some scheduling issues, but it seems they could be overcome. Just a thought.
 
Katamarino said:
That demand is driven by the success of frivolous lawsuits and the awards of multi-millions of dollars to people injured by their own lack of common sense. The billboards everywhere telling people that if an accident happens, they must call now and start their claim.

The entire system needs a makeover. Obviously I do not expect simplification of improvement of the system to come from lawyers; turkeys don't vote for Christmas, after all!

Clearly we need lawyers. It would be nice if we could get by with far fewer, though.
Click to expand...

I tend to agree, assuming you include judges in your definition of lawyers. They are the ones that don't throw out obviously frivolous suits. They are the ones that created the rules that make litigation so expensive such that the process is the punishment, and incentivize defendants to simply pay, no matter what, if the case gets past the summary judgment stage, which encourages more suits. They are the ones that are incredibly reluctant to award sanctions for frivolous law suits. They are the ones that have crafted remedies for every perceived wrong.
 
Interesting, they recovered a cellphone video of the last moments of the flight. Sadly it sounds like the passengers were well aware of impending doom, screams could be heard and what is being speculated as the pilot attempting to break down the door. Sad stuff.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
Denny Fitch was a helluva guy.
Click to expand...

Ya think?

Invented a new control paradigm in, essentially, thirty seconds, succeed first try or they all die. There is no way to overstate what he did, and (of course) when it was crunch time, he stayed crouched at the throttles.

Of this are heroes made...
 
Greg Bockelman said:
:confused:THAT'S a real positive thing to say. :no::rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Why should anything positive be said about an SOB who decides to end his life and take almost 150 innocent people with him?

Roll your eyes all you want Greg, but there is nothing positive about it.
 
PPC1052 said:
I tend to agree, assuming you include judges in your definition of lawyers. They are the ones that don't throw out obviously frivolous suits. They are the ones that created the rules that make litigation so expensive such that the process is the punishment, and incentivize defendants to simply pay, no matter what, if the case gets past the summary judgment stage, which encourages more suits. They are the ones that are incredibly reluctant to award sanctions for frivolous law suits. They are the ones that have crafted remedies for every perceived wrong.
Click to expand...

Don't forget to look at legislators who promote legislation which supports the plaintiffs' bar...
 
Fearless Tower said:
Why should anything positive be said about an SOB who decides to end his life and take almost 150 innocent people with him?

Roll your eyes all you want Greg, but there is nothing positive about it.
Click to expand...

I didn't say there was anything positive about it. It is just that people are quick to condemn people with mental health issues.

Yes, it is a tragedy that should not have happened. I don't condone what he has done, but what about all the other people that might have had clues as to his mental health issues? Do they bear any responsibility? If so, condemn them, also.
 
SCCutler said:
Ya think?

Invented a new control paradigm in, essentially, thirty seconds, succeed first try or they all die. There is no way to overstate what he did, and (of course) when it was crunch time, he stayed crouched at the throttles.

Of this are heroes made...
Click to expand...

The reason I keep bringing Denny up is that he is the real hero of United flight 232. Yes, Al Haynes was the Captain, but he was along for the ride.

Every time 232 is mentioned, and Denny is not, I will make that point.

You will now be returned to regularly scheduled programming.
 
SCCutler said:
Ya think?

Invented a new control paradigm in, essentially, thirty seconds, succeed first try or they all die. There is no way to overstate what he did, and (of course) when it was crunch time, he stayed crouched at the throttles.

Of this are heroes made...
Click to expand...

Al Haynes was using the throttles to control the aircraft before Fitch entered the cockpit. He relinquished the throttles to Fitch after telling him the basics of what he had been doing.
 
PPC1052 said:
I tend to agree, assuming you include judges in your definition of lawyers. They are the ones that don't throw out obviously frivolous suits. They are the ones that created the rules that make litigation so expensive such that the process is the punishment, and incentivize defendants to simply pay, no matter what, if the case gets past the summary judgment stage, which encourages more suits. They are the ones that are incredibly reluctant to award sanctions for frivolous law suits. They are the ones that have crafted remedies for every perceived wrong.
Click to expand...

Sounds like this bears repeating. :D

attachment.php
 
3393RP said:
Al Haynes was using the throttles to control the aircraft before Fitch entered the cockpit. He relinquished the throttles to Fitch after telling him the basics of what he had been doing.
Click to expand...

I did not know that detail.
 
3393RP said:
Al Haynes was using the throttles to control the aircraft before Fitch entered the cockpit. He relinquished the throttles to Fitch after telling him the basics of what he had been doing.
Click to expand...

I heard that too. Seems to me Al, Denny,the FO and a few FA's had a 1 hour special on PBS and they sat around told the entire story.....

I will see if I can find a U tube of it...
 
Greg Bockelman said:
I didn't say there was anything positive about it. It is just that people are quick to condemn people with mental health issues.

Yes, it is a tragedy that should not have happened. I don't condone what he has done, but what about all the other people that might have had clues as to his mental health issues? Do they bear any responsibility? If so, condemn them, also.
Click to expand...

Depression does not absolve this man of his culpability. The general category of "mental health issues" is vast. Not every person with mental health issues is so far gone that they can't distinguish right from wrong. This guy had depression, and he was a narcissistic evil petty man. These are not mutually exclusive. I know people with depression that would never do such an evil thing.
 
Last edited:
PPC1052 said:
Depression does not absolve this man of his culpability. The general category of "mental health issues" is vast. Not every person with mental health issues is so far gone that they can't distinguish right from wrong. This guy had depression, and he was a narcissistic evil petty man. These are not mutually exclusive. I know people with depression that would never do such an evil thing.
Click to expand...

I agree with everything you said EXCEPT the evil part. What the man did was evil. Was the man himself evil? You may say so because of his actions, but unless you are a mental health professional, you are just projecting your opinions. Just like I am projecting my opinions.

The man may have in fact been evil, but with mental health issues, there is more to it than what meets the eye.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
The reason I keep bringing Denny up is that he is the real hero of United flight 232. Yes, Al Haynes was the Captain, but he was along for the ride.

Every time 232 is mentioned, and Denny is not, I will make that point.

You will now be returned to regularly scheduled programming.
Click to expand...
https://youtu.be/DRdAWtGKhY0 This illustrates the accident well. The air crash investigation videos are really interesting
 
Greg Bockelman said:
The reason I keep bringing Denny up is that he is the real hero of United flight 232. Yes, Al Haynes was the Captain, but he was along for the ride.

Every time 232 is mentioned, and Denny is not, I will make that point.

You will now be returned to regularly scheduled programming.
Click to expand...

Maybe you could just get a tee shirt made or something....:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top