Vision Jet autoland

Ted DuPuis said:
Now he knows another. I always monitor guard, unless too many idiots are going "Meow"
Click to expand...

Yeah should monitor guard. Could save your bacon one day when you are headed for that pop up TFR, unknown to you lost comms, or maybe just help a fellow pilot having a bad day out. Wish ATC would be more serious about triangulating that dang flying cat. Bugs the crap out of me. For pax listening in to ATC, they also seem to be pretty shocked at the behavior of some of the pro-pilots out there on guard.
 
It stops the plane on the runway? I didn't realize that. So in addition to autothrottles, the plane will also need autobrakes.

And the automated recording says. "wait for aircraft and propeller to stop before exiting the aircraft." Which means that it also can shut down the engine.
 
donjohnston said:
it also can shut down the engine.
Click to expand...

So it’s designed to automatically starve the engine?

Anybody find that worrisome? A combination of sensors and computer code that can, without any intent by the pilot, shut down the engine?
 
Sinistar said:
I don't know any pilots that listen to guard while flying.
Click to expand...
I do.
FDC 4/4386 FDC SPECIAL NOTICE... NATIONAL AIRSPACE SYSTEM INTERCEPT PROCEDURES. AVIATORS SHALL REVIEW THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION AERONAUTICAL INFORMATION MANUAL (AIM) FOR INTERCEPTION PROCEDURES, CHAPTER 5, SECTION 6, PARAGRAPH 5-6-2. ALL AIRCRAFT OPERATING IN UNITED STATES NATIONAL AIRSPACE, IF CAPABLE, SHALL MAINTAIN A LISTENING WATCH ON VHF GUARD 121.5 OR UHF 243.0.
 
NoHeat said:
So it’s designed to automatically starve the engine?

Anybody find that worrisome? A combination of sensors and computer code that can, without any intent by the pilot, shut down the engine?
Click to expand...

I would hope that circuitry is not functional until the button is pushed.
 
NoHeat said:
So it’s designed to automatically starve the engine?

Anybody find that worrisome? A combination of sensors and computer code that can, without any intent by the pilot, shut down the engine?
Click to expand...

That’s true of literally any FADEC controlled engine. That’s why FADECs use multiple independent lanes, a voting system between lanes, and redundant sensors for critical things like TLA and cutoff position sensing but fundamentally everything is always controlled by “a combination of sensors and computer code” in modern FADEC engines (and by modern I really mean designed in the 1980s and up...)
 
Last edited:
Speaking of autonomous landings...

49006655452_2d7108e1b2.jpg


Good thing nothing was stopped on the runway!
 
Is there a test mode? Or do you have to go the full routine including emergency calls in order to periodically verify the functionality?
 
FastEddieB said:
Well, now you can say you know one!

Seriously, it’s required by FDC NOTAM “when capable”. It’s not a bad idea, regardless.
Click to expand...
Yep, it gives that second radio something to do, and it rarely bothers you.
 
Bonchie said:
It’s an emergency landing with an incapacitated pilot. Perfect circumstances aren’t a requirement. If there’s a disabled plane on the runway then someone’s bad day ends up worse.

I’m guessing it doesn’t care what the weather minimums are. It’s just flying it into the ground in a controlled manner anyway.
Click to expand...
Yeah, Cat III in a box.
 
Bonchie said:
I’m guessing it doesn’t care what the weather minimums are. It’s just flying it into the ground in a controlled manner anyway.
Click to expand...

Exactly. If the weather is IMC, the passengers are even more helpless and less useful than before (and they’re likely pretty helpless and useless if they’re pressing this button) so better that the system prioritize wind,landing distance available, and emergency services available than minimums. Box doesn’t care if you can’t see the runway.

Note I mean helpless and useless here not as a pejorative but rather relating in the passengers ability to contribute to the situation.
 
AKiss20 said:
Exactly. If the weather is IMC, the passengers are even more helpless and less useful than before (and they’re likely pretty helpless and useless if they’re pressing this button) so better that the system prioritize wind,landing distance available, and emergency services available than minimums. Box doesn’t care if you can’t see the runway.

Note I mean helpless and useless here not as a pejorative but rather relating in the passengers ability to contribute to the situation.
Click to expand...

I don’t know if it’s been mentioned, but the Cirrus Jet also has an airframe parachute, so passengers have a second option if autoland is out of the question.
 
FastEddieB said:
I don’t know if it’s been mentioned, but the Cirrus Jet also has an airframe parachute, so passengers have a second option if autoland is out of the question.
Click to expand...
Yes it’s come up. Apparently if autoland is not possible for whatever reason, it will instruct passengers how to deploy CAPS.
 
Velocity173 said:
Cheap is subjective but I’d start around $10,000 and go up from there. We’ve got a Terra Radar Altimeter at work has and I think they’re maybe $10-12K new.
Click to expand...

jrcox19 said:
https://buy.garmin.com/en-US/US/p/166298
Click to expand...

So these are definitely easy to include in the price of the Vision and Meridian.

I was going to ask about the accuracy over water but the Garmin product indicates it even works over choppy water. Otherwise I could just see the auto land pick a runway with water on the arrival end and then receive a false altimeter return that indicates a false (higher) altitude and then attempt to come down farther.
 
Sinistar said:
So these are definitely easy to include in the price of the Vision and Meridian.

I was going to ask about the accuracy over water but the Garmin product indicates it even works over choppy water. Otherwise I could just see the auto land pick a runway with water on the arrival end and then receive a false altimeter return that indicates a false (higher) altitude and then attempt to come down farther.
Click to expand...

Yeah if I had the cash to buy an SF50, then I can afford the additional cost of the system. I read a rumor on FB of $130K. Sounds reasonable to me. Just the autopilot alone on our helicopter costs that much.

Never seen any issues over water. If you fly over an open field, it’ll pick up a single tree. How far the radar is going into the tree or into tall grass is probably negligible. Obviously in a turn they aren’t accurate either.
 
Last edited:
As soon as the automatic take off is operational will blind folks be able to fly.??
 
Zeldman said:
As soon as the automatic take off is operational will blind folks be able to fly.??
Click to expand...

Let’s face it, the technology for fully automated flight is already available. Unlike automated driving, we not only have the vehicle technology but also the airspace and procedural infrastructure. We’re just not willing to turn it all on and use it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
Bill Watson said:
Let’s face it, the technology for fully automated flight is already available. Unlike automated driving, we not only have the vehicle technology but also the airspace and procedural infrastructure. We’re just not willing to turn it all on and use it.
Click to expand...

Not really. We're a hell of a long way out from safe, autonomous passenger carrying ops in civil aviation. Your kids won't fly aboard fully automated airliners, but your grandkids (more likely their great grandkids) might.
 
Velocity173 said:
Yeah if I had the cash to buy an SF50, then I can afford the additional cost of the system.
Click to expand...

I think that’s poor reasoning.

There is always a threshold. There is someone out there for whom $2.1 million is an extravagance that with the right finagling they can just barely make work, but an extra $100k puts it just out of range. Stipulated that for the super-rich, it won’t matter. But for the merely rich, I still hold there’s a limit to their budgets, where corners may have to be cut to make it happen at all.
 
Ryan F. said:
Not really. We're a hell of a long way out from safe, autonomous passenger carrying ops in civil aviation. Your kids won't fly aboard fully automated airliners, but your grandkids (more likely their great grandkids) might.
Click to expand...
With those qualifiers, we aren’t there yet. But considering the standards we hold passenger carrying aircraft to and the safety records that have already been achieved, the bar is quite high for auto pass carry ops.

On the other hand, we are already doing autonomous aircraft ops by many measures.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
 
Will ATC be automated too?
 
Bill Watson said:
With those qualifiers, we aren’t there yet. But considering the standards we hold passenger carrying aircraft to and the safety records that have already been achieved, the bar is quite high for auto pass carry ops.

On the other hand, we are already doing autonomous aircraft ops by many measures.
Click to expand...

Yes. But those are drones. They won't be carrying passengers fully autonomously for many years. Let's not get carried away. We are not even close to autonomous civil aviation.
 
Bill Watson said:
Let’s face it, the technology for fully automated flight is already available. Unlike automated driving, we not only have the vehicle technology but also the airspace and procedural infrastructure. We’re just not willing to turn it all on and use it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Click to expand...
I think MCAS pushed that timeline back too a bit don’t you think?
 
Flocker said:
Good questions! Also,
What if there is a disabled aircraft on the runway? Deer on the runway??? Etc.
I assume it checks the METARs as part of the wx decision which could be an hour old.

Lots of questions...
Click to expand...


The possibilities are endless.

.

 
Ryan F. said:
Not really. We're a hell of a long way out from safe, autonomous passenger carrying ops in civil aviation. Your kids won't fly aboard fully automated airliners, but your grandkids (more likely their great grandkids) might.
Click to expand...

Haven't you heard? Uber will be operating a fleet of autonomous VTOL air taxis in the airspace over our largest cities by 2023.
 
Bill Watson said:
Let’s face it, the technology for fully automated flight is already available. Unlike automated driving, we not only have the vehicle technology but also the airspace and procedural infrastructure. We’re just not willing to turn it all on and use it.
Click to expand...
Because actually flying the plane is just one small piece of aviating, in the same way that steering a car is a small piece of driving. The autonomous car drivers haven't come close to solving the trolley problems in 2 dimensions. It's going to be a long time before they're solved for aviation.
 
Lindberg said:
The autonomous car drivers haven't come close to solving the trolley problems in 2 dimensions.
Click to expand...

In most accident avoidance situations, the driver’s actions are largely or totally reflexive. I don’t think there’s generally time to ponder and select between conflicting trolley problem scenarios. Not necessarily the case with autonomous driving systems with much faster processing capability.
 
Sinistar said:
So these are definitely easy to include in the price of the Vision and Meridian.

I was going to ask about the accuracy over water but the Garmin product indicates it even works over choppy water. Otherwise I could just see the auto land pick a runway with water on the arrival end and then receive a false altimeter return that indicates a false (higher) altitude and then attempt to come down farther.
Click to expand...
Hopefully they are integrating the GPS altitude as a check. It ain't perfect, but it's better than relying on a single instrument.
 
3393RP said:
Haven't you heard? Uber will be operating a fleet of autonomous VTOL air taxis in the airspace over our largest cities by 2023.
Click to expand...

Not holding my breath on that one...
 
Ryan F. said:
Yes. But those are drones. They won't be carrying passengers fully autonomously for many years. Let's not get carried away. We are not even close to autonomous civil aviation.
Click to expand...

Ryan, I agree with you. Read my original post; there is no mention of autonomous flight of passengers, just a statement that the technology is there and then some.

Put another way, the technology is not a significant barrier as it is with automated cars. Or put another way, automated flight is significantly easier which is why we have drones that can do it and accomplish real tasks. 3D space is easier to deal with (e.g. aircraft separation by altitude) Automated driving is tougher. Roads are busy and are only 2D. Lot’s of exceptional activity, etc.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
 
NealRomeoGolf said:
I think MCAS pushed that timeline back too a bit don’t you think?
Click to expand...

No I don’t and perhaps just the opposite. Boeing (and the industry) was both challenged by and dependent on flight crews in the cockpit. On one hand crews are expensive. OTOH, while crews can generally be relived on to flexibly and accurately respond to faults and failures, they have to be trained and kept proficient which goes back to being expensive.

The MCAS thing made that clear to everyone in the industry for whatever the half life of a large fatal aviation accident is. 10 - 20 - 30 years?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
 
FastEddieB said:
In most accident avoidance situations, the driver’s actions are largely or totally reflexive. I don’t think there’s generally time to ponder and select between conflicting trolley problem scenarios. Not necessarily the case with autonomous driving systems with much faster processing capability.
Click to expand...
That's precisely the problem though, isn't it? Computers don't encounter moral dilemmas. They just do as they're programmed to.

It's paradoxical.
 
Last edited:
I thought this was interesting, from AOPA:
The system even forecasts its own weather if the nearest suitable runway is a significant distance away, long enough that the current ADS-B or SiriusXM weather may not be valid. It uses the latest weather trend information, for example, to determine if a thunderstorm might move into the runway environment where it intends to land.
Click to expand...
 
Lindberg said:
That's precisely the problem though, isn't it? Computers don't encounter moral dilemmas. They just do as they're programmed to.

It's paradoxical.
Click to expand...
I want my airplane programmed to get my passengers and me safely to the ground. If a nice soft group of senior soccer players are in the way, it wasn't my choice.
 
Bill Jennings said:
Yes, I would assume the software is designed to be broadcasting on CTAF as well as the other frequencies. This whole thing is interesting. Autonomous flying seems to be an easier nut to crack than autonomous cars.
Click to expand...
There's a lot less to hit on the way to the garage/hanger, which is really the only thing holding back autonomous cars at this point.
 
The-Flying-Lawyer said:
There's a lot less to hit on the way to the garage/hanger, which is really the only thing holding back autonomous cars at this point.
Click to expand...

I’ve wondered whether the toughest task in auto flight given our current airspace infrastructure would be taxiing. Taxi is where non-manned aircraft would have to mix it up most closely with manned aircraft. Perhaps the portion of ‘flight’ where there is the most risk of swapping paint.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
 
Not if there is a relative size and positioning signal emanating from the airplane. That way another aircraft would be able to "see" a plane and "know" where it is, and how big it is, so as not to hit it. Basically it identifies the plane, or other objects, tracks it real time, and stays out of its way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top