Southwest Airlines vs. Pilots

 

Southwest Airlines pilots apparently have been “sicking out” in response to news that if they are not vaccinated, then the airline will fire them to conform to Biden’s Executive Orders. The airline has insisted that the pilots are not striking. The union (covering its rear) also insists that they are not striking.

Governor Abbott gave the airline an “out” — and a big one. He declared that vaccine mandates are not legal for Texas corporations. It looked like the situation was saved – hurrah!

But… The idiotic management at Southwest decided that since Southwest (like all US airlines) is a federal contractor, the Texas “out” does not apply. So the vaccinate-or-be-fired ultimatum remains. The pilots, who were relieved, are now back threatening action.

The Southwest pilots provide a great opportunity to defeat the Federal Government. How can the rest of us support it?

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 67 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Percival (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    Mark Camp (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    GLDIII Purveyor of Splendid Ma… (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    With what’s been going on with self-driving cars, why is there no talk of self-flying airplanes?

    The not so dirty little secret is that they already are, most pilots pop on the Flight Director (a big step up from your garden variety auto pilot) as soon as they clear the runway on take off. The systems are now capable of landing planes as well, and have been offered as an option on some GA aircraft as a safety feature for the “dead pilot” fear some passengers feel with single pilot operations. The biggest duty for pilots is the FAA required communications and taxiing the plane to & from the runway.

    I fly a lot both in my GA planes and commercially, and I have gotten so attuned to the plane’s control that I can tell when the guys up front are doing their currency hours on departure and especially on approach. Flight directors are much smoother than the “minute corrections” that is a “feature” of humans in the control loop.

    EDIT: Of course I should have read others comments before I posted.

    The biggest problem with the MCAS was that not only did the flight crew not know how to disengage it, they might not even have known that there was anything to disengage.

    I guess you think, “Gosh, I hope they finish their currency hours pretty quick…these guys really don’t remember how to fly very well anymore!”

    MCAS was taking over control of the plane based on the output of a failed airspeed sensor. A single failed airspeed sensor. There wasn’t a big red button anywhere labelled “Give me back my plane.”

    They put one in, though.

    There was a post not too long ago, I’ve been unable to find it, that discussed a few “auto-pilot” incidents including one in which the ship navigator etc believed a SatNav system even though it wasn’t working properly, because the indication of that problem was a little thing that said “DR” (for Dead Reckoning) that was small, not flashing or a different color…

    We wanted one that was big and red and flashing. It was also referred to as the YOYO light: You’re On Your Own.

    Something like:

     

    • #31
  2. Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patriot) Member
    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patriot)
    @ArizonaPatriot

    Mark Camp (View Comment):

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    I have not evaluated the legality of the federal vaccine mandate is question.

    If it is legal, and has the force of federal law, then Texas law cannot invalidate it, under the Supremacy Clause.

    Jerry, is this right?:

    1. The USG can appeal the Texas law, probably pushing it to the Supreme Court for a decision. Nothing too shocking there. That is how the system has always worked.
    2. Texas can nullify the US law.
      1. According to one ancient argument, well-known to all lawyers and supported by precedents, nullification is illegal.
      2. According to the other ancient argument, well-known to all lawyers, and supported by a few other precedents, nullification is not illegal.
      3. According to well-established constitutional legal doctrines, it is illegal. Or maybe, legal.

    Like most ordinary, non-Lawyer Americans, I strongly support the doctrine of Nullification in cases of clear violation of States’ rights, and am strongly opposed went it’s just people with bad ideas resisting the proper use of Federal power.

    If on any given issue, it is not clear to someone which rule applies, just post your question on Ricochet and I will give you the correct opinion.

    Mark, I can’t claim any special expertise on nullification.  I don’t think that there’s any good precedent for nullification.  Here’s what I recall.

    There were the Alien and Sedition Acts, and the objections stated in the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions.  There was a nullification controversy during the Jackson administration, in which South Carolina claimed the right to nullify a federal tariff.  In the latter case, South Carolina backed down when Jackson made it clear that he was not going to tolerate this action.  Wisely in my view, SC decided not to tangle with Old Hickory.  Though Henry Clay worked out a legislative compromise that addressed some of SC’s objections.

    Of course, there was the Civil War, which is not exactly a legal precedent.  It was settled by force of arms.  I do not consider it to have settled the question of secession permanently, but it’s not really a legal question.

    I should make something clear.  If a state blocks enforcement of an invalid federal law, then this isn’t really nullification by state action.  Such a law is a nullity in any event, whether a state objects or not.  However, under the Constitution and in a judicial case, the validity of a federal law is a question of federal law, and therefore within the ultimate jurisdiction of SCOTUS.  The Supremacy Clause would require a state to defer to such a judicial determination by SCOTUS.  The states would have political alternatives, of course, by seeking legislative changes in Congress or executive action by the President.

    • #32
  3. David Foster Member
    David Foster
    @DavidFoster

    kedavis (View Comment):
    There was a post not too long ago, I’ve been unable to find it, that discussed a few “auto-pilot” incidents including one in which the ship navigator etc believed a SatNav system even though it wasn’t working properly, because the indication of that problem was a little thing that said “DR” (for Dead Reckoning) that was small, not flashing or a different color…

    That would probably be my post ‘You Better Go to Raw Data’

    • #33
  4. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    David Foster (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):
    There was a post not too long ago, I’ve been unable to find it, that discussed a few “auto-pilot” incidents including one in which the ship navigator etc believed a SatNav system even though it wasn’t working properly, because the indication of that problem was a little thing that said “DR” (for Dead Reckoning) that was small, not flashing or a different color…

    That would probably be my post ‘You Better Go to Raw Data’

    Yes that was it, I tried to find it in the (mostly useless) “search” feature but had no luck.

    • #34
  5. GLDIII Purveyor of Splendid Malpropisms Reagan
    GLDIII Purveyor of Splendid Malpropisms
    @GLDIII

    Mark Camp (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    GLDIII Purveyor of Splendid Ma… (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    With what’s been going on with self-driving cars, why is there no talk of self-flying airplanes?

    The not so dirty little secret is that they already are, most pilots pop on the Flight Director (a big step up from your garden variety auto pilot) as soon as they clear the runway on take off. The systems are now capable of landing planes as well, and have been offered as an option on some GA aircraft as a safety feature for the “dead pilot” fear some passengers feel with single pilot operations. The biggest duty for pilots is the FAA required communications and taxiing the plane to & from the runway.

    I fly a lot both in my GA planes and commercially, and I have gotten so attuned to the plane’s control that I can tell when the guys up front are doing their currency hours on departure and especially on approach. Flight directors are much smoother than the “minute corrections” that is a “feature” of humans in the control loop.

    EDIT: Of course I should have read others comments before I posted.

    The biggest problem with the MCAS was that not only did the flight crew not know how to disengage it, they might not even have known that there was anything to disengage.

    I guess you think, “Gosh, I hope they finish their currency hours pretty quick…these guys really don’t remember how to fly very well anymore!”

    Fortunately it is subtle, it required a “trained butt” to recognized the hunting for the glide slope needles (for those planes so equipped, some newer planes now have little display of boxes on the EFIS to “fly thru” to do approaches). The important reason to have those guys is when either the flight systems start failing, or something unforeseen by the designers occurs (like ingesting a whole flock of birds, toasting two finely operating GE turbines, and you have just moments to decide who’s day you are going to ruin). 

    • #35
  6. GLDIII Purveyor of Splendid Malpropisms Reagan
    GLDIII Purveyor of Splendid Malpropisms
    @GLDIII

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    Mark Camp (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    GLDIII Purveyor of Splendid Ma… (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    With what’s been going on with self-driving cars, why is there no talk of self-flying airplanes?

    The not so dirty little secret is that they already are, most pilots pop on the Flight Director (a big step up from your garden variety auto pilot) as soon as they clear the runway on take off. The systems are now capable of landing planes as well, and have been offered as an option on some GA aircraft as a safety feature for the “dead pilot” fear some passengers feel with single pilot operations. The biggest duty for pilots is the FAA required communications and taxiing the plane to & from the runway.

    I fly a lot both in my GA planes and commercially, and I have gotten so attuned to the plane’s control that I can tell when the guys up front are doing their currency hours on departure and especially on approach. Flight directors are much smoother than the “minute corrections” that is a “feature” of humans in the control loop.

    EDIT: Of course I should have read others comments before I posted.

    The biggest problem with the MCAS was that not only did the flight crew not know how to disengage it, they might not even have known that there was anything to disengage.

    I guess you think, “Gosh, I hope they finish their currency hours pretty quick…these guys really don’t remember how to fly very well anymore!”

    MCAS was taking over control of the plane based on the output of a failed airspeed sensor. A single failed airspeed sensor. There wasn’t a big red button anywhere labelled “Give me back my plane.”

    They put one in, though.

    More importantly they changed the pilot training so the folks up front know what the system does and how to turn it off when needed. Boeing was guilty of trying to sell the 737 MAX as just a “minor” mod/upgrade to avoid making the airlines spend a fortune on re certifying their pilots, which is a not so trivial cost bucket.

    The new engines on the MAX were sufficiently bigger in diameter that they had to move them forward and up wards on the wings, this changed the plane’s CG, and they thought they could get cute and just fold it into the planes operating software (MCAS) for the few instances where it mattered (ie takeoff, w/full fuel). Everyone want the 4 to 6% fuel savings of the new engines (which typically don’t require a full recertification), but Boeing management did not want to acknowledge they change the plane enough for a required full recertification, and all the associate costs.

    Well they certainly lost money on that decision. Physics is a harsh mistress.

    • #36
  7. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    Mark Camp (View Comment):

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    I have not evaluated the legality of the federal vaccine mandate is question.

    If it is legal, and has the force of federal law, then Texas law cannot invalidate it, under the Supremacy Clause.

    Jerry, is this right?:

    1. The USG can appeal the Texas law, probably pushing it to the Supreme Court for a decision. Nothing too shocking there. That is how the system has always worked.
    2. Texas can nullify the US law.
      1. According to one ancient argument, well-known to all lawyers and supported by precedents, nullification is illegal.
      2. According to the other ancient argument, well-known to all lawyers, and supported by a few other precedents, nullification is not illegal.
      3. According to well-established constitutional legal doctrines, it is illegal. Or maybe, legal.

    Like most ordinary, non-Lawyer Americans, I strongly support the doctrine of Nullification in cases of clear violation of States’ rights, and am strongly opposed went it’s just people with bad ideas resisting the proper use of Federal power.

    If on any given issue, it is not clear to someone which rule applies, just post your question on Ricochet and I will give you the correct opinion.

    Mark, I can’t claim any special expertise on nullification. I don’t think that there’s any good precedent for nullification. Here’s what I recall.

    There were the Alien and Sedition Acts, and the objections stated in the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions. There was a nullification controversy during the Jackson administration, in which South Carolina claimed the right to nullify a federal tariff. In the latter case, South Carolina backed down when Jackson made it clear that he was not going to tolerate this action. Wisely in my view, SC decided not to tangle with Old Hickory. Though Henry Clay worked out a legislative compromise that addressed some of SC’s objections.

    Of course, there was the Civil War, which is not exactly a legal precedent. It was settled by force of arms. I do not consider it to have settled the question of secession permanently, but it’s not really a legal question.

    I should make something clear. If a state blocks enforcement of an invalid federal law, then this isn’t really nullification by state action. Such a law is a nullity in any event, whether a state objects or not. However, under the Constitution and in a judicial case, the validity of a federal law is a question of federal law, and therefore within the ultimate jurisdiction of SCOTUS. The Supremacy Clause would require a state to defer to such a judicial determination by SCOTUS. The states would have political alternatives, of course, by seeking legislative changes in Congress or executive action by the President.

    From what I understand a law is both valid and a nullity at the same time until the Supreme Court opens the brief and looks in side it.

    • #37
  8. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Flicker (View Comment):
    From what I understand a law is both valid and a nullity at the same time until the Supreme Court opens the brief and looks in side it.

    Schrodinger’s Supreme Court.

    • #38
  9. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    GLDIII Purveyor of Splendid Ma… (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    Mark Camp (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    GLDIII Purveyor of Splendid Ma… (V

    The not so dirty little secret is that they already are, most pilots pop on the Flight Director (a big step up from your garden variety auto pilot) as soon as they clear the runway on take off. The systems are now capable of landing planes as well, and have been offered as an option on some GA aircraft as a safety feature for the “dead pilot” fear some passengers feel with single pilot operations. The biggest duty for pilots is the FAA required communications and taxiing the plane to & from the runway.

    I fly a lot both in my GA planes and commercially, and I have gotten so attuned to the plane’s control that I can tell when the guys up front are doing their currency hours on departure and especially on approach. Flight directors are much smoother than the “minute corrections” that is a “feature” of humans in the control loop.

    EDIT: Of course I should have read others comments before I posted.

    The biggest problem with the MCAS was that not only did the flight crew not know how to disengage it, they might not even have known that there was anything to disengage.

    I guess you think, “Gosh, I hope they finish their currency hours pretty quick…these guys really don’t remember how to fly very well anymore!”

    MCAS was taking over control of the plane based on the output of a failed airspeed sensor. A single failed airspeed sensor. There wasn’t a big red button anywhere labelled “Give me back my plane.”

    They put one in, though.

    More importantly they changed the pilot training so the folks up front know what the system does and how to turn it off when needed. Boeing was guilty of trying to sell the 737 MAX as just a “minor” mod/upgrade to avoid making the airlines spend a fortune on re certifying their pilots, which is a not so trivial cost bucket.

    The new engines on the MAX were sufficiently bigger in diameter that they had to move them forward and up wards on the wings, this changed the plane’s CG, and they thought they could get cute and just fold it into the planes operating software (MCAS) for the few instances where it mattered (ie takeoff, w/full fuel). Everyone want the 4 to 6% fuel savings of the new engines (which typically don’t require a full recertification), but Boeing management did not want to acknowledge they change the plane enough for a required full recertification, and all the associate costs.

    Well they certainly lost money on that decision. Physics is a harsh mistress.

    Yes.  And I read once that they actually put in a lighted switch or rather relabeled an existing light, I think on the center console (or perhaps under the yoke).

    • #39
  10. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Flicker (View Comment):
    Yes.  And I read once that they actually put in a lighted switch or rather relabeled an existing light, I think on the center console (or perhaps under the yoke).

    That’s what Khan needed:

     

    • #40
  11. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    GLDIII Purveyor of Splendid Ma… (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    Mark Camp (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    GLDIII Purveyor of Splendid Ma… (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    With what’s been going on with self-driving cars, why is there no talk of self-flying airplanes?

    The not so dirty little secret is that they already are, most pilots pop on the Flight Director (a big step up from your garden variety auto pilot) as soon as they clear the runway on take off. The systems are now capable of landing planes as well, and have been offered as an option on some GA aircraft as a safety feature for the “dead pilot” fear some passengers feel with single pilot operations. The biggest duty for pilots is the FAA required communications and taxiing the plane to & from the runway.

    I fly a lot both in my GA planes and commercially, and I have gotten so attuned to the plane’s control that I can tell when the guys up front are doing their currency hours on departure and especially on approach. Flight directors are much smoother than the “minute corrections” that is a “feature” of humans in the control loop.

    EDIT: Of course I should have read others comments before I posted.

    The biggest problem with the MCAS was that not only did the flight crew not know how to disengage it, they might not even have known that there was anything to disengage.

    I guess you think, “Gosh, I hope they finish their currency hours pretty quick…these guys really don’t remember how to fly very well anymore!”

    MCAS was taking over control of the plane based on the output of a failed airspeed sensor. A single failed airspeed sensor. There wasn’t a big red button anywhere labelled “Give me back my plane.”

    They put one in, though.

    More importantly they changed the pilot training so the folks up front know what the system does and how to turn it off when needed. Boeing was guilty of trying to sell the 737 MAX as just a “minor” mod/upgrade to avoid making the airlines spend a fortune on re certifying their pilots, which is a not so trivial cost bucket.

    The new engines on the MAX were sufficiently bigger in diameter that they had to move them forward and up wards on the wings, this changed the plane’s CG, and they thought they could get cute and just fold it into the planes operating software (MCAS) for the few instances where it mattered (ie takeoff, w/full fuel). Everyone want the 4 to 6% fuel savings of the new engines (which typically don’t require a full recertification), but Boeing management did not want to acknowledge they change the plane enough for a required full recertification, and all the associate costs.

    Well they certainly lost money on that decision. Physics is a harsh mistress.

    You did a better job with that than I could have.

    In addition to the change in the CG, the 737 MAX has two Angle of Attack (AoA) sensors. These are usually little wind vanes that deflect based on the amount of air moving past them. They generally work pretty good, but being exposed to the outside, they can get dinged. They can fail. Because they can fail, the aircraft usually has two of them. The 737 MAX had two of them. It was only using the output from one of the two, and that one failed in such a way that it thought the AoA was 20° higher than it actually was. So the MCAS tried to bring the nose down. 

    • #41
  12. The Cloaked Gaijin Member
    The Cloaked Gaijin
    @TheCloakedGaijin

    Of course, John Podhoretz and fanatical-at-all-cost pro-vaccine Commentary podcast are enraged at Governor Abbott…

    • #42
  13. Stad Coolidge
    Stad
    @Stad

    Dr. Bastiat (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    With what’s been going on with self-driving cars, why is there no talk of self-flying airplanes?

    My friend was a pilot for United Airlines. They told him not to touch the controls – it was more efficient if the plane flew itself. He was only there in case something went wrong. He eventually retired early, because he said he was getting rusty – he rarely flew a plane anymore, and he was worried that his skills were deteriorating to the point that he might have difficulty jumping in if something did go wrong…

    I can understand with the autopilot, going from A to B is easier to manage.  But there are significantly more variables on takeoffs and landings such that I wouldn’t feel comfortable as a passenger, much less a pilot, if the plane were allowed to fly the entire route by itself.

    • #43
  14. Stad Coolidge
    Stad
    @Stad

    Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… (View Comment):

    I have not evaluated the legality of the federal vaccine mandate is question.

    If it is legal, and has the force of federal law, then Texas law cannot invalidate it, under the Supremacy Clause.

    ” [Justice] John Marshall has made his decision. Now let him enforce it.”  President Andrew Jackson

    • #44
  15. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Stad (View Comment):

    Dr. Bastiat (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    With what’s been going on with self-driving cars, why is there no talk of self-flying airplanes?

    My friend was a pilot for United Airlines. They told him not to touch the controls – it was more efficient if the plane flew itself. He was only there in case something went wrong. He eventually retired early, because he said he was getting rusty – he rarely flew a plane anymore, and he was worried that his skills were deteriorating to the point that he might have difficulty jumping in if something did go wrong…

    I can understand with the autopilot, going from A to B is easier to manage. But there are significantly more variables on takeoffs and landings such that I wouldn’t feel comfortable as a passenger, much less a pilot, if the plane were allowed to fly the entire route by itself.

    Can an autopilot see the extent of flames on engine number 2?  Or does it not need to?

    • #45
  16. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    Dr. Bastiat (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    With what’s been going on with self-driving cars, why is there no talk of self-flying airplanes?

    My friend was a pilot for United Airlines. They told him not to touch the controls – it was more efficient if the plane flew itself. He was only there in case something went wrong. He eventually retired early, because he said he was getting rusty – he rarely flew a plane anymore, and he was worried that his skills were deteriorating to the point that he might have difficulty jumping in if something did go wrong…

    I can understand with the autopilot, going from A to B is easier to manage. But there are significantly more variables on takeoffs and landings such that I wouldn’t feel comfortable as a passenger, much less a pilot, if the plane were allowed to fly the entire route by itself.

    Can an autopilot see the extent of flames on engine number 2? Or does it not need to?

    It’ll have temperature sensors that ought to let both the system and the cockpit know.

    • #46
  17. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Percival (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    Dr. Bastiat (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    With what’s been going on with self-driving cars, why is there no talk of self-flying airplanes?

    My friend was a pilot for United Airlines. They told him not to touch the controls – it was more efficient if the plane flew itself. He was only there in case something went wrong. He eventually retired early, because he said he was getting rusty – he rarely flew a plane anymore, and he was worried that his skills were deteriorating to the point that he might have difficulty jumping in if something did go wrong…

    I can understand with the autopilot, going from A to B is easier to manage. But there are significantly more variables on takeoffs and landings such that I wouldn’t feel comfortable as a passenger, much less a pilot, if the plane were allowed to fly the entire route by itself.

    Can an autopilot see the extent of flames on engine number 2? Or does it not need to?

    It’ll have temperature sensors that ought to let both the system and the cockpit know.

    But I mean when no one’s in the cockpit.  Can any, does any, auto=pilot handle a duck sucked into the engine on take-off, or over the ocean?  Or an even less-expected event?

    I know that military jets can avoid a collision with the ground if a pilot blacks out, but can one navigate back to the airfield and land on it’s own?

    I just want to know the state of the art.

    • #47
  18. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    Dr. Bastiat (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    With what’s been going on with self-driving cars, why is there no talk of self-flying airplanes?

    My friend was a pilot for United Airlines. They told him not to touch the controls – it was more efficient if the plane flew itself. He was only there in case something went wrong. He eventually retired early, because he said he was getting rusty – he rarely flew a plane anymore, and he was worried that his skills were deteriorating to the point that he might have difficulty jumping in if something did go wrong…

    I can understand with the autopilot, going from A to B is easier to manage. But there are significantly more variables on takeoffs and landings such that I wouldn’t feel comfortable as a passenger, much less a pilot, if the plane were allowed to fly the entire route by itself.

    Can an autopilot see the extent of flames on engine number 2? Or does it not need to?

    It’ll have temperature sensors that ought to let both the system and the cockpit know.

    But I mean when no one’s in the cockpit. Can any, does any, auto=pilot handle a duck sucked into the engine on take-off, or over the ocean? Or an even less-expected event?

    I know that military jets can avoid a collision with the ground if a pilot blacks out, but can one navigate back to the airfield and land on it’s own?

    I just want to know the state of the art.

    Generally, no.

    • #48
  19. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Percival (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    Dr. Bastiat (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    With what’s been going on with self-driving cars, why is there no talk of self-flying airplanes?

    My friend was a pilot for United Airlines. They told him not to touch the controls – it was more efficient if the plane flew itself. He was only there in case something went wrong. He eventually retired early, because he said he was getting rusty – he rarely flew a plane anymore, and he was worried that his skills were deteriorating to the point that he might have difficulty jumping in if something did go wrong…

    I can understand with the autopilot, going from A to B is easier to manage. But there are significantly more variables on takeoffs and landings such that I wouldn’t feel comfortable as a passenger, much less a pilot, if the plane were allowed to fly the entire route by itself.

    Can an autopilot see the extent of flames on engine number 2? Or does it not need to?

    It’ll have temperature sensors that ought to let both the system and the cockpit know.

    But I mean when no one’s in the cockpit. Can any, does any, auto=pilot handle a duck sucked into the engine on take-off, or over the ocean? Or an even less-expected event?

    I know that military jets can avoid a collision with the ground if a pilot blacks out, but can one navigate back to the airfield and land on it’s own?

    I just want to know the state of the art.

    Generally, no.

    Sounds like they can do without licensed pilots about as well as self-driving cars can do without licensed drivers.

    • #49
  20. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    Dr. Bastiat (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    With what’s been going on with self-driving cars, why is there no talk of self-flying airplanes?

    My friend was a pilot for United Airlines. They told him not to touch the controls – it was more efficient if the plane flew itself. He was only there in case something went wrong. He eventually retired early, because he said he was getting rusty – he rarely flew a plane anymore, and he was worried that his skills were deteriorating to the point that he might have difficulty jumping in if something did go wrong…

    I can understand with the autopilot, going from A to B is easier to manage. But there are significantly more variables on takeoffs and landings such that I wouldn’t feel comfortable as a passenger, much less a pilot, if the plane were allowed to fly the entire route by itself.

    Can an autopilot see the extent of flames on engine number 2? Or does it not need to?

    It’ll have temperature sensors that ought to let both the system and the cockpit know.

    But I mean when no one’s in the cockpit. Can any, does any, auto=pilot handle a duck sucked into the engine on take-off, or over the ocean? Or an even less-expected event?

    I know that military jets can avoid a collision with the ground if a pilot blacks out, but can one navigate back to the airfield and land on it’s own?

    I just want to know the state of the art.

    Generally, no.

    Sounds like they can do without licensed pilots about as well as self-driving cars can do without licensed drivers.

    You get things out of a pilot that no autopilot can ever give you. Intuition. Judgement.

    • #50
  21. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Percival (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    Dr. Bastiat (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    With what’s been going on with self-driving cars, why is there no talk of self-flying airplanes?

    My friend was a pilot for United Airlines. They told him not to touch the controls – it was more efficient if the plane flew itself. He was only there in case something went wrong. He eventually retired early, because he said he was getting rusty – he rarely flew a plane anymore, and he was worried that his skills were deteriorating to the point that he might have difficulty jumping in if something did go wrong…

    I can understand with the autopilot, going from A to B is easier to manage. But there are significantly more variables on takeoffs and landings such that I wouldn’t feel comfortable as a passenger, much less a pilot, if the plane were allowed to fly the entire route by itself.

    Can an autopilot see the extent of flames on engine number 2? Or does it not need to?

    It’ll have temperature sensors that ought to let both the system and the cockpit know.

    But I mean when no one’s in the cockpit. Can any, does any, auto=pilot handle a duck sucked into the engine on take-off, or over the ocean? Or an even less-expected event?

    I know that military jets can avoid a collision with the ground if a pilot blacks out, but can one navigate back to the airfield and land on it’s own?

    I just want to know the state of the art.

    Generally, no.

    Sounds like they can do without licensed pilots about as well as self-driving cars can do without licensed drivers.

    You get things out of a pilot that no autopilot can ever give you. Intuition. Judgement.

    Same with a human driver rather than Google Driver or whatever.

    • #51
  22. GLDIII Purveyor of Splendid Malpropisms Reagan
    GLDIII Purveyor of Splendid Malpropisms
    @GLDIII

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    Dr. Bastiat (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    With what’s been going on with self-driving cars, why is there no talk of self-flying airplanes?

    My friend was a pilot for United Airlines. They told him not to touch the controls – it was more efficient if the plane flew itself. He was only there in case something went wrong. He eventually retired early, because he said he was getting rusty – he rarely flew a plane anymore, and he was worried that his skills were deteriorating to the point that he might have difficulty jumping in if something did go wrong…

    I can understand with the autopilot, going from A to B is easier to manage. But there are significantly more variables on takeoffs and landings such that I wouldn’t feel comfortable as a passenger, much less a pilot, if the plane were allowed to fly the entire route by itself.

    Can an autopilot see the extent of flames on engine number 2? Or does it not need to?

    A lot of the newer airframes that are passenger/commercial now have engines (GE, Rolls Royce, Pratt & Whitey) that are in near communications with ground (typically data logging to the engine’s manufacturer) on the status and performance of the engine. It has become the way they track required maintenance and inspections based on how the engine is being operated.

    I suspect that certain parameters became immediate attention getters with a requisite call to the flight crew. 

    • #52
  23. GLDIII Purveyor of Splendid Malpropisms Reagan
    GLDIII Purveyor of Splendid Malpropisms
    @GLDIII

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    Dr. Bastiat (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    With what’s been going on with self-driving cars, why is there no talk of self-flying airplanes?

    My friend was a pilot for United Airlines. They told him not to touch the controls – it was more efficient if the plane flew itself. He was only there in case something went wrong. He eventually retired early, because he said he was getting rusty – he rarely flew a plane anymore, and he was worried that his skills were deteriorating to the point that he might have difficulty jumping in if something did go wrong…

    I can understand with the autopilot, going from A to B is easier to manage. But there are significantly more variables on takeoffs and landings such that I wouldn’t feel comfortable as a passenger, much less a pilot, if the plane were allowed to fly the entire route by itself.

    Can an autopilot see the extent of flames on engine number 2? Or does it not need to?

    It’ll have temperature sensors that ought to let both the system and the cockpit know.

    But I mean when no one’s in the cockpit. Can any, does any, auto=pilot handle a duck sucked into the engine on take-off, or over the ocean? Or an even less-expected event?

    I know that military jets can avoid a collision with the ground if a pilot blacks out, but can one navigate back to the airfield and land on it’s own?

    I just want to know the state of the art.

    A Flight Director in commercial, and some GA aircraft, have the ability to track a preplanned course from departure to arrival and it controls the course, attitude, altitude, fuel management, and throttles. I don’t think they have the smarts yet for abnormal occurrences (ie sucking a duck), nor am I sure how they handle a go around scenario beyond the pilot punching the missed approach button, and it takes the plane to the correct holding location for the approach that was just missed. Some are sufficiently sophisticated to land a plane hands off. This is a feature the Garmin flight systems just introduced to about a dozen GA aircraft this last year.

    • #53
  24. GLDIII Purveyor of Splendid Malpropisms Reagan
    GLDIII Purveyor of Splendid Malpropisms
    @GLDIII

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    Dr. Bastiat (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    With what’s been going on with self-driving cars, why is there no talk of self-flying airplanes?

    My friend was a pilot for United Airlines. They told him not to touch the controls – it was more efficient if the plane flew itself. He was only there in case something went wrong. He eventually retired early, because he said he was getting rusty – he rarely flew a plane anymore, and he was worried that his skills were deteriorating to the point that he might have difficulty jumping in if something did go wrong…

    I can understand with the autopilot, going from A to B is easier to manage. But there are significantly more variables on takeoffs and landings such that I wouldn’t feel comfortable as a passenger, much less a pilot, if the plane were allowed to fly the entire route by itself.

    Can an autopilot see the extent of flames on engine number 2? Or does it not need to?

    It’ll have temperature sensors that ought to let both the system and the cockpit know.

    But I mean when no one’s in the cockpit. Can any, does any, auto=pilot handle a duck sucked into the engine on take-off, or over the ocean? Or an even less-expected event?

    I know that military jets can avoid a collision with the ground if a pilot blacks out, but can one navigate back to the airfield and land on it’s own?

    I just want to know the state of the art.

    Generally, no.

    Sounds like they can do without licensed pilots about as well as self-driving cars can do without licensed drivers.

    Essentially correct, but there is far less things too bump into at altitude. We call it the big sky safety check.

    • #54
  25. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    GLDIII Purveyor of Splendid Ma… (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    Dr. Bastiat (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    With what’s been going on with self-driving cars, why is there no talk of self-flying airplanes?

    My friend was a pilot for United Airlines. They told him not to touch the controls – it was more efficient if the plane flew itself. He was only there in case something went wrong. He eventually retired early, because he said he was getting rusty – he rarely flew a plane anymore, and he was worried that his skills were deteriorating to the point that he might have difficulty jumping in if something did go wrong…

    I can understand with the autopilot, going from A to B is easier to manage. But there are significantly more variables on takeoffs and landings such that I wouldn’t feel comfortable as a passenger, much less a pilot, if the plane were allowed to fly the entire route by itself.

    Can an autopilot see the extent of flames on engine number 2? Or does it not need to?

    A lot of the newer airframes that are passenger/commercial now have engines (GE, Rolls Royce, Pratt & Whitey) that are in near communications with ground (typically data logging to the engine’s manufacturer) on the status and performance of the engine. It has become the way they track required maintenance and inspections based on how the engine is being operated.

    I suspect that certain parameters became immediate attention getters with a requisite call to the flight crew.

    ACARS (Aircraft Communications, Reporting, and Addressing System. Yeah, the acronym is out of order. I blame the French.) I haven’t worked directly with it, but from what I have read it sends information on where to look in the Flight Data Recorder for potential problems. FDRs hoover all that data up. Satellite comm can get pretty expensive pretty quick. It will also log position information periodically, which will prevent situations like Malaysian Air Flight 370.

    • #55
  26. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    GLDIII Purveyor of Splendid Ma… (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    Dr. Bastiat (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    With what’s been going on with self-driving cars, why is there no talk of self-flying airplanes?

    My friend was a pilot for United Airlines. They told him not to touch the controls – it was more efficient if the plane flew itself. He was only there in case something went wrong. He eventually retired early, because he said he was getting rusty – he rarely flew a plane anymore, and he was worried that his skills were deteriorating to the point that he might have difficulty jumping in if something did go wrong…

    I can understand with the autopilot, going from A to B is easier to manage. But there are significantly more variables on takeoffs and landings such that I wouldn’t feel comfortable as a passenger, much less a pilot, if the plane were allowed to fly the entire route by itself.

    Can an autopilot see the extent of flames on engine number 2? Or does it not need to?

    It’ll have temperature sensors that ought to let both the system and the cockpit know.

    But I mean when no one’s in the cockpit. Can any, does any, auto=pilot handle a duck sucked into the engine on take-off, or over the ocean? Or an even less-expected event?

    I know that military jets can avoid a collision with the ground if a pilot blacks out, but can one navigate back to the airfield and land on it’s own?

    I just want to know the state of the art.

    A Flight Director in commercial, and some GA aircraft, have the ability to track a preplanned course from departure to arrival and it controls the course, attitude, altitude, fuel management, and throttles. I don’t think they have the smarts yet for abnormal occurrences (ie sucking a duck), nor am I sure how they handle a go around scenario beyond the pilot punching the missed approach button, and it takes the plane to the correct holding location for the approach that was just missed. Some are sufficiently sophisticated to land a plane hands off. This is a feature the Garmin flight systems just introduced to about a dozen GA aircraft this last year.

    FlightAware lets you track most traffic now. I used it to track a PiTizen’s progress across the Atlantic not too long ago. (Now that’s stalking.)

    • #56
  27. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    GLDIII Purveyor of Splendid Ma… (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    Dr. Bastiat (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    With what’s been going on with self-driving cars, why is there no talk of self-flying airplanes?

    My friend was a pilot for United Airlines. They told him not to touch the controls – it was more efficient if the plane flew itself. He was only there in case something went wrong. He eventually retired early, because he said he was getting rusty – he rarely flew a plane anymore, and he was worried that his skills were deteriorating to the point that he might have difficulty jumping in if something did go wrong…

    I can understand with the autopilot, going from A to B is easier to manage. But there are significantly more variables on takeoffs and landings such that I wouldn’t feel comfortable as a passenger, much less a pilot, if the plane were allowed to fly the entire route by itself.

    Can an autopilot see the extent of flames on engine number 2? Or does it not need to?

    It’ll have temperature sensors that ought to let both the system and the cockpit know.

    But I mean when no one’s in the cockpit. Can any, does any, auto=pilot handle a duck sucked into the engine on take-off, or over the ocean? Or an even less-expected event?

    I know that military jets can avoid a collision with the ground if a pilot blacks out, but can one navigate back to the airfield and land on it’s own?

    I just want to know the state of the art.

    Generally, no.

    Sounds like they can do without licensed pilots about as well as self-driving cars can do without licensed drivers.

    Essentially correct, but there is far less things too bump into at altitude. We call it the big sky safety check.

    Except right around airports, anyway.

    • #57
  28. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Percival (View Comment):
    ACARS (Aircraft Communications, Reporting, and Addressing System. Yeah, the acronym is out of order. I blame the French.)

    It’s easier to day “ACARS” than “ACRAS.”

    • #58
  29. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):
    ACARS (Aircraft Communications, Reporting, and Addressing System. Yeah, the acronym is out of order. I blame the French.)

    It’s easier to day “ACARS” than “ACRAS.”

    I’m going to blame the French anyway. Saves time.

    • #59
  30. Mark Camp Member
    Mark Camp
    @MarkCamp

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):
    ACARS (Aircraft Communications, Reporting, and Addressing System. Yeah, the acronym is out of order. I blame the French.)

    It’s easier to day “ACARS” than “ACRAS.”

    I find both acronyms equally difficult to day.

    • #60
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.