Hacker News Reader

Comment by samstave | Hacker News Reader

I would assume they were testing flight overide logic... which takes some balls...

Yeah, I can hardly imagine being the crazy/gutsy person actually doing a test of failure modes on a plane in the air. I mean, what exactly are your options if it goes wrong? Maybe you can parachute, but seems like a long shot given altitude and the plane itself (just aim it at an uninhabited area before you jump?)

I'm just... gonna go back to my office job, I think.

The type of error that this appears to be is solved if you know what it is, you can just turn the MCAS system off and hand-trim the plane no problem. So testing the failure at a high altitude is of a relatively low risk, you've specifically briefed and likely practiced in a simulator exactly how to turn these systems off. The pilot not flying the plane almost certainly has their hands right on the switches and or fuses.

Note, though, that as soon as you do that, you're flying an airplane with flight characteristics that are unlike any other aircraft you've ever flown (unlike any ever built before); an unstable aircraft with extreme stall characteristics you've never encountered - not a normal airliner. And you're close to the ground already.

Serious question:

WHY has not Boeing turned every single aircraft of theirs into a drone-capable device?

They should have a person, like we have with air traffic control, sitting monitoring all planes in flight, but that person is sitting in a pit on the ground.

They have to monitor X number of craft - and in the event of any anomolous data.... be ready to take over control of the machine in the air.

Imagine if all pilots had a life sensor on them, and should they fail - control of the craft auto switches to ground control.

We can already kill millions of people with dron pilots in nevada. Why not make drone pilots fly airliners.

Heck, in a few years - you just need a few technicians in the cock pit to be sure there are not physical issues - and let the ground pilots do all the work - but the air pilots can take over if the ground connection is lost...

Here are two obvious reasons:

1. Lack of low-latency communication. The Ethiopian Airlines crash flight occurred when flightradar24 couldn’t see the plane. Two-way communication is even harder than just receiving transponder signals.

2. How, exactly, is a random Boeing employee going to help? They’re thrown into a situation in which sensors are faulty and they can’t see out the windshield.

What makes you believe that a ground pilot will be more competent than the existing air pilots?

It is very rare for crashes to occur because the pilots both become incapacitated. I do remember a crash that occurred because the pilots allowed the cabin to become depressurized and failed to diagnose the problem. Eventually everyone, including the pilots, fell unconscious and the plane circled on autopilot until it ran out of fuel.

Arguably this should be possible for cars as well, as a transitional stage towards full self-driving capability.

With planes you could argue that the additional complexity of implementing something like this would be a safety liability in itself. It's not 100% clear what problem it would solve. On the other hand, plenty of people would pay to not have to do the driving themselves.

I freaking love this idea with cars.

Pay disabled people to GTA 5 you home....

(aside: japanese cafes are employing disabled-driven robots....)

Dont be so hard on yourself, office jobs crash and burn at a much higher rate.

I suppose if the hazard pay is enough to set my family up for life...

There is literally no amount of money that compensates for an absent parent. YMMV, of course, and the calculus is different if you're single or something.

That's like saying money can't buy happiness. Technically it's true but money can buy you things that make the difference imperceptible.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com