On Fri, 26 Jun 2015 21:16:41 +0000 (UTC), Skywise
wrote:

http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/26/travel/remote-controlled-passenger-airplane/index.html

No thanks. Not that I need to fly so it's a moot point, but I
wouldn't fly as it is purely on philosphical grounds vs TSA.
But that pales in comparison to the ramifications of remotely
controlled airliners.

Can you imagine the chaos when someone hacks the signal? And
it WILL get hacked. It's already happening with military drones.

I'm no ludite, but I think technology is being put in places
it has absolutely no business being put. Drone military craft
are one thing - it removes people from harm. Drone airliners
PUTS people into harm.

Brian


Interesting.

Like unmanned drones, who is legally responsible in the event there's a mishap
when there's no pilot in the cockpit?

Does the lack of the prospect of the "pilot's" imminent death, as a result of
her being safely on the ground, reduce her caution and/or lead to increased
disregard for FARs?

If the pilots are not eliminated, there's little cost incentive to go down this
road. If they are eliminated, how is your estate going to be compensated for
damages in the event of a MAC?

Of course, AirBus aircraft are already fly-by-wire, so they could be put into
unmanned service rapidly.

One presumes there are butt-loads of computer code involved in implementing
such automated aircraft operations; what could go wrong? :-(

Hacking is always an issue (apparently in manned airliners too), but what about
jamming the weak satellite radio control signals with a more powerful
terrestrial radio transmitter? Can autonomous programming overcome loss of
remote control input?

This sort of reminds me of The Small Aircraft Transportation System (SATS):
https://www.nasa.gov/centers/langley/news/factsheets/SATS.html.

So, are you ready for the Internet Of Things (IOT):
https://player.vimeo.com/video/126458720?api=1&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.raspber rypi.org%2Fwindows-10-for-iot%2F.