Auto pilots in airliners and flying cars?

Question

What do you think about autopilots in airliners? If you want to be a pilot, don't you want to be a pilot so you can actually fly the plane? No just supervise a machine? Autopilots during the intitial climb and descent and cruise and approach is great, but if you want to be a pilot, don't you want to takeoff and land the plane? I think auto land and auto takeoff is a stupid idea. If it ever goes into the marker I will change my mind instantly about becoming an airline pilot. I'm in it for the FLYING.

Also, what do you think about flying cars? Don't you think it would ruin the "treat" of flying? Seiously, all those bad drivers on the road will just be in the sky. Plus, it will add to the already overcrowded airspace. General Aviation will be for sure doomed. Also, many many aviation careers would be ruined. Who would want to fly an airline if you could fly yourself?

I think certain autopilot types and all flying cars is a stupid idea. Please give me your opinion.

Answer 1

Flying cars are very expensive, to buy and to run. If people needed to fly long distance they would do best getting on the plane. Also flying cars will eventually require an air road, this would include altitude, so airlines could still get their plains up. Flying cars probably won't go very far because of the greater dangers when there is an accident. I want a flying car, so I can fly myself, take off land...

Answer 2

The autoland systems of today do a better job than us mammals. I keep thinking about what the cockpit of the future will look like. A human "captain" sitting in the left seat. A big dog sitting in the right seat. The captain's job is to feed the dog. The dog's job is to bite the captain if he touches anything. Keep in mind, 85% of all aircraft accidents involve pilot error. Remove the pilot, remove 85% of problems that cause accidents. We'll get there someday. Glad I got my forty years in flying when I did.

Answer 3

You asked for an opinion and my opinion is that neither of the ideas are stupid.

Of course, the flying cars are not practical as yet and it will be quite a time before we can have the technology to handle millions of flying objects over a city safely. No need to worry about it for the next 50 years.

Autopilot stupid? I'd say that it is pretty narrow minded thought. You just think of YOUR flying. The progress in aviation is not focused on individual pleasures, rather it is on greater safety, efficiency and capabilities. If the human being can be safely removed from the loop, aviation will do that. What you said is akin to saying that the automobile is a bad idea because you like running/walking.

FMS ruined several navigator's careers, right? But it was done for the betterment of aviation. Try telling airline pilots that FMS is bad because you wanted to be a navigator. So definitely, maintaining careers doesnt really figure out in the aviation progress priorities.

Answer 4

A pilot can turn the autopilot off any time, and hand-fly the airplane.  But most of the time you'll be glad it's there.  Believe me, the crew are still in charge, and are still operating the airplane, even when the autopilot is engaged.  You will just have to experience it to get the feel of what I am saying.

The autopilot/autoland/autowhatnot does not actually fly the airplane--you are still the one in charge, and supervising the operation of the automatic systems at all times.  By the time you reach the left front seat of a large airliner, you will have hand-flown plenty of airplanes, and you will be glad to have a little assistance with stability and directional control.  That's what the autopilot does:  it smooths things out and takes a lot of the stress out of day to day flying, without taking any of the fun out.  Believe me, you'll see what I mean if you get there, and you will agree the auto controllers are not a stupid idea.

Flying cars turned out to be an unworkable (not "stupid," but impractical) idea, and you can rest assured they will never become a part of our lives.  They just aren't practical.  So don't worry about it.

Answer 5

We actually do the takeoffs and landings by ourselves 99% of the time.  Only under extreme circumstances does the auto-land system take precedence.  Like when the visibility is so low that a standard ILS approach can't be completed.

For the most part though, flying an airplane is just like any other job.  Its boring and tedious to hand fly at cruise altitude.  Automation also allows us to place our attention elsewhere, like checking systems, planning fuel burns, briefing arrivals and approaches and so forth.  All in all automation makes the job much MUCH safer and passengers are the beneficiaries of that.

Answer 6

I fly a C-172, and use autopilot most of the time in cruise.  Approaches and landings are by hand.  It doesn't make a lot of difference; flying is like driving a car, and most of the time doesn't require a lot of attention.  So, one looks out the window for other aircraft, monitors communications from ATC, and keeps an eye on the gauges.

A flying car would be nice, but the laws of physics are brutal to the concept: if you don't have a fairly sizeable wing, the power required to stay aloft increases rapidly, and your fuel consumption (for which you are already paying $5 a gallon) skyrockets.  And, once you get the machine back onto the ground, what do you do with the wings?  Furthermore, a transmission capable of driving both wheels and a propeller would be a mechanical monstrosity -- and heavy as all get out -- and weight is NOT the pilot's best friend.