Dodgy knees wrote: ↑Sat Jan 16, 2021 9:51 am
The electrickory is a great safety backup, but to have your life depend on it is different. I honestly can't see them sharing our public roads in real world, any time soon.
Dodgy knees wrote: ↑Sat Jan 16, 2021 9:51 am
The electrickory is a great safety backup, but to have your life depend on it is different. I honestly can't see them sharing our public roads in real world, any time soon.
Maybe don't fly on an airliner then.
Don't plan on flying soon if you're particularly risk averse.
With HGVs its not really the UK you have to think about, at least not in the short term. Although there are still relevant points about the UK.
Consider that in the US its quite common for truckers to "pair up" in the same cab, one drives while one sleeps (often they're a married couple). That's the only way you can succeed in the business. No obviously an AV can just plough on 24/7 only stopping for fuel. That should tell you the financial attraction of an AV.
In the UK we already have laws about how long you can stay in the driver's seat for. Those laws only exists cause its financially attractive to drive for as long as possible, so again that gives you some indication as to the benefit that can potentially be reaped by an AV.
Airbus aircraft are 100% computer controlled and have been since the late 80s. The pilot decides left/right and up/down, but the computer actually flies it with full authority. That's where the original "fly by wire" phrase comes from. There is no backup, if the computers fail there is literally no way the plane can fly.
Crucially on an Airbus there is no way to override the computer, if it thinks the aircraft can't do what you're asking it just won't do it. That was a contributor to an accident when the A320 first came out, the Pilot didn't understand what the plane would/could do and flew it in a questionable manner, resulting in an accident.
Boeing are doing the same now too. Since the 90s most of their planes have been electronic, there's no mechanical backup (737 being the exception). Until recently they didn't go as far as Airbus, the plane would faithfully execute whatever command the pilot gave, using electronics. They're doing more of the Airbus style 'computer pilot' type stuff now (not the MCAS system though!)
Now obviously aircraft are much more controlled, operated by much more qualified people and - not insignifiacntly - cost a lot more! But if you fly on a modern airliner you're totally reliant on a computer to fly it, whether or not there's someone in the cockpit.
Edit: Its probably also worth mentioning that the last 30-40 years of aerospace electronics development feed into AVs. Not so much in direct designs, but in the approaches used to develop and produce high reliability systems. Typically speaking aerospace has ~10 times the budget that automotive has to do the same thing, so they develop stuff first.
Mr. Dazzle wrote: ↑Sat Jan 16, 2021 10:56 am
Airbus aircraft are 100% computer controlled and have been since the late 80s. The pilot decides left/right and up/down, but the computer actually flies it with full authority. That's where the original "fly by wire" phrase comes from. There is no backup, if the computers fail there is literally no way the plane can fly.
Was it the Eurofighter that was designed to be aerodynamically unstable to improve manoeuvring?
I'll try and get a link but I'm told that things are already with HGVs, with some quarrying vehicles and yard shunters that will do fairly repetitive tasks but, more importantly, limiting liability on road risk.
If the "flying" is being done by computer, the next question is - who does the maintenance? Some of the failures described above, eg those caused by insect larvae in a pitot tube, could be a problem for computer detection and rectification, and still lead to catastrophic failures. There's still a place for careful humans, but on the ground instead of in the air?
Dodgy knees wrote: ↑Sat Jan 16, 2021 10:48 am
AFAIK, Autopilot just does the easy bit in the middle. Start and finish have real pilots, just incase.
Not really, auto landing is frequent, and safer in many marginal situations. Safer mainly because it will NOT carry on if stuff changes at the last minute. Humans do tend to plan, and then carry on with the plan even though they shouldn't.
dayglo jim wrote: ↑Sat Jan 16, 2021 11:14 am
I'll try and get a link but I'm told that things are already with HGVs, with some quarrying vehicles and yard shunters that will do fairly repetitive tasks but, more importantly, limiting liability on road risk.
Yes, quarrying is a great example: repetitive journeys, little chance of bumping into anything or anyone, etc.
Mr. Dazzle wrote: ↑Sat Jan 16, 2021 10:40 am
With HGVs its not really the UK you have to think about, at least not in the short term. Although there are still relevant points about the UK.
Consider that in the US its quite common for truckers to "pair up" in the same cab, one drives while one sleeps (often they're a married couple). That's the only way you can succeed in the business. No obviously an AV can just plough on 24/7 only stopping for fuel. That should tell you the financial attraction of an AV.
In the UK we already have laws about how long you can stay in the driver's seat for. Those laws only exists cause its financially attractive to drive for as long as possible, so again that gives you some indication as to the benefit that can potentially be reaped by an AV.
Assuming these are all going to be battery powered 'only stopping for fuel' is likely to be a big thing. How long will a lorry take to recharge, will we have enormous new lorry charging areas built near motorways, will Amazon have a near monopoly because they are the only ones with enough infrastructure to swap cabs half way to Scotland for urgent deliveries?
I can see automated lorries not arriving first as haulers won't want to invest in battery powered long haul until they are forced to and they won't want to buy new automated diesels if they will be legislated off the road soon.
Unless the battery breakthroughs that have been just around the corner for the last twenty years suddenly happen.
Mussels wrote: ↑Sat Jan 16, 2021 2:55 pm
Assuming these are all going to be battery powered 'only stopping for fuel' is likely to be a big thing. How long will a lorry take to recharge
Unless the battery breakthroughs that have been just around the corner for the last twenty years suddenly happen.
That article is a little disingenuous. Its true for example that you need the right ground and aircraft infrastructure to use autoload, but bear in mind the Cat III systems described were introduced in the 1960s for example. Similarly, the 25kt crosswind limit mentioned would be considered dicey under any circumstances for a civil airliner.
Indeed, Autoland is actually a legal requirement when flying under Cat III conditions (when you can't see a bloody thing basically).
The point remains, if you don't want to put your life in the hands of electronics and computers you shouldn't fly on a modern plane.
