I agree with Jeff_G. The idea that 99% of flights would go just fine single pilot is a weird point to make. As an FO I am correcting things and being corrected, like misheard radio calls or interpretations of charts and procedures, or forgetting to change autopilot modes. This kind of thing happens on probably 20-30% of flights.
If not caught these mistakes are a small safety risk which could balloon into an overloaded pilot. But not only that, they would decrease the efficiency of the ATC system, which is at carrying capacity currently. Anything that decreases that efficiency is a cost, and an enormous one for airlines.
Between the decreased efficiency of ATC and the higher chance of bent metal and delays, and the higher training costs of captains, Iâm not convinced that removing the FO would actually be a cost savings in the long run.
I strongly agree regulations should require 2 human pilots for scheduled commercial (airlines) operations. In the future automation MAY be able to take the place of a human pilot. However, the cost should never be the driving reason to replace any aircrew. The overriding priority for automation over humans should be for SAFETY.
ATC with 34 years experience. These fools donât really understand what either ATC or pilots actually do. Oh sure, they understand that pilots operate the controls & ATC gives instructions, but thatâs the trivial part of our jobs.
What we do that really matters might only happen once or twice in a career but when it does occur, it more than compensates for all of the wages & benefits we were given in return for our presence.
I used to talk with a buddy of mine who was a Technical operations manager for the FAA. We described the fact that 99.99% of the time, you guys (pilots) would do perfectly fine without us. However, 99.99% of the time would still translate to 4 incidents per day in the USA alone. It wouldnât be long before people would go back to riding Amtrak or Greyhound.
We earn our money by how we respond when things go wrong. Computers or AI could not have done what Sullenberger did. Only a human can make a unique choice.
I agree almost completely. But one bit I have to quibble with. Most people donât understand how unbelievably safe this system is. The same people (almost all of us, even in this forum) accept forty thousand highway deaths per year in the US and donât even discuss it. If we went from the recent record of, statistically speaking, average around 12 deaths per year in the lower 48, scheduled 121 domestic passenger flights over the past decade, to higher numbers what would happen? Iâm not convinced that if that number went up to say, average 50 or 100 fatalities per year, that anyone would really be up in arms about it. Especially if airlines kept making, or ummm⌠started making more money. Maybe people would just accept a slightly lower standard of safety. I hope not. But they mightâŚ