Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

a) A human pilot who does combines exceptional luck with unusual skill

b) Said human pilot was aided considerably by the airplane's autopilot system

c) I'm not sure why you think software would find this particularly challenging?




It's not the landing that's difficult, it's the "write an algorithm which correctly identifies which specific parameters should cause the aircraft to choose a river near the airport as its landing site, and get approval for it" that's the difficult part.


How often does it happen, though? You don't need a human on every flight in order to deal with that. Build a few ground-based emergency remote-control centers across the continent, and train the autopilots (or the air traffic controllers) to call them when things get bad.


I'm not convinced anyone in the commercial aviation industry would agree with you.

Some on-ground duty pilot sitting in a simulator who's suddenly placed in control of an aircraft that's notified an anomaly seconds before landing has absolutely zero chance of being able to make the same judgement call as a human (co)pilot who's been sitting at the controls for the last few hours. And the likelihood of human input being required is highly correlated with the possibility the aircraft has lost connectivity and/or some of the equipment that's supposed to be sending back data is malfunctioning (and yeah, you could build in more redundancy, but that still doesn't eliminate the problem and probably costs more than the pilot)




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: