Book: Would You Kill The Fat Man?

Sure. You ever heard of a simulator?

Predator drones cost $40 million each. The pilots get training.

A 747 by comparison is $357 million.

Well, you go ahead and get on that 747 with a drone operator at the controls. You may at some point have cause to reconsider your decision, but all the screaming may make it difficult for you to concentrate.

I would hazard a guess -- just based on the information that drone crews have 64 technicians and 747s have cockpit crews of two -- that a 747 is a lot more "fly by wire" than a drone.

"Fly by wire" merely denotes the replacement of cables and hydraulics with wires, sensors, and motors.

Can you accept that flying an airplane and controlling a drone require different skill sets?

_Howard wrote:

"Fly by wire" merely denotes the replacement of cables and hydraulics with wires, sensors, and motors.

No it doesn't.

_Howard wrote:

Can you accept that flying an airplane and controlling a drone require different skill sets?

If it was a Venn diagram I'd say it's about 92% overlap. Drone pilots probably don't get as much training on air traffic control, and handling unruly passengers, and projecting a calm cockpit voice during emergencies. Other than that....

NoCoPilot wrote:

_Howard wrote:

"Fly by wire" merely denotes the replacement of cables and hydraulics with wires, sensors, and motors.

No it doesn't.

your wikipedia article wrote:

Fly-by-wire (FBW) is a system that replaces the conventional manual flight controls of an aircraft with an electronic interface. The movements of flight controls are converted to electronic signals transmitted by wires (hence the fly-by-wire term), and flight control computers determine how to move the actuators at each control surface to provide the ordered response.

Yes, today there are computes in the system, but they were not present when the term fly-by-wire came into being. It is not necessary that there be any intervening computer actions to define an aircraft as being fly-by-wire.

NoCoPilot wrote:

_Howard wrote:

Can you accept that flying an airplane and controlling a drone require different skill sets?

If it was a Venn diagram I'd say it's about 92% overlap.  Drone pilots probably don't get as much training on air traffic control, and handling unruly passengers, and projecting a calm cockpit voice during emergencies.  Other than that....

I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume that you have never flown an airplane.

You shoulda kept quoting:

Wikipedia wrote:

The fly-by-wire system also allows automatic signals sent by the aircraft's computers to perform functions without the pilot's input, as in systems that automatically help stabilize the aircraft, or prevent unsafe operation of the aircraft outside of its performance envelope.

In other words, "fly by wire" refers to computers taking over the basic stuff like stability and level flight and flying within the aircraft's design parameters so the pilots can't do anything stupid. Or at least, not without a lot of flashing lights.

Because of this I've heard (although I've never actually flown one myself!) that a civilian off the street could slip into the cockpit of a 747 and do almost everything but find the airport and land.

Drones are probably a lot more maneuverable, and a lot less stable, and a lot less idiot-proofed. So yes, I'm guessing, a lot harder to fly too.

The magic words here are also allows. As I said, the term was coined before there were computer controls. It is not necessary for the electronic system to do anything other than move the control surfaces for the aircraft to be designated as fly-by-wire. It doesn't matter how much the computer-operated systems have come into use over the years, the term can still refer to the basic operations.

NoCoPilot wrote:

Because of this I've heard (although I've never actually flown one myself!) that a civilian off the street could slip into the cockpit of a 747 and do almost everything but find the airport and land.

You know, if I was a passenger on an airplane, I would be very concerned about the use of the word "almost." I would also find the ability to find the airport and land to be a very significant matter in evaluating my satisfaction with the experience.
But I do agree that a drone controller would equate to a "civilian off the street" in this case.

A bit from this article about drone pilots: (they prefer RPA - Remote Piloted Aircraft - to the word drones).

Quote :

Many early recruits to the program flew jets, bombers, or cargo planes before being "asked" to transfer to drone duty under the impression they could reassign to a base of their choosing after putting in time on RPA rotations. But as demand for their new skill set increased, the timelines became moving targets. Some have been flying drones so long they would need expensive retraining to fly regular aircraft again.

If experienced pilots would need retraining before going back to normal aircraft, wouldn't it seem plausible that  those "pilots" who have only operated drones would be unqualified  to fly standard aircraft?

_Howard wrote:

I would also find the ability to find the airport and land to be a very significant matter in evaluating my satisfaction with the experience.

There are entire Florida flight schools devoted to teaching novices how to fly straight and level, without ever needing to approach the hard stuff like "landing safely."

_Howard wrote:

If experienced pilots would need retraining before going back to normal aircraft, wouldn't it seem plausible that those "pilots" who have only operated drones would be unqualified to fly standard aircraft?

I think they're talking about fighter aircraft here. Not only are they undoubtedly a whole lot more complicated than a 747, I'll bet the technology changes substantially while you're off flying toy airplanes.

Notice that the quote I posted said, "jets, bombers, or cargo planes." It did not say fighters. It was a lousy sentence, as "jets" doesn't really mean much,

I'm not sure what you are referring to as "toy airplanes."

Here's a pretty good article relating to the subject this thread: The moral naivete of ethics by numbers