A low-cost airline wants flight attendants to fly aeroplanes in case of emergency. The reason: Having two pilots in the cockpit is too expensive. That’s great, because I really can’t wait to see Steven Slater landing a 747 at JFK.
The father of the idea is none other than Michael O’Leary, CEO of Ryanair, the most famous low-cost airline in Europe. O’Leary does a lot of seemingly stupid things, but he’s a very smart man too. In this case, he may be completely right too.
Authorities and aircraft manufacturers are actually looking into this. Embraer is planning to have a one pilot-only commercial jetliner by 2020, and General Electric and Lockheed Martin are actively working in incorporating remote-control capabilities – now used in military unmanned air vehicles – into civilian aircraft.
This is not crazy. These companies argue that nowadays aeroplanes could be easily flown by only one pilot. The only reason for having a co-pilot, they say, is in case the pilot becomes incapacitated, which is a strange circumstance. Civil aviation authorities are already considering the idea. In the UK, officials say that if a one pilot plus high-technology solution can offer “equivalent safety” to a two-pilot solution, it could be admitted.
It seems crazy, but consider David Learmount’s – operations and safety editor at Flight International magazine – description of aviation 60 years ago:
Some 60 years ago, airliners with about 30 passenger seats on board needed a pair of pilots, a flight engineer, a navigator and radio operator because the workload was so high in each of those roles. The reasons such a crew is no longer necessary are too obvious to need rehearsing here. An aeroplane today may be extremely complex, but automation and massive advances in system reliability has reduced the human operator’s workload dramatically.
Technology – with the incorporation of UAV systems – is almost at the point in which one-pilot operation could be considered safe. After all, it’s not a true one-pilot system, since another pilot can take control from the ground in case of emergency. And indeed, flight attendants could be trained to activate or override systems in case of emergency.
Learmount even goes further and imagines no-pilot planes, fully automated and supervised from the ground by real pilots. But forget about that not-so-remote future. The question now is this: Are you ready for one-pilot aeroplanes?
Before you answer, look at this plane landing in heavy crosswind:
Or this one landing in Honduras:
I know what my answer is.
Illustration by our contributing illustrator Sam Spratt. Check out Sam’s portfolio and become a fan of his Facebook Artist’s Page.
Michael Harris
Saturday, September 11, 2010 at 6:37 PMAargh, if I see another non-airline site reporting on this crap of O’Leary’s I’m going to have an brain ‘splosion. The fact is this is simply another press stunt by O’Leary to garner publicity, nothing more, nothing less. The more uneducated press who report on this, the more his goal is served.
Let’s look at this issue on the facts, and facts alone. Why cockpit automation has increased, the simple fact is the current aviation environment simply doesn’t allow this to become a reality.
As pointed out by the Worldmate Travelog blog – this is prohibited as part of JAR-OPS Subpart N, 1.940(A)(1) & 1.940(A)(2), set by the The Joint Aviation Authorities (JAA). JAA is a multi-national organisation that oversees safety and regulatory standards for more than 40 European countries.
JAR-OPS 1.940 Composition of Flight Crew states;
(a) An operator shall ensure that:
(1) The composition of the flight and the number of the flight crewmembers at designated crew stations are both compliance with, and no less than the minimum specified in, the Aeroplane Flight Manual (AFM)
(2) The flight crew includes additional flight crew members when required by the type of operation, and is not reduced below the number specified in the Operations Manual.
And if one reads the AFM for the Boeing 737-800, it states the aircraft requires a crew of two pilots in the cockpit to operate this type.
So, unless O’Leary can convince 40-something sovereign nations to review and permit single pilot operations, or Boeing to re-write the AFM and recertify his airframes of choice to permit single pilot – this can’t and won’t happen.
Simply put – do the research before writing, and stop giving O’Leary and his crazy self-promoting ideas oxygen.
Rant over, resuming normal commentary.
William
Tuesday, September 14, 2010 at 11:58 AMI agree with M.Harris’ comment above – there is no way that cabin crew would be allowed to fly the plane, and no way that the flying public would accept the risk, despite the advantages of the new remote technology.
As a private pilot, I know a bit about the risks of flying, and what it takes to land a plane. For a start, you have to fly regularly to gain the experience needed, and cabin crew aren’t going to do that, nor are they going to remain as cabin crew if they are qualified pilots.
Then there is the willingness of the public to fly on what they will undoubtedly see as higher risk flights – just to save a few dollars? I think not.
Finally, there is a big difference between actually being in the cockpit of a plane and on the ground using a remote control system. Unless the remote control system is a fully-equipped simulator with the actual touch & feel of a real plane, with all the sensory information a pilot needs to make split-second decisions, then the remote pilot will not be as good or as safe as a real one in the cockpit.
Great idea, but not for a long time to come.