There's more to it than that; consider that simplified, more automated fuel, electrical, and bleed air systems are cheaper than flight engineers! That's what really matters.
Cheers,
Wes
Cruising speed?
- Thread starter Just Schmidt
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Cheers,
Wes
GregP
Major
I'm not a fan of overly complicated automation. Every single computer I have ever used or owned has, at one time or another, frozen, locked up, or has come to an incorrect conclusion. If I had a computerized car with Microsoft Safe Driver installed, I'm quite sure I'd be dead by now.
Simplifying automation? Yes, within some limits.
Complete automation? No, not without some serious self-checking, and not without an "off" switch and a human for backup. There's a BIG difference between an "on" switch and a closed-loop control system that has gone off-kilter.
I like a PID loop where the requirement is for the device to be able to be controlled when any single part of the PID loop fails. And no "Windows" software allowed. The operating system has to be stand-alone, non-interruptable. Windows doesn't even come close to qualifying.
I can see it now, you pull back on the control column to flare for landing and get the message, "I'm Sorry, Windows is busy with an update! Please flare again later!"
Simplifying automation? Yes, within some limits.
Complete automation? No, not without some serious self-checking, and not without an "off" switch and a human for backup. There's a BIG difference between an "on" switch and a closed-loop control system that has gone off-kilter.
I like a PID loop where the requirement is for the device to be able to be controlled when any single part of the PID loop fails. And no "Windows" software allowed. The operating system has to be stand-alone, non-interruptable. Windows doesn't even come close to qualifying.
I can see it now, you pull back on the control column to flare for landing and get the message, "I'm Sorry, Windows is busy with an update! Please flare again later!"
Old Wizard
2nd Lieutenant
You don't have to go overboard with automation to eliminate a flight engineer. That little 19 passenger tinkertoy I flew took all the functions a 727 or L1011 flight engineer did and rendered them manageable by two pilots with a fraction of their attention. And no digital computers involved. You set your pressurization profile by entering takeoff and landing elevations and intended cruise altitude. Done. If there are any radical changes inflight, adjust as necessary. Fuel system is plumbed and programmed to minimize CG migration with fuel burn. Electrical system is mostly automatic as far as load sharing and bus combining/isolating is concerned, as well as load shedding in an emergency. Bleed air and cabin environment are all self-regulating, and easily adjusted. All of this can be overridden manually if necessary. The control circuits were all analog and dead reliable.
My girlfriend spent the last two years of her career in 737-800s, and they seem to be more or less the same thing on a larger scale, except they do have digital engine controls and Flight Management Systems, also dead reliable. No Windows. Unix and Linux (U L Approved!).
Some of the airline's flight sims ATTH, are Windows-based.
Cheers,
Wes
My girlfriend spent the last two years of her career in 737-800s, and they seem to be more or less the same thing on a larger scale, except they do have digital engine controls and Flight Management Systems, also dead reliable. No Windows. Unix and Linux (U L Approved!).
Some of the airline's flight sims ATTH, are Windows-based.
Cheers,
Wes
Last edited:
