Good or Bad News?

I’m really not sure?


Why would that be bad news? Just curious.



Because I don’t retire until the 2050s.
It would be pretty bad for pilots if the industry grows a brand new generation of thousands of pilots and then significantly cuts the demand for them a decade or more before they retire.

From a pilot perspective: it’s good it’s delayed, bad that it’s still being researched so heavily.

1 Like


2030 is only 7yrs away. Further if they can convince the authorities to go to single pilot in cruise, right there that would mean a significant reduction in staffing.


1 Like

Good point. I was going to say, “here’s to hoping you’re all senior enough”, but at the same time it would reduce the shortage and thus bargaining leverage for the union. And we all know what that means.


It only takes one bad pilot and a tragic accident to show 2 is better than 1.


We don’t need 2 pilot on the flightdeck to protect the passengers from “bad pilots”. Even the best pilots can have a very bad day at work. There’s a concept in modern aviation safety called the Inevitability of Human Error and it simply states as humans none of us are perfect. Good pilots understand this hence the primary reason for 2 pilots and another concept. It’s statistically improbable (not impossible) for 2 people to make the same error at the same time.

Thinking only bad pilots crash airplanes is a dangerous mindset. Further it would be a greater justification for a single pilot cockpit since the certification bodies don’t believe they pass any bad pilots hence if only bad pilots crash we don’t need 2.


You’re right Adam. I should have worded my comment as a pilot experiencing a bad day and accidents don’t happen because of one mistake. They happen from a series of continual mistakes. I heard of a study where they found even the best pilots are bound to make a handful of mistakes on any given flight, and the plane is still able to make it to the destination safely.

When the automated AirTran in Newark actually starts to function correctly, I will think about maybe worrying about single pilot cockpits. Until then, I am sleeping just fine at night.



I still don’t know if I can fully trust self-driving vehicles… especially commercial vehicles like tractor trailers. I’m not worried about single-pilot planes flying hundreds of souls anytime soon.


I don’t think it will work out and i hope it doesn’t. What happens in case of a medical emergency and long flights? The ones proposing this ideas are selfish. Commercial jets needs more than one pilot at the cockpit.

The Envoy flight that had to return to the field because the Capt was incapacitated is the perfect case study for why we need more than one in the flight deck. He had a medical emergency and was no longer able to operate the aircraft. Luckily, the first officer stepped up and was able to return to the field, land and taxi off the runway.

Sure enough when googling the article to post here, Flying magazine already made the connection as well.



The computer geeks answer the incapacitated pilot question by stating that a remote operator will be able to take over and safely land the airplane. Which might be true, but might not.

These articles and bold statements from Boeing surface every couple of months. Typically these articles are written by computer geeks who have a great deal of knowledge about MS Flight Simulator, or flying drones, and very little knowledge at all about actually flying airplanes.

As for Boeing, there bold predictions do not mesh with the 346 lives lost due to their most recent “programming error”.


My $0.02:

My Outlook application just gave me a message saying that it can’t display the message, WHILE DISPLAYING THE MESSAGE. Computer geeks can’t fly a plane safely, ever.



Respectfully, there are a few thousand military drone pilots who would disagree.

Like it or not it’s coming, fortunately it’ll be long after I retire.