Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search

hide menu
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #10 - galaxyguy ONLINE (01/26/2013) [-]
Well, the autopilot does most of the flying anyway, so there's no reason the pilots can't be texting or whatever while the computers do all their work for them.

Actually, because the autopilot does such a large ammount of the actual flying, it was proposed some years ago that the pilots should remain on ground, flying their aircraft by remote control, if at all. This would prevent them from panicking during potential crash scenarios, allowing them to calmly right their airplanes, and not make rash decisions. This also would keep pilots alive so that they could report what went wrong after the flight, preventing future crash scenarios.
#52 to #10 - airdick (01/26/2013) [-]
my apologies but this is the stupidest ******* thing ive ever heard..
User avatar #67 to #52 - galaxyguy ONLINE (01/26/2013) [-]
My thoughts exactly. But it does make some sense.

For instance, the materials inside planes, particuarly the seats (I think it was the seats), release noxious fumes when they catch fire. In the event of a fire on the plane, having the pilots present increases the risk that they be knocked out and rendered incapable of flying their aircraft, effectively dooming all aboard.

Now imagine if the pilot was instead sitting in the control tower, controlling the plane remotely. No chance of knocking out due to noxious fumes, sudden depressurization, diving sickness (due to rapid descent), et cetra.
#71 to #67 - airdick (01/26/2013) [-]
I do see where you are coming from, and it does make sense in a way

But i do still feel that when it comes to remote controls, many more things can go wrong. For instance, when you're completely depending on remote control, it is so much easier to lose contact or signal to the plane. Where as when theres a pilote on board even if computers start to fail, theres still the possibility of manually controlling the aircraft, right?

As for toxic fumes and such, a) why wouldnt they just re design and use non harmul material and stuff (although possibly expensive, its better than the remote control idea) and b) why not make the cockpit have its own ventilation system, as well a fire proof it and totally isolated from the main cabin, so if anything does go wrong, the flight attendants could be trained to deal with it, while the pilots, the trained pilots, are locked in ensuring the safety of all by doing whatever is necessary.

In my eyes, I just beleive there are simpler, more convienient ways to deal with these sorts of problems.

We all know KISS, keep it simple stupid. (not saying anyone is stupid, its just the expression)
 Friends (0)