• mikezane@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    8 months ago

    “Aerolane believes it shouldn’t be treated much differently by the FAA than regular ol’ recreational gliders. It remains to be seen how the FAA will feel about this.”

    This is an absurd statement as it completely omits the automated part of the towed airplane. Witch is the major point of this project.

  • rtxn@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    I was completely on-board until the word “autonomous”. The gliders need at least a supervising crew if they are to fly anywhere near populated areas.

    • ForgotAboutDre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      8 months ago

      I imagine a ground based crew would be available to intervene and fly it remotely. With an option for the powered aircraft crew to fly it remotely through a data link in the cable.

      Proper sensory redundancy, appropriate control systems and designing for inherent stability should make this very safe.

      The problem with the recent Boeing aircraft is modifying the airframe to take larger quieter engineers caused it to be inherently unstable. This type of aircraft should be designed to be inherently stable. However, redesign is expensive so they avoided that. Instead they added a control system to stabilise the aircraft (perfectly acceptable). The problem is they didn’t add redundancy to the sensors the control system relied on, faulty data caused the aircraft to crash. They also skipped training the pilots on how to override this new control system.

      All completely avoidable if everything was done right. They got away with not doing everything right because they successfully corrupted the FDA. Other equivalent bodies assumed the FDA wasn’t corrupt and accepted their qualification of the aircraft.

      Remove the corruption and penny punching this concept is completely safe. With corruption all aircrafts are liable to be dangerous.

      • rtxn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        FDA

        I don’t think the Food and Drug Administration has much influence over commercial aviation.

        Intended or not, software bugs are unavoidable. So are mechanical errors, human errors, administrative errors, and regulatory errors. That is why there should always be a human at the end of this stack of Swiss cheese to notice and plug the holes. Aviation didn’t become the safest-by-numbers method of transportation because it was made to be perfect – accidents happened, and the engineers learned from them to make the next iteration safer. Hopefully Boeing’s current bollocking is another such event.

        Before the 737 MAX was grounded, there was at least one incident where the MCAS caused the airplane to trim nose-down, and it was a pilot who noticed that the trim wheel was spinning and physically intervened. I’ve consumed most of the Mayday series and several podcasts on the topic – there were many incidents where loss of life was averted by true human ingenuity. That’s why I always want a human operator, even if only to supervise the machine.

  • maynarkh@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    8 months ago

    It’s not a new idea at least, other than the self-landing part. I sincerely hope they will have to employ and pay a proper aircrew to be in charge of a gigantic flying vehicle though.

  • FrankTheHealer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    This seems cool as hell. I just hope the FAA agrees. Also, landing one of these things seems like it couldn’t be tough, especially in bad conditions. But who knows

  • starman@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Good luck landing with this

    Edit: unless the glider detaches itself and lands separately