Airbus: Pilots don't really need windows

Seattlepi.com via SFGATE ^ | 07/02/2014 | AUBREY COHEN

[DFG]

Future airliner flight decks may do away with windows and move out of the nose of the aircraft, according to Airbus.

The European airplane maker filed a patent application Dec. 23, published June 26, for a flight deck that relies mostly or entirely on electronic viewscreens.

The first advantage is aerodynamic, since flight deck windows require interrupting the ideal scalpel shape of the nose, Airbus wrote. Also, big windows and the reinforcement required for them add weight to the aircraft.

[Grampa Dave]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3177483/posts

Planes almost collide in dramatic runway near-miss at Barcelona airport
The Telegraph ^ | 7/8/2014
Posted on 7/8/2014 9:33:43 AM by Former Fetus

This is the terrifying moment two passenger jets came seconds from crashing into each other at Barcelona airport.

The heart-stopping moment two passenger planes avoided a catastrophic collision was caught on camera on Saturday.

Footage shows a Boeing 767 from the Russian airline UTair coming in to land on a runway at Barcelona’s El Prat Airport. But with the plane just feet from touching down, an Aerolineas Argentineas Airbus A340 slowly taxis across the runway, forcing the still-airborne pilot to respond to the emergency by pulling back into the air.

The quick-thinking pilot of the UTair jet landed the plane safely after circling around.

Plane enthusiast Miguel Angel caught the moment on film, describing it as “one of the worst experiences I have ever had”.

[Iscool]

No way would I ever board a plane where the pilot can’t look out the window to see the runway...It their scenario, the pilot doesn’t even need to board the plane...No thanks, I’m not going to fly in a drone...

[xander]

Looks like Radio Control. Website source for the image appears to confirm this.

[Chainmail]

"Sorry,you are incorrect. "

Well you should be sorry.. Modern aircraft are flown on autopilot throughout near the whole flight regime. There have also been autolanding systems in effect since the Lockheed L1011 in the early '70s.

The loss of that Air France flight over the Atlantic was due to the pitot tubes failing, which caused the autopilot to read the flight situation incorrectly and when the pilots took over, they made very poor decisions and destroyed the airplane and everyone in it.

The "thousands of decisions" pilots make are inputting waypoints into the navigation system, various radio calls when required, and whether their coffee should have cream and sugar or not.

Wasn't there a recent transatlantic flight where the flight crew fell asleep through most of it? Proves my point, doesn't it?

[Wingy]

I don't understand why "No windows" turned into "No Pilots". No windows doesn't mean No visibility. It means that instead of using glass panels that the pilot looks through, you use cameras and screens that the pilot looks at. Besides the advantages that are cited in the article, with more cameras from different vantage points, you actually increase his visibility, not decrease it.

I would guess that it might take some time for an older pilot to get used to, and I would certainly appreciate a VERY well tested system. Robust and redundant are two words that come to mind.

As for getting rid of pilots; I would say from a passenger perspective, we are not quite ready for that. Thank God!

[Nepeta]

Speaking of the Concorde, wasn’t the cockpit essentially windowless except for when the nose was hinged down for takeoff and landings?

If I remember correctly, no. Technology moved on and the windshield issue was solved. It's been almost 30 years since I read a book about the development of Concorde.

An incredibly beautiful plane in flight.

[Tzfat]

You are talking to a 30-year airline pilot. You have no clue.

[Chainmail]

"You are talking to a 30-year airline pilot. You have no clue."

Started out in DC-3s, did we? Well, move aside grandpa, things are changing. Automation of most everything is almost here. We can count on pilotless combat aircraft for almost all missions, Unattended Ground Vehicles for many forms of ground combat, Unattended Sea Vehicles, the whole nine yards. Removing human error is the direction technology is taking, count on it.

No offense, Buddy, but things always change. I was in artillery for nearly 40 years but I was the Program Manager for the world's first completely automated artillery system. Works, fine, hits what it's supposed to, no people.

[rlmorel]

I didn't look that carefully at it, but I thought it was this:

Giant A-380 RC flight

I thought I had heard the guy ran it into the ground by accident...guess I was wrong!

[rlmorel]

"...Robot flies plane, no flight attendants necessary. 10 minutes before plane lands, wake everyone up..."

I don't know why, but putting that at the end like that hit my funny bone!

"When I die, I want to go peacefully in my sleep like my old Uncle Floyd, not kicking, screaming and yelling like the passengers in his car..."

[rlmorel]

Here is another image to give another view of the scale:

That would be fun to have enough disposable income to throw at that!

[pfflier]

That is an awesome model. I can see how you might assume that is what happened.

The sim looks like Microsoft FSX.

[Tzfat]

Wrong again. Sometimes FR can be a bore when folks spout off about things they know nothing about. You have no clue. I am an Airbus Captain at the largest airline in the world. I’ve flow nearly every modern airline type. If the “autopilot” could do it all, what are they paying me 210k a year for? I’d love to wrap someone like you inside a level 5 TRW and let you barf your lungs out. Cheers.

[Chainmail]

One would hope that future flight computer systems would have the good design to avoid dangerous thunder cells.. then maybe we could avoid the $210K (X2) per year expense.

I spent a few hours in a TAV-8B in the hands of a superb pilot at 5Gs or so. If that didn't cause me to "barf my lungs out" nothing will.

Automation is coming, Big Guy - and safer flight when it's ready.