[JRandomFreeper]

when the system malfunctions?

Which one? The one on the "A" bus, the one on the "B" bus, or the one that is switchable between "A", "B", or "Batt"

/john

[Reeses]

Even if this system was perfected, what would keep a terrorist from landing on a terminal at the airport? Timed right the terrorist could take out 10,000 people and a dozen 747's loaded with fuel. Or the terrorist could fly into a cruise ship, which being movable would not be in the GPS data base.

It's a lot more fool-proof to have the pilots armed with guns.

[FairOpinion]

Not to be melodramatic, but the Titanic was supposed to have been unsinkable. "Foolproof systems" with no human override make me nervous. And of course if there is a human override, it defeats the purpose.

It's an interesting idea, but Murphy's law hasn't been repealed. Such system on planes could cause accidents just by the virtue of their existence, someone made a software glitch in the program, which only causes a problem in some 1 in a million situation, and bingo, that situation happens.

I vaguely remember that NASA lost some unmanned drones, which go through plenty of design reviews and tests, on account of some software glitch due to some simple conversion issue that nobody noticed. Well, think of hundreds of people on an airplane when a glitch occurs.