The Future Of Artificial Intelligence
11-27-2018, 07:27 AM
#241
In a land of unicorns
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Position: Whale FO
Posts: 6,593
Funny story by the way - one of these Ansett 3-crew-planes is now known as N767MW. That's Mark Cuban's plane.
11-27-2018, 07:36 AM
#242
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: B-737NG preferably in first class with a glass of champagne and caviar
Posts: 5,995
The 767 was the first Boeing wide-body to be designed with a two-crew digital glass cockpit. Cathode ray tube (CRT) color displays and new electronics replaced the role of the flight engineer by enabling the pilot and co-pilot to monitor aircraft systems directly. Despite the promise of reduced crew costs, United Airlines initially demanded a conventional three-person cockpit, citing concerns about the risks associated with introducing a new aircraft. The carrier maintained this position until July 1981, when a US presidential task force determined that a crew of two was safe for operating wide-body jets. A three-crew cockpit remained as an option and was fitted to the first production models. Ansett Australia ordered 767s with three-crew cockpits due to union demands; it was the only airline to operate 767s so configured.
11-27-2018, 07:38 AM
#243
In a land of unicorns
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Position: Whale FO
Posts: 6,593
[QUOTE=captjns;2714764]Wekipedia
Yeah, the way I understand that is that Ansett was the only one that actually ordered the 3-crew option, UAL never ordered them. The planes were delivered with Ansett's own customer code.
I'm not 100% sure, but I think 767MW is the only one still flying, I assume it's been converted later to the traditional cockpit.
The 767 was the first Boeing wide-body to be designed with a two-crew digital glass cockpit.[19] Cathode ray tube (CRT) color displays and new electronics replaced the role of the flight engineer by enabling the pilot and co-pilot to monitor aircraft systems directly. Despite the promise of reduced crew costs, United Airlines initially demanded a conventional three-person cockpit, citing concerns about the risks associated with introducing a new aircraft. The carrier maintained this position until July 1981, when a US presidential task force determined that a crew of two was safe for operating wide-body jets. A three-crew cockpit remained as an option and was fitted to the first production models. Ansett Australia ordered 767s with three-crew cockpits due to union demands; it was the only airline to operate 767s so configured.[\QUOTE]
I'm not 100% sure, but I think 767MW is the only one still flying, I assume it's been converted later to the traditional cockpit.
11-27-2018, 07:41 AM
#244
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: B-737NG preferably in first class with a glass of champagne and caviar
Posts: 5,995
[QUOTE=dera;2714769]
True statement.... UAL never took delivery of the 3 man B767. Legend had it that UAL had a 3 man B767 built... but we’re talking some 30+ years ago.
Wekipedia
Yeah, the way I understand that is that Ansett was the only one that actually ordered the 3-crew option, UAL never ordered them. The planes were delivered with Ansett's own customer code.
I'm not 100% sure, but I think 767MW is the only one still flying, I assume it's been converted later to the traditional cockpit.
Yeah, the way I understand that is that Ansett was the only one that actually ordered the 3-crew option, UAL never ordered them. The planes were delivered with Ansett's own customer code.
I'm not 100% sure, but I think 767MW is the only one still flying, I assume it's been converted later to the traditional cockpit.
11-27-2018, 07:46 AM
#245
In a land of unicorns
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Position: Whale FO
Posts: 6,593
This was actually an interesting thing to look up. I've heard the story of the 3 man 767's before but never really looked into it. I flew out of KDAL for 6 months and kept seeing 767MW parked there almost every day, but I never realized it is one of the old Ansett planes, converted into a private jet!
11-27-2018, 08:27 AM
#246
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: 767A (Ret)
Posts: 6,248
Air Canada had an interesting way of filling the S/O seat on the DC-8:
https://airfactsjournal.com/2015/02/...officers-tale/
https://airfactsjournal.com/2015/02/...officers-tale/
11-27-2018, 06:29 PM
#247
Banned
Joined APC: Jul 2017
Posts: 894
Air Canada had an interesting way of filling the S/O seat on the DC-8:
https://airfactsjournal.com/2015/02/...officers-tale/
https://airfactsjournal.com/2015/02/...officers-tale/
12-05-2018, 07:41 AM
#248
Line Holder
Joined APC: May 2017
Posts: 55
As someone with about 4 years left flying in the military do you think it will still be worth it to forego retirement with all of the talk of artificial intelligence being able to accommodate single pilot ops or even remote pilot. I’ll be 29 leaving active duty with 11 years in service and about 1500-1800 TT and1000 TPIC multi engine fixed wing.
This isn’t just a question about my specific situation, I am curious to the opinions on whether this job will be as lucrative when AI starts making advancements at a fast pace. I hope there’s still good jobs available because I plan to get my foot in the door somewhere in 2023 when my service obligation is up.
This isn’t just a question about my specific situation, I am curious to the opinions on whether this job will be as lucrative when AI starts making advancements at a fast pace. I hope there’s still good jobs available because I plan to get my foot in the door somewhere in 2023 when my service obligation is up.
12-05-2018, 09:04 AM
#249
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: 767 Captain
Posts: 3,989
As someone with about 4 years left flying in the military do you think it will still be worth it to forego retirement with all of the talk of artificial intelligence being able to accommodate single pilot ops or even remote pilot.
am curious to the opinions on whether this job will be as lucrative when AI starts making advancements at a fast pace.
am curious to the opinions on whether this job will be as lucrative when AI starts making advancements at a fast pace.
12-05-2018, 09:17 AM
#250
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2016
Posts: 463
For goodness sake, can people please stop using the FE and navigator argument as to why droids are replacing us?
FE/Navigator - Highly technical jobs easily replicated by a computer or the Pilots up front. They made no command decisions and their decisions were always routed through a pilot in command.
Pilot - Has command authority over a flight and directly affects the lives of the passengers. The FO isn’t just there to make the coffee or wake the Captain up, it’s called CRM, and preventing some whacko from going Germanwings.
Apples to Oranges comparison.
FE/Navigator - Highly technical jobs easily replicated by a computer or the Pilots up front. They made no command decisions and their decisions were always routed through a pilot in command.
Pilot - Has command authority over a flight and directly affects the lives of the passengers. The FO isn’t just there to make the coffee or wake the Captain up, it’s called CRM, and preventing some whacko from going Germanwings.
Apples to Oranges comparison.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
