gloopy

Single pilot still requires full and complete, massive redundancy of every single function of the aircraft with hacker proof data link and self contained problem solving. Every breaker, every switch, lever, etc, with multiple layers of redundancy. If the single pilot becomes incapacitated you can't just get by with a remote control to an autopilot for an autoland. It would have to be able to handle any and every emergency a live pilot could while in the process of a divert (even assuming all levels of incapacitation could be instantly detected).

Possible? Yes. Decades ago. Cheaper than an FO? LOL! Not for a VERY long time.

Mesabah

Hacking is not a concern at all to single pilot, UAV's yes, but if you have someone on the other end verifying the quality of the data, hacking isn't a threat. Otherwise, our nuclear missiles would have been hacked, and launched years ago. A hacker would have to know ahead of time that a pilot was going to be disabled before they had any real chance of pulling it off.

If terrorists wanted to take out a plane, it is much simpler just to buy a manped on the black market.

gloopy

There still would have to be an incredible amount of security for the remote control link in any case. Being able to remotely control the entire plane, even with a pilot on board to over ride would be no small concern.

The real issue is the massive, earth shattering levels of redundancy that every single aspect of the plane would have to have. It could easily be done right now. But it would cost orders of magnitude more than a second pilot, and likely always will.

This isn't an issue of "Moore's Law" as it has nothing to do with computing power. The tech has been around for decades to do this. Its about massive additional layers of redundancy and engineering necessary that would enable either an internal or remote source to take over and fly a plane safely, in all dynamic environments, with the full range of control and troubleshooting and all of that.

That's not going to be cheaper or more practical than human pilots for a VERY long time, even for cargo. We're just too cheap.

The real threat may be reduced 3 and 4 man crews. That may or may not be financially feasible at some point in our careers.