That's it, thanks. Hmmm, I guess the info I heard was obviously very inaccurate or it was a heavy drinking night... I seen it a while back but I was sure the commentator said it was remote. I think now he may have been talking about the auto land and I'm just remembering it wrong. Thanks for finding it Dario.* Edit:Wow, glad I seen this. It is much longer than whatever I saw it on before and I had no idea it was full of passengers. It's amazing there were survivors.

That's it, thanks. Hmmm, I guess the info I heard was obviously very inaccurate or it was a heavy drinking night... I seen it a while back but I was sure the commentator said it was remote. I think now he may have been talking about the auto land and I'm just remembering it wrong. Thanks for finding it Dario.* Edit:Wow, glad I seen this. It is much longer than whatever I saw it on before and I had no idea it was full of passengers. It's amazing there were survivors.

Hi Dan, (Turbine 777)Your comments are well thought out and you show a lot of interest in the PMDG forums and this is good.But that thing (tongue??) hanging out of your mouth in your picture is disgusting. Remove it. You're smarter than that. Why make your self look like an idiot?Jack Hancock

Hi Dan, (Turbine 777)Your comments are well thought out and you show a lot of interest in the PMDG forums and this is good.But that thing (tongue??) hanging out of your mouth in your picture is disgusting. Remove it. You're smarter than that. Why make your self look like an idiot?Jack Hancock

Lighten up dude :( I think Dan said it's a bit of turkey from a sandwich lol. my girlfriends looking at me really strange because I had a huge grin on my face when I typed that!

Dan, I concur with the Newbie. You should photoshop it away and replace with say, a human arm.

Has anyone tried flying into Frankfurt around 8pm GMT solo in a heavy jet and bad weather on Vatsim? descent planning, reprogramming the FMC at the last minute, switching freq and reading back instructions all while flying the aircraft and backing it up with RAWDATA, you can forget about hand flying until your at least fully established. Now imagine doing that in the real world solo with 200 pax sitting behind you!

Which is the whole point of the automation...its the manual fiddling with swithces and all those other Human inputs that make it hard work....Look at it like this, buy FS2Crew....watch how much your workload reduces when you are able to just say "Set heading 100" instead of either clicking or if you have a harware MCP turning the knob.....now take this a stage further. the HDG Select info already gets sent to ATC now we see exaclty what we said over the radio get selected (this is the HDG selcted not just the heading the plane is passing through) so you have at present ATC say turn left HDG 100, pilot 1 Reads it Back, Pilot 2 twists knob, pilot 1 check knob twist is what they think atc said....lots of chances for humans to get it wrong. So instead ATC think hmmmm could do with turning that plane left onto a HDG 100....Tell you what tip tap on my kepboard...plane turns left onto HDG 100, Just one human then sitting on plane watching this to see that all is well...Volia one less pilot needed...and lots of human error removed and workload of the remaning humans all reduced to spend better time seeing that all is well with the left turn onto HDG100 and it not going to bounce them into a mountain.!They didnt remove Flight engineers without ensuring the systems they monitored first were replaced, or redesigned to be done by two pilots. they Not going to just say hey lets remove a pilot and make him busy without first putting other systems in place....It will happen....I dont think it be a long time before you see a totally pilotless plane(Due to public opinion rather than physical ability) but I think that in my career I will be controlling passenger planes with just one crew...why? Because I already do now!

He obviously doesn't always think through what he say. Just by suggesting this, I wouldn't fly on his airline ever. Sorry, I'll pay the extra 100 bucks to fly elsewhere. If he is suggesting things like this what is he actually doing WITHOUT permission (eg, neglecting maintenance to get that extra mile out of a screw jack or something). Jack C

Channel 4 television here in the UK sent an undercover reporter in as an employee with Ryanair for about 3 months. While the reporter found that passengers were sometimes treated shoddily ("what d'you expect for a £10 fare?") cabins were only cleaned at the beginning of a day (vomit on a seat was just casually wiped over and perfume poured on to cover the strong smell) absolutely no evidence was found of maintenance being skimped. On one late night flight, with a full pax load aboard the Captain on his walk around found a dent in the fuselage caused by a ground vehicle. He refused to take the a/craft even though a replacement would not arrive until the next morning. There was absolutely no pressure brought to bear on him to turn a blind eye. However, the passengers were left to fend for themselves!Iain Smith

Your talking about something completely different, It's all fair game when the technology exists and is wont send the industry bunkrupt, as I mentioned earlier I can see automated freighters in the next twenty years, after many years of near flawless performance pax will come around (I still think automated cars will have to be the norm first)What Mr O'leary is talking about is saving costs in the current enviroment by getting rid of the F/O. Now we all know that is extremely stupid and his way of getting in the papers but lets look at some isues if the world went mad and this was put into place.1.Pilot incapacitation (He actually suggested having a trained flight attendant onboard!)2.Flying complex Jet's is about CRM, cross checking and having a backup, how do you do that single crew? The reason why we don't see major incidents on a daily basis is due to this safety net.3. How do new pilots get experience? There is more to flying then having good handling skills and sticking to SOP, you get experiance from that old bloke in the left hand seat that refuses to retire so you can get your command.4. In a complete system failure (and we all know computers will fail) who flies the damn thing while the QRH is run?5. If I have to eat chicken and the Captain eats beef what do I eat to avoid potential food poisoning if I'm flying solo :(

Hi Dan, (Turbine 777)Your comments are well thought out and you show a lot of interest in the PMDG forums and this is good.But that thing (tongue??) hanging out of your mouth in your picture is disgusting. Remove it. You're smarter than that. Why make your self look like an idiot?Jack Hancock

Hi Jack, Rob is correct on it being turkey. It is the only aircraft related picture of me that I have. As I've said before, I was at the park with my girlfriend and her kids, I was being a goof and a ham for the kids, making them laugh when an airplane flew over. As I was looking my gf took the pic. Sorry you find it so disgusting but personally I like the memories behind it and it's staying put (at least til I someday get one of me behind the controls of something).I don't take pix of me that often and trust me when I say, the others are even more controversial and would probably cause forum rioting :( (not a tongue, it's turkey).Even my own website has it, and I never had a single complaint, women tell me all the time they love the sense of humor and that pic is so very me, etc.. etc... and I have to agree that no other picture really captures my weird personality like this one and the fact I was looking at an AC made it even more fitting to use here :)I'm sure once you see it for what it is, it's not as bad as your making it out to be.*Edit: Hmmmm, ya know Doug,,, I don't entirely hate your idea :(This could be a good look for me :(

I, myself, didn't think it was your tongue BUT if it were I would say that is the cleanest looking tongue I ever seen. Must use Comet or something. As for the debate on the matter or one pilot, there are many strong points on each side of the coin. As one person said about how much the plane would actually cost to buy if it were that automated. Now this is just a guestimate. Lets say this new level of automation costs an extra 25 million (I can see it costing this easily). Lets say that planes flies 70,000 hours over the course of its life (this is probably even on the high side). Do the math and thats $357 bucks per hour to have that automation. NO first officer I know get paid close to that. More like 40-120 per hour. And you have to take into account the increased maintenace and cost of parts. That would be HUGE. So would it really be worth to have that automation? Not remotely close. So it would cost about 3-6 times more to have that automation than to just have an FO. AND on top of that I am sure the captains would be demanding more money too. There are a lot of newer advances that are effective in reducing crashes. I would like to see how much EGPWS has made a difference. I am guessing a drastic difference. Things like this is where I think the focus should be. It was mentioned that there is more likely to be errors if there were two pilots than one. I disagree to a point. If pilots practice discipline and good SOPs the error are reduced iMHO.Jack C

*Edit: Hmmmm, ya know Doug,,, I don't entirely hate your idea :(This could be a good look for me :(

No problem. Trying to play to your strengths there....

Dan, I concur with the Newbie. You should photoshop it away and replace with say, a human arm.

At this point, a foot would be more appropiate...

Your talking about something completely different, It's all fair game when the technology exists and is wont send the industry bunkrupt, as I mentioned earlier I can see automated freighters in the next twenty years, after many years of near flawless performance pax will come around (I still think automated cars will have to be the norm first)What Mr O'leary is talking about is saving costs in the current enviroment by getting rid of the F/O. Now we all know that is extremely stupid and his way of getting in the papers but lets look at some isues if the world went mad and this was put into place.1.Pilot incapacitation (He actually suggested having a trained flight attendant onboard!)2.Flying complex Jet's is about CRM, cross checking and having a backup, how do you do that single crew? The reason why we don't see major incidents on a daily basis is due to this safety net.3. How do new pilots get experience? There is more to flying then having good handling skills and sticking to SOP, you get experiance from that old bloke in the left hand seat that refuses to retire so you can get your command.4. In a complete system failure (and we all know computers will fail) who flies the damn thing while the QRH is run?5. If I have to eat chicken and the Captain eats beef what do I eat to avoid potential food poisoning if I'm flying solo :(

Okay just to play devils advocate here...1. In order to have gone to one pilot, you would have had to either gone the full automatic route, or got systems(like it already becoming now hence the flight engineer subject) so that the work load is so mininmal and that the ability that commands to the aircraft are sent from the ground as mentioned already with the tech with mode S. In this totally unusual circumstance the "Emergency" situation could be handled this way.2. Cross checking what? as you have reduced the input and workload of the single pilot what is he/she checking? In essence you have the cross check with the commands that are coming direct from ATC on the ground(your second pilot almost) and the single crew pilot. Whose workload is such now he's basically monitioring the flight.3. Exepreince for what? Again simpler to fly, less experience needed, Simulations improved etc. etc. etc.4. Computers dont actually fail generally, its normally the effect of the Human on them that causes them to fail, computers are dumb they only do what we tell them to. and with the modern aircraft that operate now, a systems failure on the scale you are talking about is probably as devistating as if the wings fell off. A320 with no computers at all....hmmm like to see any pilot sort that out.5. Same statement as question 1 really...the point is the single crew man isnt really flying it, just monitoring it!I accept that there are variations on a theme here, from present tech with removing just one crew member...not particularly good, to one crew and some tweaks to the tech which are probably quite easy and cost effective to do now, to a more fully automated design which the tech and cost is probably prohibitive at present. At the end of the day it will slowly come, and it will be in stages even then, the vast range of aircraft arent all going to be part or fully automatic over night, so some more newer and modern airliners will come that can be single crew rated and use the new ground to air tech and others will still require the 2 guys/gals upfront, just like the industry now, with commercial aircraft operations where some aircraft have higher standards or tech to allow them to do more automated or accurrate flight.In sense of cost to change some modern airliners now to be controlled or part controlled from the ground, other than the development costs, the actual equipment to do it would be negligble, most of its already there. Mode S an ancient piece of tech, sends the data to the ground, there is nothing to having the data sent the other way which would interface directly with the autopilot. TCAS in essence does this, it talks to another aircraft and works out the required action to be followed, it could easliy be done that instead of telling the pilot to climb, it just climbs and climbs at the rate it needs to avoid the conflict, it would just be a simple software patch after all in essence the pilot shouldnt never ignore the TCAS RA!So take that into account and fact the whole flight is virtually all done on auto anyway, then if the plane is climbed and turned as needed by ATC then really only the take off and landing requires the pilot. and in essence only the takeoff. So a single crew quite easliy achieved, should that single crew die enroute or eat some dodgy chicken, well ATC just vector the plane onto the ILS, and the "trained Hostess" sticks the gear down or its the emergency landing button, where the plane automatically configures, speed and flaps as required for landing.Think it wont happen, well ATC are developinng tools already to automate ATC, computers work out conflict paths, best routes, climb points, etc in order to get plane A and B to destination quickest without bumping into each other...so the next installement isnt just the automated plane, but the instructions are coming from a ground based computer controlling them all! totally removing the human from the equation...other than the pax still getting out of date sandwiches in the back of the ryanair!

At this point, a foot would be more appropiate...

Jac, now you're starting to annoy me. When exactly did I put my foot in my mouth to necessitate your rude comments? Exactly what did I do to you that is motivating your idiotic and unjustified attack on me? I explained my pic and didn't even have to. I did it to keep peace but honestly if you don't like it, don't look at it.Too bad, so sad, bye bye

Okay just to play devils advocate here...1. In order to have gone to one pilot, you would have had to either gone the full automatic route, or got systems(like it already becoming now hence the flight engineer subject) so that the work load is so mininmal and that the ability that commands to the aircraft are sent from the ground as mentioned already with the tech with mode S. In this totally unusual circumstance the "Emergency" situation could be handled this way.2. Cross checking what? as you have reduced the input and workload of the single pilot what is he/she checking? In essence you have the cross check with the commands that are coming direct from ATC on the ground(your second pilot almost) and the single crew pilot. Whose workload is such now he's basically monitioring the flight.3. Exepreince for what? Again simpler to fly, less experience needed, Simulations improved etc. etc. etc.4. Computers dont actually fail generally, its normally the effect of the Human on them that causes them to fail, computers are dumb they only do what we tell them to. and with the modern aircraft that operate now, a systems failure on the scale you are talking about is probably as devistating as if the wings fell off. A320 with no computers at all....hmmm like to see any pilot sort that out.5. Same statement as question 1 really...the point is the single crew man isnt really flying it, just monitoring it!I accept that there are variations on a theme here, from present tech with removing just one crew member...not particularly good, to one crew and some tweaks to the tech which are probably quite easy and cost effective to do now, to a more fully automated design which the tech and cost is probably prohibitive at present. At the end of the day it will slowly come, and it will be in stages even then, the vast range of aircraft arent all going to be part or fully automatic over night, so some more newer and modern airliners will come that can be single crew rated and use the new ground to air tech and others will still require the 2 guys/gals upfront, just like the industry now, with commercial aircraft operations where some aircraft have higher standards or tech to allow them to do more automated or accurrate flight.In sense of cost to change some modern airliners now to be controlled or part controlled from the ground, other than the development costs, the actual equipment to do it would be negligble, most of its already there. Mode S an ancient piece of tech, sends the data to the ground, there is nothing to having the data sent the other way which would interface directly with the autopilot. TCAS in essence does this, it talks to another aircraft and works out the required action to be followed, it could easliy be done that instead of telling the pilot to climb, it just climbs and climbs at the rate it needs to avoid the conflict, it would just be a simple software patch after all in essence the pilot shouldnt never ignore the TCAS RA!So take that into account and fact the whole flight is virtually all done on auto anyway, then if the plane is climbed and turned as needed by ATC then really only the take off and landing requires the pilot. and in essence only the takeoff. So a single crew quite easliy achieved, should that single crew die enroute or eat some dodgy chicken, well ATC just vector the plane onto the ILS, and the "trained Hostess" sticks the gear down or its the emergency landing button, where the plane automatically configures, speed and flaps as required for landing.Think it wont happen, well ATC are developinng tools already to automate ATC, computers work out conflict paths, best routes, climb points, etc in order to get plane A and B to destination quickest without bumping into each other...so the next installement isnt just the automated plane, but the instructions are coming from a ground based computer controlling them all! totally removing the human from the equation...other than the pax still getting out of date sandwiches in the back of the ryanair!

JC75, I was looking into automated TCAS a few months back http://spirellis.com/danny/aidl/hssd0302.pdf For some reason I actually thought it was implemented on the A380. Anyway I pretty much agree with everything your saying as it's the way of the future, however I was not under the impression Mr O'Leary was saying the same thing.Seems like he's being a typical wind up merchant and talking about single crew ops in the 'Current environment'Here's the link to one of the reports,I did actually find the part about passengers loading their own luggage into the cargo hold quite funny :)http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/article-1309444/Ryanairs-Michael-OLeary-says-air-stewards-land-planes-emergencies.htmlDan, don't sweat it mate, sounds like the guy has some issues :)

And what if the super intelligent autopilot computer that canfly the plane without any pilot onboard, make perfect cabin annoucements oreven play chess with the passengers throught the IFE system had just onetiny little flaw.........his name is HAL ? :(