Popular Science: The Future of Aviation
Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2003 9:21 pm I read an article in Popular Science about the future of aviation. (For the record, Webster's says aviation means "1 : the operation of heavier-than-air aircraft". NOT the SUPERVISION of heavier-than-air aircraft.) My thoughts after reading this article is that there will be no "aviation" in the future, for pilots anyway, but just sitting in a seat the whole time while the computer does everything from start-up to shut-down. Not that this isn't done already but the pilot actually does control many aspects of the flight, regardless what people say.
They also claim that rather than having a "hub-and-spoke configuration for airports in the future, they will have many small airports which operate "air taxies" that probably will wipe out the need for airliners. It's almost as if the pilot of the future wouldn't be a pilot, but a cabbie or a bus driver, if there are going to be airliners, that is.
Not only that, but general aviation is taking a turn for the worst. Burt Rutan talks of "synthetic vision" which enables a pilot to see through clouds in IFR conditions, taking a great deal of the challenge and excitement out of flying the plane. He also says that he would like to see the day when we have a system that corrects the pilot's errors for him or her, provided they don't repsond to a warning signal.
On top of that, the planes of the future are butt-ugly, in my opinion at least. They are, instead of tube and wing designs, blended wing and body designs, or at least that's what Boeing wants to see. Airbus, however would like to keep the TW design.
From my standpoint, aviation has a grim future, maybe not for passengers, but definitely for pilots. If we go the computer-controlled aircraft route, many peolple will be basically put out of work, because they would essentially not even be needed except to watch the computer do its thing and make sure nothing goes wrong with it. Sorry, folks but aviation is fast losing its sexiness and wonder and adventure, and as I said before, soon, there will be no true "aviation".
They also claim that rather than having a "hub-and-spoke configuration for airports in the future, they will have many small airports which operate "air taxies" that probably will wipe out the need for airliners. It's almost as if the pilot of the future wouldn't be a pilot, but a cabbie or a bus driver, if there are going to be airliners, that is.
Not only that, but general aviation is taking a turn for the worst. Burt Rutan talks of "synthetic vision" which enables a pilot to see through clouds in IFR conditions, taking a great deal of the challenge and excitement out of flying the plane. He also says that he would like to see the day when we have a system that corrects the pilot's errors for him or her, provided they don't repsond to a warning signal.
On top of that, the planes of the future are butt-ugly, in my opinion at least. They are, instead of tube and wing designs, blended wing and body designs, or at least that's what Boeing wants to see. Airbus, however would like to keep the TW design.
From my standpoint, aviation has a grim future, maybe not for passengers, but definitely for pilots. If we go the computer-controlled aircraft route, many peolple will be basically put out of work, because they would essentially not even be needed except to watch the computer do its thing and make sure nothing goes wrong with it. Sorry, folks but aviation is fast losing its sexiness and wonder and adventure, and as I said before, soon, there will be no true "aviation".
