Pilot Unions Form Coalition to Oppose Single-Pilot Operations, Citing Safety Concerns and Profit-Driven Motives

A good few years ago my friends brother was flying a plane full of tourists to the Canary Islands , half way into the flight he felt dreadful and passed out . 1st officer safely landed the flight. Captain was ok after a spell in hospital for influenza. No way will single crew commercial flights ever be safe
I should note , before anyone says “ he must have felt ill before the flight “
It was the first thing I asked him , and the reply was “no , felt fine , I wouldn’t have taken the aircraft if I didn’t “

Besides the ALPA and other Pilot Organizations, the general public is opposed to single-pilot operations. I wished I had kept the poll but a recent poll showed the flying public response with 94% opposed to such an idea. Several of the comments were hilarious

Murphy’s Law: if it can go wrong it will go wrong.
Bahler’s Law: Murphy was an optimist.

As Musk says "AI will probably kill us all" This is the Most Stupid Technology man is developing...As a pilot I find this as the work of Satan...I am glad I will never see this take effect. Evel reigns guys!!!!

I think there's a broad consensus on the part of everybody except the airlines and their spokesmen that single pilot commercial operations are a danger to public safety.

If I remember correctly it was Delta's Ed Bastian who said he wasn't getting on an airliner with only one pilot; neither am I as most of the flying public won't either. Find something else to improve on like food service and quality.

Every day someone comes up with a senseless idea. Single pilot flight decks tops most of them.

Simply stated. I was a commercial pilot for almost 40 years. I will not get on an aircraft with a single pilot.Nor would I recommend my family to get on an airplane if It only has one pilot.

It's a truly dreadful idea, and puts everyone at risk - both in the air and on the ground. The airlines are really becoming a load of low-life money grubbers with seemingly no concerns about safety. Automated systems can take over the load during normal operations, but if something goes wrong (as it does) and a single pilot simply cannot take over all of the necessary tasks, who takes responsibility for the potential loss of hundreds of lives?

Today's technology is surely going in the wrong direction for those opposed to the idea.

In the article, near the discussion of AI and ML, the phrase "data-driven decisions" appears. Wasn't MCAS a data-driven system that, based on what turns out to be faulty, single-sourced data, made the wrong decision twice, resulting in hundreds of deaths?

Today, a properly installed and maintained autopilot can fly the airplane better than virtually any human pilot. Have you tried to hand-fly an airplane at FL300, maintaining altitude and heading, with a center of gravity that's constantly shifting due to the self-loading cargo (pax) moving about. Pretty tough to do for even 10 minutes, much less for hours, so we have the autopilot doing what it does best: flying the machine.

On the other hand, the thing that the healthy, properly trained, properly maintained and rested human can do better than virtually any autopilot is to observe, evaluate both gross and subtle issues, and make significant decisions, taking all available factors into account, e.g. Captain Sullenberger. We now have humans doing what they do best: thinking about the factors that affect the flying and making decisions based on those.

I believe it will be a long while before automation will reach the level of being able to do that kind of evaluation and decision making. AI, for all of its capabilities, still has a lot to learn; ask anyone who is technically competent in the development of the self-driving car. (I have a relative who worked on the programming for a self-driving car, and in his opinion we are still decades away from being able to truly accomplish that, if ever.)

In the meantime, we will have two pilots, at least, for the foreseeable future. Doing otherwise makes for interesting conversation over a bended elbow, but that's about it.

I will NEVER fly on a plane with only one pilot.

Simply stated. I was a commercial pilot for almost 40 years. I will not die. Will I allow my family to get on an airplane? It only has one pilot.

flight attendants are cheaper than pilots. I thought 2 crew people had to be in cockpit at all times for safety.

It's all about the bottom line.

I think there's a broad consensus on the part of everybody except the airlines' upper management and their spokesmen that single pilot commercial operations are a danger to public safety.

really makes sense in the commercial world, and Part 135, even railroad companies have abandoed the idea. I wish the public would stop with the "single pilot/no-pilot" and just stick to the circle runway ideas...

An attempt to deconflict some of these arguments would be:
The Unions will demand that two pilots be in the aircraft for nothing more than union dues (profits they use to argue with the airlines).

The FAA and insurance companies will determine currency and proficiency parameters which could go either way depending upon social experimentations.

Each of these (labor and regulation) will be marginalized by these experimentations, thereby increasing costs and decreasing safety.

Incursions, incidents, and perhaps accidents are likely to result and the airlines will be held accountable and at fault for compliances.

In the end, costs (labor, regulatory, and liability) will cause a welcoming of automation through, perhaps, the triple redundancy of a single pilot, navigation and landing automation, and remote piloting through data links that are used today.

In the end, the people will convert and fly, they have from 3 pilots to 2 pilots, and will when it goes to 1 pilot (still need that self preservation component). Technology enabled going from 4 engines to 2 engines. The prices will still go up as regulations continue to sore and the Government does the two things it does best - tax and overspend; and the unions do what they do best - overprice labor. Safety could actually increase as represented in current remote piloting statistics - assuming the same technological sophistication is utilized.

Fundamentally, this is an economic problem and that is how all parties will approach it behind closed doors. Inciting safety concerns is only to emotionally energize the people in their favor. 96% of all aircraft accidents are pilot induced even with the newer crew resource management profiles. In the design engineers defense however, the overall number of incidents has decreased through technology advancements in automation.

There’s no such thing as a single pilot . “ can a bird fly with one single wing?” I’m a very optimistic person, but it’s hard to be optimistic at this stage .
First and foremost we must protect pilot’s jobs, teach the future generations how to fly and promote the flying industry.
“ a single pilot “ idea “ is not based on reality” it will not happen.

Let’s be serious and realistic, Ladies and Gentleman.

Only single pilot mode of transportation I will ever take is my car and me.

Maybe someday, perhaps, but if the manufacturers and their engineers (Airbus, for instance according to the article) do not support single pilot ops, then why would anyone think this is in the near future? Of course, it's a NO right now. Perhaps the complaints should wait until manufacturers and their engineers actually propose such a thing, which is not currently the case.

That hasn't changed. Most will not trust a self driving car to fully control the car. Safety assistance is great and welcome - but that's far from "self-driving".

Formerly with FAA in Washington, I could have used a co-pilot when low blood sugar caused me to wipe out a pine tree and telephone pole with my Chevy 2 years ago, which totaled the auto. I had no physical warning for this event; just woke up in hospital with firemen leaving. Been driving 69 years with no previous events, even when not driving. I always thought one would get some sensation of a problem, but I had no warning at all. Now, if I can ever get my license back in the State of Maine, I would be so happy! I am a driving person as pilots are "flying people"; I drove in all states and overseas in all conditions. I have Dutch ancestry, and am proud to see the King of Holland flies daily as a working copilot. What a great guy!

It's a truly dreadful idea and puts everyone at risk - both in the air and on the ground. The airlines are really becoming a load of low-life money grubbers with seemingly no concerns about safety. Automated systems can take over the load during normal operations, but if something goes wrong (as it does) and a single pilot simply cannot take over all of the necessary tasks, who takes responsibility for the potential loss of hundreds of lives?

I'm too young to remember the loss of Radio Operators and Navigators but do remember the fight put up for Flight Engineers. All results were the same. Innovation, technology, Data, and history will move on. As facts overcome fear mongering, SPO is in the future.

With all the issues with the CV Vaccine effecting the heart, I vote NO on single pilot operations at least the next years. They've already relaxed the EKG requirements on the medical.

Yeah, yeah - they did the same 40/30 years ago when eliminating the FE with the debut of the two-man widebody crew.

Elsewhere, turkeys voted to abolish Christmas.

I should add, I dont disagree with their concern at the moment. But that doesnt mean that, at some point in the future, it wont be possible. Unions and regulators need to work together to find that point in time. Public perception will be guided by the thoughts of the unions and regulators.

Remember, that plenty of aircraft fly around with single pilots now. Some fly with no pilots. There is no god given right to have 2 people up front of an aircraft. Back in the day, there were 3. At some point in the future there will be 1, and maybe 0. Probably many (50?) years away, but eventually.

Having said all that, until the safe system can be guaranteed, which at the moment it cant, the efforts of bean counters should stop. But i wouldnt expect manufacturers to stop their efforts to make those safe systems work...!

Plenty of single pilot passenger carriers already. Just not operating under part 121.

Brings new light to advising crew that “I’m a GA pilot, if you need me…”

will dehavilland dhc2 pilots need a copilot ?

After 5 years on the 787, I’m not sure we need any pilots on board the modern aircraft. Next thing you know, these greedy managers will want to pull the flight engineers off the airplanes and elevator operators off the elevators.

The Luddites still exist. These are the same folks who said train safety would suffer if the caboose riding train conductor position was eliminated, despite the implementation of technology that handled those duties.

When pilots 'pass out'/DIE, from the Experimental mRNA Bio-weapon Injections, WHO will then LAND THE PLANE????

But none of us have any problem jumping on the driverless high speed tram that takes us from the gate to the terminal.
I think the problem is the fear of loosing a career due to improvements to the electronics which will happen sooner than we expect.

Ha. Soon it will be zero pilot operations. It is inevitable.