Technical Considerations

The technical side of automating large civilian aircraft is not likely to be an issue for long. Most passengers would be surprised to know that autopilots are already used in situations where they probably think the pilot is in control. For example, it is routine for large modern airliners to land on autopilot when visibility is poor, due to fog or bad weather. Experts insist that it is safer to let the computer land the plane in these situations.

However, commercial aircraft do not yet have the capacity for automated take-off. Although technically possible, the extra equipment required on both the plane and the ground would be expensive. There is also a safety factor to consider. One of the most dangerous situations during takeoff is an engine failure, which requires the pilot to instantly judge whether the plane has sufficient ground speed for takeoff, and if not, the flight must be aborted. Under current safety standards only one failure in a billion flights is allowed, and designing a take-off autopilot to meet these standards, although possible, would be extremely costly.

There are also other factors to consider. Pilots do more than just fly their plane in isolation. A pilot is also required to interact with air-traffic controllers, other aircraft, and to judge weather conditions during flight. These functions would also need to be automated. The Global Hawk uses a satellite relay to allow the operators to talk to traffic controllers directly - to the controllers it seems as though the operators are actually in the plane. The operators can thus avoid collisions and bad weather while airborne, or manoeuvre on the ground using "normal" communications, even though they may be physically located thousands of kilometres from their plane.

However, the Global Hawk operates in a very different environment to that of commercial flight. For example it flies at an altitude of 65,000 feet, and mostly in war zones where the airspace is usually empty, thus posing no threat to commercial flight paths. Military operators also only have to worry about one UAV at a time. However, the prospect of remotely co-ordinating all the aircraft using a commercial airport is a much more complex problem.

Although this would require a complete overhaul of air-traffic-control procedures, both in the air and on the ground, many experts argue that this would be a positive development, and that individual aircraft should be given greater control over choice of route, and avoidance of other planes. This would make navigating the airways similar to the system now used at sea. It would also require the development of better (but possibly expensive) navigation and collision-avoidance technology.

Pilotless planes would also force major changes to airport procedures. For example, ticketing, baggage and passenger security systems would still be needed, but the whole process of taxiing and queuing planes would be automated.

In summary, overcoming the technical problems associated with pilotless commercial flight is not the main issue - the solutions are either available now or will be in the near future. The cost would be high, but the savings for airlines could be massive. The cost of staff represents about 50% of airline expenditure, and pilots are the largest component of their wage bill. Conversely, autopilots do not require accommodation, never get sick, and can fly unlimited hours. The trend in aviation is clearly towards using technology to cut down on staff costs, and this is unlikely to stop.

The first steps toward this new age of aviation are already being taken. Northrop Grumman are investigating commercial applications in communications and agriculture, while Boeing have recently set up a UAV research unit with a long-term commercial focus. If these developments are successful, the next step will be the use of UAVs in freight transport. Once established, automated freight flights would provide the model for automated passenger flights.

WORD LIST

abort отменять

accommodation жилье

airborne [7BEbO:n] находящийся в воздухе

application применение

associated with sth связанный, действующий совместно с

available доступный

avoid collision избегать столкновения

be in control управлять, контролировать

capacity [kE7pXsiti] способность

complete overhaul [7EuvEhO:l] полный пересмотр

consider рассматривать, учитывать

conversely [7kOnvEsli] наоборот, обратно

costly дорогой

current [7kVrEnt] текущий, современный

cut down сокращать (расходы)

design проектировать, конструировать

development развитие, разработка, усовершенствование

empty пустой, свободный

engine failure [7feiljE] отказ двигателя

environment окружение, обстановка

establish устанавливать, учреждать

expenditure [iks7penditSE] трата, расход

extremely [ik7stri:mli] чрезвычайно, крайне

force changes вынуждать, потребовать изменения

freight [freit] transport грузовой транспорт

in isolation отдельно

in summary [7sVmEri] вкратце

insist настаивать

instantly [7instEntli] немедленно, тотчас

interact взаимодействовать, вести связь

investigate исследовать, изучать

judge приходить к выводу, решать, оценивать

major главный, важный

meet standards соответствовать стандартам

navigate управлять

overcome преодолевать

pilotless [7pailEtlis]беспилотный

pose ставить, предлагать

queue [kju:] организовывать очередь

relay [7ri:lei] смена, переключатель

remotely [ri7mEutli] отдаленно

require [ri7kwaiE] требовать

routine [6ru:7ti:n] рутина, шаблон, установившаяся практика

satellite [7sXtElait] спутниковый

set up a research [ri7sE:tS] учреждать, выдвигать исследование

similar to sth подобно чему-либо

solution решение

staff служебный персонал, кадры

sufficient [sE7fiSnt] достаточный

thus так, таким образом

visibility видимость

wage bill счет заработной платы

QUESTIONS:

1. What is the technical side of automating large civilian aircraft?

2. What is the routine procedure for large modern airliners when visibility is poor, due to fog or bad weather?

3. Is it safer to let the computer or the pilot land the plane in these situations?

4. Do commercial aircraft have the capacity for automated take-off? Is it technically possible?

5. What is the other factor to consider except the cost of the extra equipment?

6. What is one of the most dangerous situations during takeoff?

7. Is it possible to design a take-off autopilot under current safety standards?

8. What are pilots required to do except flying their planes in isolation?

9. What does the Global Hawk use to allow the operators to talk to traffic controllers directly?

10. Can the operators avoid collisions and bad weather while airborne, even though they may be physically located thousands of kilometers from their plane?

11. Where does the Global Hawk operate? What altitude does it fly at?

12. Does the Global Hawk pose any threat to commercial flight paths, flying in war zones?

13. Why do many experts argue that a complete overhaul of air-traffic-control procedures would be a positive development?

14. What would these pilotless planes require? And what changes to airport procedures would they force?

15. How massive could the savings for airlines be with the development of pilotless commercial flight?

16. What are the advantages of autopilots if to consider the side of expenditure?

17. What is the trend in aviation at present?

18. Are the first steps toward this new age of aviation already being taken or not? What are they?

² T9.9

Part Three

Не нашли, что искали? Воспользуйтесь поиском: