- Joined
- Feb 16, 2012
- Messages
- 4,690
- Reaction score
- 7,164
- Location
- At home, in the brewery in Maryland.
Systems monitor is an excellent way to describe it. By the time I retired from flying, the job of actually ‘flying’ had devolved from stick and rudder manipulator to data input programmer.Unless the car is doing the driving and you are just a systems monitor. That is the way I drive anymore. Reminds me a lot of flying on autopilot where you don't concern yourself with the heading and altitude hold drudgery but instead relax and take in the big picture.
Back when the transition from “steam gauge” systems to “glass cockpits” was happening, the transition wasn’t always smooth for aviators who were steeped in traditional methods.
Boeing aircraft (back when Boeing was influenced more by engineering rather than bean counting) were generally more intuitive in their design, as opposed to Airbus. Throughout training, and until you have more than a few months of actual operational experience, the most common refrain heard in Airbus cockpits was, “What’s the airplane doing now?”
Even after seven years of flying as Captain on the A320, I wasn’t always sure what the aircraft would do in response to my programmed inputs. Boeing, on the other hand, was like a highly skilled First Officer who would reliably do exactly what you told it to do. Just be very careful what you tell it to do.
I suspect that’s much the case with self driving cars. Casual drivers think the system is fully functional and totally responsive to all driving situations. This is simply not the case, and has repeatedly been demonstrated in accident after accident where operators have ceded all control and monitoring to algorithms that are insufficiently designed and engineered to handle the multitude of variables.