The idea of having only one pilot in the passenger plane’s cockpit by 2030 is gaining popularity. Regulatory authorities in 40 nations, including Germany, the United Kingdom, and New Zealand, are seriously examining this option to cut operational costs and address the rising pilot shortage. In Russia, the possibility of shifting to a single-pilot crew using a “virtual co-pilot” powered by neural network-based artificial intelligence algorithms is being investigated. However, many experts instantly questioned this suggestion, given the substantial risks involved.
Airbus has been exploring technologies to enable “extended Minimum Crew Operations” (eMCO). In an interview with the Sunday Times, Christian Scherer, the chairman of Airbus’ commercial aircraft division, not only stressed the viability of reducing the number of pilots but also stated, “Technologically, this is entirely achievable. And keep in mind that if you move to a single-pilot cockpit, you might as well move to a cockpit without a human.”
However, significant questions about a single-pilot approach remain unresolved. What about critical flying stages, such as takeoff and landing, which usually require two pilots? How will a single pilot handle a heavy workload during an emergency? What happens if the lone pilot falls incapacitated with no one else around?
Currently, all countries prohibit single-pilot operations for large commercial airplanes. International safety laws require at least two people in the cockpit at all times. If a pilot leaves, another crew member must take their position.
Can artificial intelligence truly replace a pilot who is responsible for the safety of hundreds of passengers? What compromises might be acceptable?
The key phrase is “long term.” This implies the development of a sophisticated onboard computer capable of taking over control at any time and performing complex tasks such as landing, which every professional will tell you is one of the most difficult aspects of flight.
Airline CEOs are intensely campaigning for pilotless technology, which is understandable given the current pilot shortage and rising operational costs. Airbus has already made major advances in autonomous flight technology.
For example, Project Morgan is developing two new cargo planes that have fewer crew requirements. An A350-1000 test aircraft successfully tested various autonomous operations, including automatic emergency landings, right down to taxiing to the parking area.
Another portion of the research focuses on enhancing pilot support during taxiing, which is a high-workload phase, particularly before departure.
This is about pushing the limits of aviation technology, with the ultimate goal of increasing safety and efficiency. Reducing the number of pilots must not jeopardize either of these goals.
However, pilot associations, particularly the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA), are strongly opposed to the move to single-pilot flights. Its president, Jason Ambrosi, has openly termed the idea of replacing pilots with technology “insane.”
However, history demonstrates that nothing is permanent under the sun, including ALPA’s position.
When the first Boeing 737s debuted in the late 1960s, they required a three-person crew: captain, co-pilot, and flight engineer, similar to the Russian Tu-214 and IL-96. ALPA insisted on keeping this crew composition at the time, despite subsequent aircraft modifications having more advanced automation. The group contended that having an extra “set” of eyes, ears, and hands in the cockpit was critical for managing large workloads or in the event that one pilot became incapacitated.
Only after thorough testing demonstrated the safety of two-person crews did ALPA settle on what is now the industry standard: two pilots in the cockpit.
There are nuances here. Airbus and Dassault Aviation, the manufacturers of the Falcon business jet series, support single-pilot flights, although only at cruising altitude. The concept suggests that “solo pilots” adhere to tighter criteria of experience and health.
Individual airlines, pilot unions, and the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) must approve changes to crew standards. Initially, the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) indicated that such flights would only be considered for more advanced aircraft, such as the Airbus A350, Boeing 787, and Boeing 777X.
However, data show that 80% of passengers would never feel comfortable flying without two pilots in the cockpit. According to the Australian and International Pilots Association, 83% of Australians would not reserve a ticket for a journey with only one pilot. In 15 countries, 76% of adult passengers were uncomfortable with the concept of pilotless planes.
Proponents of single-pilot flying have enormous obstacles in gaining public trust and approval. However, it’s clear that these opinions stem from perceptions. Currently, two pilots operate large aircraft, and there is no safety data available for unmanned or minimally manned civil aviation to compare with current statistics.
While the likelihood of a pilot’s health deteriorating during mid-flight is extremely low, it has never reached zero. There are a few situations from the last five years that have not resulted in an accident. However, such occurrences highlight why having a second pilot onboard is still a crucial safety measure.
They emphasize the significance of doing a thorough safety evaluation before making significant modifications to pilot operations. Implementing solutions for external control (or advanced onboard computer systems) and autonomous landing at appropriate airports may make single-pilot flights feasible.
Furthermore, ground control systems would require advanced understanding of the aircraft’s intended operations in the event of pilot incapacitation.
For “reduced-crew” operations, ground services, particularly air traffic controllers, must establish new rules and technologies. Clear protocols would be required for landing decisions and accountability in the event of unforeseen problems.
Airports would need to put in place ground-based systems for autonomous approaches and landings, as well as real-time meteorological data transfer to onboard computers. However, not every region or country will be able to fund such changes. So the underlying question is whether the costs of retaining a full crew are greater than the costs of developing and supporting technologies for single-pilot or pilotless flights. Another concern is whether world leaders, governments, and international organizations would desire to travel without pilots or prefer the guarantee of human accountability for their safety over depending exclusively on algorithms.
So, could single-pilot operations be a temporary phenomenon?
History demonstrates that societal opinions change throughout time. Several airports now offer driverless shuttles between terminals, and some metro trains in big cities are already self-driving.
The quest for single-pilot operations using artificial intelligence is one of the most significant and controversial developments. As the discussion over this transformation continues, it is apparent that switching to single-pilot operations would necessitate significant research and testing. Aviation engineers are faced with a challenging task: they need to balance innovation with passenger safety.
Official Website of Youtube Channel – Altitude Addicts