Press a button and this plane lands itself

The answer to every pilot’s worst nightmare is closer than you think.

Garmin’s system, developed for Piper Aircraft, allows a pilot to land a plane in an emergency with the push of a button. Picture: Garmin

The answer to every pilot’s worst nightmare is closer than you think. Some recreational flyers can now can buy private planes that can safely land themselves in emergencies.

Air-safety experts have long envisioned a future in which confused or incapacitated aviators could rely on a single command — sometimes dubbed pushing the “big red button” — to cede control to computers that save lives by preventing crashes and quickly getting planes on the ground.

The next giant leap in cockpit automation is showing up in an unlikely place: single-engine propeller planes used by weekend pilots.

Such systems can manage aircraft speed and engine performance on their own, while automatically descending toward the nearest suitable airport.

Without any human input, computers are designed to communicate with air-traffic controllers, line up with the correct runway and extend landing gear — all while avoiding storms or terrain, and entering a holding pattern if necessary. After touchdown, other sensors are intended to help automatically apply brakes and shut down the engine.

Until recently, total “auto-land” capabilities were unimaginable in virtually any civilian aircraft. Now private pilots are getting access to sophisticated automated safeguards, going beyond those used in many commercial aircraft. Proponents of the systems predict they could start reshaping jetliner cockpits within the next decade.

The new features have been approved by US air-safety regulators and since May have been standard equipment on Piper M600 turboprops that carry six people, adding about $US150,000 to the roughly $US3.2 million ($4.6m) overall price tag. The avionics were developed by Garmin Ltd for Piper Aircraft Inc, which has sold 35 planes with such safeguards, though it says none of them has been activated in flight.

Honeywell International Inc, France’s Thales SA and United Technologies Corporation’s Rockwell Collins unit are among leaders in cockpit automation working on similar technology.

Such features also are expected to be available shortly on the personal, single-engine Cirrus Vision Jet and Daher TBM 940 turboprops. Similar systems eventually could spread to business jets and airliners, fundamentally changing operations, pilot training and the way future crews will interact with flight controls.

At this point, Garmin is solely targeting pilot incapacitation due to a stroke, heart attack or other sudden medical crisis. The emergency backstop can kick in with the push of a button, or turn on automatically if pilots fail to respond to computer prompts checking on their condition. It can even be turned on by a passenger, and clicked off the same way.

Some of the broader impact, though, is likely to show up first in cargo jets. Currently mandated two-pilot crews eventually could be replaced with a single pilot, monitored from the ground and, in extreme cases, replaced by an auto-land system in the event of incapacitation.

Phil Soucy, a 69-year-old former military aviator and Virginia aerospace entrepreneur who normally flies a couple of times a month for pleasure — often with his wife or other family members — says he was instantly sold on the feature.

Mr Soucy took delivery of a Piper M600 in May, recalling: “I wouldn’t have done it, if it weren’t for the auto-land system.” Explaining that he “would like to continue flying for some time,” Mr Soucy adds that his wife “was all for getting it” to alleviate concerns about having to take over the controls in the unlikely event he passed out. “It takes away all that risk.”

Impaired pilots — whether suffering from health issues or problems stemming from drug or alcohol use — account for roughly 8 per cent of fatal crashes of private planes in the US. Beyond reducing or eliminating those kinds of accidents, Garmin envisions much wider adoption of its latest feature.

“This seed has been planted,” says Phil Straub, executive vice-president of Garmin’s aviation business. “I think it will progress,” he adds, but the biggest question remains: “Where does it evolve over time?” Garmin is a major supplier of cockpit electronics for private planes, marine navigation systems and various consumer products.

Garmin’s breakthrough “at a minimum, increases the comfort level for pilots” if something really goes wrong, according to Randy Babbitt, a former head of the US Federal Aviation Administration.

Beyond that, he says, “it opens the door to more confidence for less experienced pilots, or maybe inviting fewer pilots required, for some commercial operations.”

Enhanced automation challenges fundamental concepts about the superiority of human decision-making, especially amid rapid evolution of increasingly autonomous vehicles in the air as well as on the ground.

Some experts continue to think human pilots are a better bet. Consultant Mica Endsley, a former chief scientist for the US Air Force with expertise in human factors, or the way machines and people interact, says existing automation simply can’t anticipate problems as well as humans: “It isn’t up to the level of complexity that pilots have to handle on an ongoing basis.”

Sceptics also worry about software reliability and inadequate federal oversight. “Technology is advancing very fast, but regulators clearly aren’t keeping pace,” says Najmedin Meshkati, an engineering professor at the University of Southern California. “The people who are supposed to validate, verify and test simply cannot keep up.” The FAA has said it is ramping up recruitment and enhancing reliance on a new cadre of automation experts.

With the benefits of increasing automation, safety experts also stress the biggest factor in avoiding crashes is the importance of manual flying skills — plus the willingness of pilots to take over quickly and confidently when computers go awry.

Since airline pilots typically use automation for all but a few minutes of each flight, many computerised systems are devised to prevent crews from overriding them.

In recent years, Airbus SE and Boeing Co have gone public with separate projects to develop single-pilot or pilotless planes. Both companies are relying heavily on artificial intelligence and anticipate initial flights of such aircraft within a decade.

Boeing chief executive Dave Calhoun has gone further, saying: “We are going to have to ultimately almost — almost — make these planes fly on their own.” European plane maker Airbus long ago decided automation that pilots can’t turn off is the natural antidote for the most egregious cockpit mistakes. The company’s senior safety officials used to say embracing such systems was practically a moral imperative. Last month, Airbus completed a two-year demonstration program of more than 500 airliner flights testing autonomous taxiing, takeoffs and landings.

Boeing chief executive Dave Calhoun. Picture: AFP

The automation debate is bound to intensify as next-generation airliners with more capable systems roll off assembly lines. The Pentagon is pioneering the concept of fully autonomous helicopters and fighter jets. Many airliners already preclude pilots from flying too slowly, banking too steeply or raising the plane’s nose dangerously high. Other forms of automation step in if an engine fails at takeoff, adjusting thrust on the remaining engine, along with the direction and rate of climb.

Other sensor suites and software upgrades offer the ability to land airliners in virtually zero visibility, with pilots merely monitoring instruments. Instrument landing systems use sensors on aircraft and on the ground to locate runways in all types of weather. But in most cases, those features don’t automatically turn on, choose runways by themselves or turn off engines.

As aviators and airlines become more comfortable with computers assuming more responsibility, that paves the way for failsafe solutions able to take over when humans can’t or don’t respond appropriately, or quickly enough, to avert a disaster. Garmin’s progress takes a significant step toward that goal, according to veteran safety and human-factors experts, because it highlights regulatory endorsement of the general concept.

William Voss, former head of the Flight Safety Foundation, a global advocate for accident prevention, for years has seen the automation dilemma as a growing problem.

“The industry can either move toward giving pilots a big red button as a last resort,” he says. “Or it can figure out ways to more effectively develop flying skills and enhance training so they can better respond to emergencies.”

Advocates of the technology say it could lead to single-pilot airline operations, though only gradually due to passengers who may baulk at putting their lives in the hands of a pilot with only a computer as a backup.

Even sceptics such as Ms Endsley, who doesn’t foresee widespread adoption of auto-land principles anytime soon, recognise Garmin’s design achievement. “They did a lot of things right in engineering it,” she says.

Ultimately, rapidly expanding autonomy on the ground may end up as the strongest catalyst for public acceptance of higher-level automation in the air. From computer-assisted vehicles to robotic train controls, Mr Babbitt, the former FAA head, sees automation gaining traction across the board.

He, for one, can’t wait.

“If I had an airplane that had it,” Mr Babbitt says with a chuckle, “the first thing I would do is take it up to 5000 feet, punch a button and see what it did.”

The Wall Street Journal