That’s the question researchers at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University are asking pilots around the U.S. in a new survey.
“Your assistance in this research will help develop the integration of pilot operations and urban air mobility in various scenarios,” the researchers noted.
The survey, which takes about 10 minutes to complete, asks questions about your opinions about the upcoming entrance of urban air mobility operations in the National Airspace System.
To be eligible to take the survey, you must be a resident of the U.S, a certificated pilot, completed active piloting within the last 5 years, and at least 18 years old.
All information collected will be anonymous, the researchers add. The online survey system will not save IP address or any other identifying information. No one other than the researchers will have access to any of the responses, they add.
Click here to access the study.
For more information, contact Dr. Scott R. Winter at [email protected].
The whole UAM “industry” is just the latest attempt to convince investors and taxpayers to flush a gazillion dollars down the drain supporting a technology for which there is no demand (see Eclipse & A380). Builders seem to have little knowledge of what it takes to safely and reliably move a profitable payload a useful distance in any weather. A twelve-engine, autonomous, electric flying car?
What could go wrong!
I’ll stick with two pilots, two engines powered by fossil fuel for now.
Aviation axiom: Never fly the “A” model of anything. If this happens, we are all going to be flying in the vicinity of LOTS of “A” models from various manufacturers and various software suppliers, in various combinations and configurations, and each one of them is going to have its own quirks and unique failure modes.
Tesla, which has spent a staggering amount of money on their software, still has problems, like driving into emergency vehicles. There’s somebody else in CA whose self-driving cars somehow congregate on one small cul-de-sac in SF and can’t figure out how to get out.
All these “technology” companies tout their version 0.9 products as the greatest thing since beer in cans, when in reality, most of the hype is to attract investors to the “bright idea du jour” by claiming to solve a “problem” that often doesn’t exist.
I’m perfectly willing to adopt new technology, but in this instance it might pay to remember that it is a long way down, and the ground is very hard. They will need to get this 100% right, every time, and if history is any guide, it ain’t gonna happen.
This survey ASSUMES the integration of UAV into the national airspace system has already happened, it has not. The tech isn’t there to make it work. The questions about the tech savvy of the respondents tells me all I need to know about the survey author and I’m certain he’ll use those responses to weight the responses to specific operational questions. Am I a Luddite, no and I do use Tech when it’s beneficial but the Tech to make this system functional doesn’t exist except in theoretical form. As JimH said, outside Class C and B, no way should this be allowed at this time.
My response would skew the study results … one the main reasons I live in North Dakota.
I would not want to flying anywhere near a UAV that is flying up to 5,000 ft and at 150 kts, outside class C and B airspace.