spaceandshit

I agree, I did the same thing.

I always wondered why people think building an app is the best way to get users. Maybe it’s that a large number of phone users these days are used to downloading an app for a function versus visiting a website just to get sucked into endless notifications. Maybe it’s development preferences by the creator. Maybe we’re the odd ones out and people actually do download apps just to try them out.

Unfortunately, that kind of arrogance is common on this forum.

You would have a difficult time finding an airborne system that does not already do this:

> I just hope these are thoroughly tested and actually solve real world problems

Changing from a legacy style to a new one is not cheap, and aerospace companies are not the type to spend money on useless, less reliable technology.

I see a few positions related to autonomy on your website. What kind of experience levels are you expecting? I can’t tell if those are 20+ years experience or entry-level.

However, people need to travel. And they will travel. Calling it a doomed industry is bogus.

Thanks for the link, I was not familiar. I'm not sure if any current commercial systems use these methods. I know the defense industry uses a lot of advanced techniques because they're their own regulators.

Are you familiar with DO-178? Basically outputs have to be deterministic.. so you can't really use advanced control techniques.

I haven't worked on flight control (but control on specific aircraft systems, which are at the same level), and they're all basically PID control thrown together.

Some Hindus bury, fyi

Convince regulators that advanced control techniques can be used on flight software (model-based predictive control, optimal control, etc.)

We know how to do these, maybe not as safe as we can with simpler methods today, but convincing the public and regulators will always be the challenge in aviation/aerospace.

Probably the only realistic (software related) method in today's world without a materials/battery improvement, but we won't get there for a while.

> Reducing idling time and improving routes both increase fuel efficiency without changing the airplane

Do you think idling time is a software problem? Aircraft idle for various time based on other requirements and needs, for example, spooling up the engines or inerting the fuel tanks.

Routes are already optimized by air traffic for the fastest, and cheapest route. They have no incentive to increase flight times as there would be fewer aircraft flying then.