[w0utert]

No, air traffic is not 'almost automated', and pilots are not 'just there as a safety backup'. The only part of flying that has been automated is avionics, ie: taking off, flying the aircraft along a pre-set flight path, and landing it. While this may seem this is 'all you need to automate away pilots', it completely ignores these nasty few percent of tail risk where things turn out not to follow the exact preconditions at the time of the flight plan. Like weather, technical problems (in the plane or on the ground), delays, airspace congestion, diversions, whatever. In each and every one of such cases it's still the pilot that has to decide how to handle the situation and either fly the plane itself, or reprogram the autopilot.

People always seem to think planes fly 'autonomously', but they don't. They can fly 'automatic' maybe 90% of the time, but they don't fly themselves.

[owenmarshall]

>In each and every one of such cases it's still the pilot that has to decide how to handle the situation and either fly the plane itself, or reprogram the autopilot.

So far I've heard these drones won't work because existing aircraft can't do this, or because military drones can't do that.

But no one seems to consider that these drones don't fulfill the same role as a Predator drone or a jumbo jet, so many of these objections are incredibly odd.

I remember seeing a link on HN several weeks ago about a flying robot that was designed to bump into walls and reorient itself. What if we had an army of package delivering robots that flew at 5 MPH, did best-case collision avoidance, and if they bumped into the side of a brick wall it's not a huge deal?

If an Amazon drone runs into bad weather it could be programmed to land on the nearest flat roof. If unexpected airspace congestion is detected it could just turn back to home. Or hover in place until things resolve. Or(...)

We aren't trying to safely land an airplane full of humans at 100 knots, or deliver a Hellfire missile on a moving target. We are flying a lightweight, slow moving drone with a tiny package. The considerations are completely different.

[w0utert]

>> So far I've heard these drones won't work because existing aircraft can't do this, or because military drones can't do that.

That's not the reason why I think this Amazon drone thing is just a way to generate some media hype, I can think of many other reasons why the idea is silly and won't work. You can find most if not all of them in other peoples posts in the various Amazon drone articles, I don't have to list them here.

My main point was not that delivery drones are impossible because planes or military drones still need pilots, I just wanted to point out that 'self-flying planes' are so often used as proof for other types of autonomous vehicles, which is based on the false premise that planes are autonomous.

[dspeyer]

90% is probably good enough for Amazon package delivery. The other 10% they send out another one. The cost of this is included in the fast-delivery surcharge. Unique and living products are not eligible for air delivery.