Why not an Autoland of the poor man, Dynon?

[JPBernoux]

After reading about the Garmin Autoland, I get the feeling that the Autopilot of the Skyview could be tweaked to provide a kind of Autoland service with the following additional simple tasks for the non-pilot:
- As we do not have Auto-throttle, the operator would have to move the throttle under the oral guidance of the system
- Same for the flaps although flaps are not necessary to land in normal conditions
- Same thing for the brakes - may be a little bit of differential brake training could help too
- Same thing for engine cutoff and cockpit exit
What says you Mister Dynon!

 

[DBRV10]

Or teach your pax to land....its not hard. We do it and despite the perception of being super human, its pretty easy. Or dont we want that secret to get out?

 

[swatson999]

I can't begin to imagine the liability inherent in creating this "feature".

 

[airguy]

Cirrus has had the autoland feature for years, before Garmin released it. Just pull the red handle.

You cannot let technology do everything.

 

[JPBernoux]

Cirrus has had the autoland feature for years, before Garmin released it. Just pull the red handle.

You cannot let technology do everything.

First, I need to apologize for not specifying that the "Autoland for the poor man" is not intended at providing automatic landing for any other purpose than saving the life of passengers in a light, experimental aircraft in the case of incapacitated pilot with no back-up (which is also the purpose of Garmin's Autoland).
If you look at whats going on in commercial aircraft, it seems to me that both Boeing and Airbus have let technology do "almost" everything including landing. Now with recent unfortunate events related to the 737 Max (and we could add less recent events regarding the crash of an Airbus in the Atlantic Ocean between Rio de Janeiro and Paris) one could argue that "we" have let technology do too much. In the case of the "Autoland of the poor man" I am in the world of Experimental Aviation which was the initial target of the Dynon Skyview. In this world letting the Autopilot of the Skyview conclude a flight which it has been able (with the current functionalities) to bring down to the threshold of the airport is not a big deal with the manual assistance I mentioned. Regarding liability for Dynon, it is way below the level of liability of having a neophyte building an airplane from a kit and flying it (as I have done!) with the Skyview as the main cockpit information system.

 

[HFMan]

Never happen- the Dynon GPS is not IFR certified, and is likely not capable of doing "to the runway" landings every time. I suspect the aircraft that have this autoland capability enabled have dual ADHRS systems, dual WAAS certified GPS, etc etc etc. The experimental Dynon hardware is not approved to do RNAV approaches, hence it will also not be considered for autoland capabilities.

 

[Roscoe74693]

I think the market will DEMAND autoland be included in all autopilots, just like ALL General Aviation aircraft now produced in Germany REQUIRE a ballistic chute and seat belts now. Once the technology exist to protect people, then companies who refuse to include that technology in their products become liable if the inevitable happens. I also think the autopilot calling out rpm settings for non-pilots would be an easy thing to do and for an untrained person to comply with. Auto throttle is not necessarily required.

 

[jakej]

“Once the technology exist to protect people, then companies who refuse to include that technology in their products become liable if the inevitable happens.”
I‘d suggest they would still be liable if the chute fails too.