Guest Blog: The Case For Keeping Two Pilots

Jeremiah FELIX is a pilot for a Canadian airline with concerns about the apparent move toward single-pilot airline operations.

The rise of automation in aviation has transformed the flight deck, enhancing safety and operational efficiency by reducing pilot workload and minimizing human error. However, as automation evolves, discussions about potentially reducing the number of pilots in the cockpit—possibly to just one—are intensifying. While automation is an invaluable tool, the role of human pilots remains irreplaceable, particularly in critical or unforeseen situations. This article explores the relationship between automation and flight safety, arguing that despite technological advancements, maintaining two pilots in the cockpit is essential for ensuring the highest safety standards.

The Rise of Automation in Aviation

Automation has a long and storied history in aviation. From early autopilots introduced in the 1920s to the advanced Flight Management Systems and fly-by-wire technology used in modern airliners, these innovations have revolutionized aircraft operations. Today’s flight decks, often referred to as glass cockpits due to their digital interfaces, are equipped with autopilots, auto-throttle systems and sophisticated navigational tools that allow for highly automated flight, significantly reducing pilot involvement in routine operations.

Beyond autopilot and fly-by-wire technologies, artificial intelligence is revolutionizing aviation by enabling predictive maintenance and real-time diagnostics. AI systems analyze vast amounts of data from aircraft sensors to detect potential failures before they occur, reducing unscheduled maintenance, minimizing downtime and enhancing both safety and operational efficiency. This proactive approach helps airlines improve fleet management and optimize performance, ensuring smoother, more reliable flight operations.

Key Automation Milestones

• Autopilot Systems: First introduced in the 1920s, they allowed pilots to maintain a steady course without manual input.

• Fly-by-Wire Technology: This replaced traditional mechanical controls with electronic systems in the 1970s and 1980s.

• Flight Management Systems and Automated Landing Systems: Capable of guiding an aircraft from takeoff to landing with minimal pilot input, these systems emerged in the 1990s and early 2000s.

Automation’s contribution to aviation safety is undeniable. It minimizes human error, enhances fuel efficiency and ensures precision in operations that are difficult for humans to maintain consistently over long flights. Systems such as the Enhanced Ground Proximity Warning System and Traffic Collision Avoidance System automatically alert pilots to potential threats, further bolstering safety.

Fly-by-wire systems have significantly improved aircraft response times, but they still rely on human input during critical phases like takeoff and landing.

Automation's Role in Enhancing Flight Safety

Automation has significantly transformed aviation safety by reducing pilot error, which remains one of the leading causes of accidents. Many modern systems now perform tasks that previously required extensive human attention, such as maintaining optimal flight paths, adjusting altitude and ensuring safe takeoffs and landings. By managing these routine tasks with precision, automation allows pilots to concentrate on high-level decision-making and monitoring.

While automation reduces human error, overreliance can cause pilots to lose situational awareness, as seen in the Air France Flight 447 crash, where automation disengaged unexpectedly, leading to confusion.

Safety Enhancements Through Automation

• Reducing Workload: Automation handles repetitive tasks such as maintaining speed, heading and altitude, enabling pilots to manage long, complex flights more effectively.

• Improved Emergency Response: Systems like TCAS can detect potential collisions and provide timely guidance, often faster than a human pilot can react.

• Consistency and Precision: Automated systems don’t suffer from fatigue or distraction, ensuring reliable performance in routine operations.

However, while automation can manage a significant portion of flight tasks, it is not infallible. Technology can and will malfunction, and automated systems cannot replicate human intuition, adaptability or creativity in rapidly changing environments. This is where the presence of two trained human pilots becomes crucial.

The Critical Role of Two Pilots in the Cockpit

Redundancy and Cross-Checking: A fundamental principle of aviation safety is redundancy. Two pilots provide a vital human layer of safety, complementing automated systems by cross-checking each other’s decisions and catching errors that might otherwise go unnoticed. This is particularly critical during high-stress scenarios or when automation fails, as human judgment and coordination are required to navigate complex or emergency situations.

• Mutual Monitoring: Pilots monitor each other and the aircraft systems, ensuring a second set of eyes to catch potential issues.

• Cross-Checking Critical Actions: During complex phases of flight, such as takeoff, approach and landing, two pilots can independently verify actions and system inputs to avoid mistakes.

Handling Emergencies and Unpredictable Scenarios

Automation excels at managing routine tasks, but in abnormal situations—such as severe turbulence, mechanical failures or sudden changes in weather—two human pilots are essential. They collaborate to troubleshoot, make decisions and manage the workload during emergencies. In a single-pilot cockpit, one person would be responsible for everything, increasing the risk of errors under pressure.

Examples of Two Pilots Saving Lives

Numerous instances throughout aviation history have demonstrated how the teamwork of two pilots can be crucial in emergencies. For example:

• United Airlines Flight 232 (1989): After a catastrophic engine failure, the coordinated efforts of both pilots (and a third pilot who happened to be on board) saved many lives by guiding the aircraft to an emergency landing.

• Qantas Flight 32 (2010): Both pilots’ teamwork was crucial in safely landing the aircraft after a major engine failure in an Airbus A380.

• FedEx Express Flight 1432 (2023): While on a low-visibility approach for landing at Austin-Bergstrom International Airport, First Officer Bradeen identified a Southwest flight on the runway and called for a go-around, enabling a safe landing.

In-Flight Medical or Psychological Emergencies

Another important aspect of having two pilots is the risk of one pilot becoming incapacitated due to medical emergencies, fatigue or mental health crises. With two pilots in the cockpit, there is always a backup available to take over. In a single-pilot scenario, this safety net disappears, leaving the aircraft vulnerable if the lone pilot cannot perform their duties.

The Risks of Reducing to a Single Pilot

Despite the increasing sophistication of automation, reducing the cockpit crew to a single pilot poses significant threats to aviation safety:

• Overreliance on Automation: While automation can handle many tasks, pilots must closely monitor the systems. A single pilot may become overly reliant on automation, leading to a loss of situational awareness.

• Increased Workload: In non-routine situations, the workload can overwhelm one person, especially during emergencies. Two pilots can share tasks, ensuring nothing is overlooked.

• Reduced Error-Checking: Two pilots provide a crucial safety layer by checking each other’s actions. Reducing to one pilot increases the chance of uncorrected errors.

The Air Line Pilots Association International has raised concerns about the push toward single-pilot operations, citing studies that show increased workload and reduced error-checking would compromise aviation safety.

Why Two Pilots?

While automation continues to advance, creating more efficient and safer flight systems, it is not yet capable of fully replacing human pilots. The interaction between human pilots and automated systems is critical for managing complex and unexpected scenarios. Instead of reducing the number of pilots, future automation developments should focus on effectively supporting pilots, enabling them to make better decisions while keeping humans in the equation.

The Balance Between Automation and Human Expertise

• Human Adaptability: Pilots have a unique ability to adapt to unforeseen circumstances, a quality that automation lacks. Humans are better equipped to handle ambiguous or incomplete information, make split-second decisions and adjust their actions in ways that machines cannot.

• Technological Limitations: Automation follows programmed logic, which works well in predictable scenarios but can struggle with complex emergencies. Pilots can think critically and outside the box when faced with situations that automated systems aren’t designed to handle.

Automation in aviation should be seen as a tool to support, not replace, human pilots. Future developments will likely focus on enhancing human-machine collaboration, ensuring that pilots retain control during critical moments.

Manual Proficiency

As automation takes on more tasks, maintaining manual flying skills is crucial for pilots. Regular training for abnormal situations—where automation may not function correctly—ensures that pilots can step in effectively when necessary. This training reinforces the importance of having two pilots in the cockpit, enabling them to share responsibilities and maintain awareness in the event of a system failure.

For example, the Federal Aviation Administration's Safety Alert for Operators (SAFO 17007) recommends that pilots regularly practice manual flying, especially during routine operations like takeoffs and landings. This helps maintain proficiency in handling unexpected situations when automation fails, reducing the risk of accidents due to a decline in manual flying skills. Consistent hands-on control not only strengthens a pilot’s understanding of the aircraft systems but also enables operators, managers and decision-makers to quickly identify issues, navigate unfamiliar scenarios and respond effectively.

Conclusion

Automation has undeniably enhanced aviation safety, reducing human error and improving operational efficiency. However, the notion of reducing cockpit crews to a single pilot introduces significant risks, especially in scenarios where human adaptability and judgment are essential. Two pilots provide a vital layer of redundancy that remains crucial for aviation safety, even in this era of advanced automation. The balance between human expertise and automated systems is critical; therefore, the safest path forward is to keep two trained pilots in the cockpit, working alongside automation to ensure the highest levels of safety for all.

Ensuring the presence of two trained pilots in the cockpit is essential for preserving not just operational efficiency but also the safety and trust of the flying public in the evolving age of automation.