this post was submitted on 26 Apr 2026
749 points (99.0% liked)
Not The Onion
21336 readers
1293 users here now
Welcome
We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!
The Rules
Posts must be:
- Links to news stories from...
- ...credible sources, with...
- ...their original headlines, that...
- ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”
Please also avoid duplicates.
Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, ableist, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.
And that’s basically it!
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Fuck AI for this, but there's a lot of room in ATC for further automation. To be perfectly honest, if the planes can more or less land themselves, and they're all fly-by-wire, I could see nearly automating the whole thing. Phase it in over a 10-year plan... computers HAVE to be able to be better at this than one unpaid, overworked, under-rested controller.
I'm all for automation if it works and if it improves safety but as far as I know they haven't proven that yet. I'd like to see an AI air traffic controller running in a simulation for many many years of simulation time first before we would even begin to talk about implementing it in real hardware.
That's the problem. No one wants to test Ai like that. Just dive right in and use it, I'm sure it's great!
Could test it out at small low-volume/non commercial airports first & go from there
I'd start with computer Sims before putting people's lives on the line, but then from your suggestion
And when someone dies, and they will, we decide to roll it out everywhere? As long as there's profit in it!
The question is whether the AI or the human is more prone to mistakes. It's hard to do that without real world tests, unfortunately.
Like self driving cars. Of course they're going to be involved in crashes where people die, but humans are such terrible drivers that the computers are better (except for Tesla which just has mislabeled lane assist)
Counterpoint: just look at the Air Canada crash that recently happened where a controller let a fire truck cross in the path of a landing aircraft.
Planes may have all this technology but that only involves what's happening in the air, not on the ground.
Now maybe all ground crew could have vehicles equipped with transponders and tracked as well, but there are also incidents of people randomly ending up on the runways / taxiways, or animals, or non airport vehicles.
With the amount of AI powered cameras being put up around cities around the world... Yea they could use tech like that to monitor runways too
AI is fine for this... assuming we're talking about a specifically trained machine learning model that is actually made to handle ATC and not just shoehorning an LLM into a job it was never intended to do.
Honestly, I'd put it at too high a risk for weighted models. We have ton's of pathfinding navigation code out there that could solve this outright on a raspberry pi :) not that i'd reccomend the pi...