Latest Drudge-DAILY MAIL Airplane Story

And that's the prudent reasoning why there are always 2 pilots
required I betcha

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worl...-Atlantic.html

Robert Cohen writes:

And that's the prudent reasoning why there are always 2 pilots
required I betcha

If the chance of a problem disabling one pilot is 1 in 1000, then the chance
of a problem disabling both is 1 in 1,000,000. However, the chance that at
least one of two pilots will have a problem becomes one in 500.25. But since
only one pilot is required, the former outweighs the latter.

On Nov 20, 7:21*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
Robert Cohen writes:
And that's the prudent reasoning why there are always 2 pilots
required I betcha

If the chance of a problem disabling one pilot is 1 in 1000, then the chance
of a problem disabling both is 1 in 1,000,000. *However, the chance that at
least one of two pilots will have a problem becomes one in 500.25. But since
only one pilot is required, the former outweighs the latter.

http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos107.htm

in approximately the /incapacity as being the/a reason for two, and i
lose that "betcha," uh?

well, imho, it's informally implied and despite those confusing to me
statistics/ odds you cite

what if the all-too-human co-pilot had gotten full seniority and was
flying it by himself, even if the then computer state of the art
technology were "full proof"

Both pilots are qualified to fly the aircraft, and both can fly it alone if
necessary. The distinction between "captain" and "first officer" is largely a
fiction enforced by airlines. Air regulations do require that one of the
pilots be considered the "pilot in command," but they make no mention of
make-believe pseudo-military ranks.

On Nov 20, 10:09*pm, Robert Cohen wrote:
On Nov 20, 7:21*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:

Robert Cohen writes:
And that's the prudent reasoning why there are always 2 pilots
required I betcha

If the chance of a problem disabling one pilot is 1 in 1000, then the chance
of a problem disabling both is 1 in 1,000,000. *However, the chance that at
least one of two pilots will have a problem becomes one in 500.25. But since
only one pilot is required, the former outweighs the latter.

http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos107.htm

in approximately the /incapacity as being the/a reason for two, and i
lose that "betcha," uh?

well, imho, it's informally implied and despite those confusing to me
statistics/ odds you cite

what if the all-too-human co-pilot had gotten full seniority and was
flying it by himself, even if the then computer state of the art
technology were "full proof"

oops, dammnne glitch

so, a re-wriite of the first paragraph-fragment

http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos107.htm

in approximately 8 paragraphs down, it is explained about "two pilots"
and incapacity ain't explicity specified, and thus i sorta lose that
"betcha"

blah blah...

yada yada...