Skip to main content
  1. Home
  2. Emerging Tech
  3. News

Pilotless planes? No thanks, say more than half of travelers

Add as a preferred source on Google

Although aviation experts often tell us that planes pretty much fly themselves these days, the idea of getting on one without a pilot will prompt most travelers to check the train timetable instead. Even if many of us would be willing to take a ride in a driverless car, that’s because cars travel on the ground at 50 mph rather than at 36,000 feet at 500 mph.

New research published this week confirms that most people are still not cool with the idea of stepping on a pilotless plane that can take off, fly, and land without any human help whatsoever.

Recommended Videos

The report, published by investment bank UBS, found that 54 percent of 8,000 respondents said they would most likely refuse to board a pilotless plane, even if the fare was cheaper. Only 17 percent said they’d be happy to fly on a plane without a pilot.

Breaking down the results by country, the researchers found that Americans were most comfortable about the idea of pilotless planes, with 27 percent willing to take a flight on one if the possibility presented itself. French and German travelers were the least likely, with only 13 percent expressing a willingness to give it a go.

Perhaps not surprisingly, younger respondents — specifically those aged between 18 and 34 — have the least issues about hopping aboard a plane without a cockpit. “This bodes well for the technology as the population ages,” UBS noted in its findings.

The report points out several advantages to having planes flown entirely by computers instead of humans, such as the removal of pilot error that can lead to catastrophic crashes. According to Boeing, around 80 percent of airline accidents are caused by pilot error, while the other 20 percent are attributable mainly to equipment failures.

But travelers nervous about the reliability of the technology would want to be satisfied about the security of the plane’s computers, with some fearing what hackers might do if they gained access to on-board systems or computers on the ground communicating with the aircraft during a flight.

Huge savings … for airlines

Airlines are getting interested in pilotless planes for one main reason: costs. UBS estimates that the industry spends more than $30 billion on pilots every year, so replacing them with computers offers obvious benefits. The report also suggests that significant fuel savings would be made because autonomous planes would fly more efficiently.

Although it’s hard to say when paying passengers will be flying on pilotless planes, USB points out that “the technology to remotely control military drones already exists, and this technology could be adapted to control … small to medium-sized business jets and, eventually, commercial aviation.” Indeed, plane makers are continuing to improve existing systems that already allow commercial airliners to fly without pilot assistance for much of the flight.

As flight autonomy increases, commercial airlines may first reduce pilots in the cockpit from two to one, while cargo planes would likely be the first large aircraft to do away with pilots altogether. But when it comes to taking them off passenger jets and redesigning the plane to remove the cockpit (and add more seats), well, we’re looking forward to seeing the industry’s marketing strategy for that one.

Trevor Mogg
Contributing Editor
Not so many moons ago, Trevor moved from one tea-loving island nation that drives on the left (Britain) to another (Japan)…
Yet another study says AI is bad for elections, and the rabbit hole gets worse
AI may be an election bomb waiting for someone to light the fuse
Voters cast their ballots on Election Day

Another election, another study has concluded that asking an AI chatbot for political guidance is a spectacularly bad idea. Research conducted during Hungary’s 2026 parliamentary election found that ChatGPT and Google Gemini offered not just inaccurate but also inconsistent and unreliable voting advice. The chatbots misclassified voter profiles, overlooked relevant parties, recommended parties absent from the ballot, and sometimes produced materially different answers when given the same information repeatedly.

AI keeps failing the voter test

Read more
Samsung’s humanoid robot ambitions are real, but factories come first
Samsung’s new robotics division has humanoids in its sights, although its immediate business is far more practical factory automation
Robot Touch Human Finger

Samsung wants a place in the humanoid race, but its new robotics push begins with machines built for factories rather than homes.

The CEO-led RX robotics division will initially focus on manufacturing robots. Samsung has separately identified humanoids as a priority, although it hasn’t announced a commercial model or explained where one fits into the division’s immediate plans.

Read more
The future of AI may depend on this one behind-the-scenes change
Running Claude on Android.

Whenever a new AI model arrives, it's easy to get caught up in the bells and whistles. We talk about how much smarter it is, how quickly it answers questions, or how realistic its images have become. But here's the thing: none of that matters much if the AI can't reliably work with the apps and services people use every day.

That's why an upcoming update to the Model Context Protocol (MCP) caught my attention. It isn't a new chatbot or a fancy AI model. In fact, most people will never even know it's happening. But it could quietly make the AI ecosystem a lot healthier. If you've never heard of MCP before, don't worry. Think of it as a shared language that lets AI assistants safely talk to apps like Gmail, Slack, calendars, databases, and countless other services. Instead of every company inventing its own way to make those connections, MCP gives everyone a common rulebook.

Read more