Autopilot vs. SkyOS – What's the Difference?
Today, most autopilot systems have the same primary function as when they were first invented decades ago – to relieve a qualified person from the flight controls while cruising from point to point. Given most autopilot systems leave pilots with less things to do in a cockpit, the conventional wisdom is that they make pilots safer. But do they? Even with widespread adoption of autopilot systems, over 1,200 accidents still occur throughout general aviation within the United States every year. Commercial airliner accidents, on the other hand, number a few dozen.
There are plenty of reasons why the accident rate—and subsequently the fatality rate—is much higher in general aviation, but the primary factor is technological capability. Autoflight systems that earn their way into most modern commercial airliners, versus those that are grandfathered into many general aviation aircraft, are engineered not just to reduce tasks but to nearly guarantee safety.
Autopilot systems in general aviation aircraft are mechanically attached to traditional aircraft flight controls that would otherwise require constant human manipulation; although these systems relieve the pilot from making inputs for short periods of time, they lack the capability to ensure the pilot remains in a safe profile. It’s no different than cruise control—drivers can take their foot off the pedal but it does not make the operation of the vehicle any safer. And like cruise control, they have very limited operational capability, when they work.
Autopilot systems were never designed to supercharge a human into becoming a pilot. Many of them receive commands by asking pilots to utilize a three-letter abbreviation disparate from anything used in our everyday lives (HDG=Heading; IAS=Indicated Air Speed; FLC=Flight Level Change; etc.). They take a pilot’s eyes from scanning outside to staring inside at various screens. They behave in ways that don’t always make sense, turning left or right or going up and down for unknown reasons; an autopilot’s idea of two-way communication is a kill switch.
Autopilot systems also have single points of failure—when they encounter a form of adversity (e.g., turbulence or a mechanical failure) they will, without adequate warning, shut off and hand the aircraft back to the pilot for them to handle what is likely a precarious situation.
Skyryse believes there’s a better way. And that way is called SkyOS.
What are the differences between SkyOS autoflight and a traditional autopilot system?
The limitations of traditional autopilot systems is one reason why Skyryse created SkyOS, the world’s first operating system for flight. Skyryse One, the first aircraft powered by SkyOS, is an R66 helicopter with a full authority fly-by-wire system that brings commercial and military aviation technology to general aviation. With SkyOS, Skyryse One has an autoflight system that does not rely on a traditional autopilot. This means:
- SkyOS, unlike a single-threaded aircraft autopilot, has no single point of failure. SkyOS has a full authority triply-redundant fly-by-wire architecture. Skyryse One is going to give the pilot a stable flight in all phases, from takeoff to landing, and in challenging conditions including turbulence, low visibility, and crosswinds. The stability of heading, altitude, and vertical speed is always guaranteed, to a level only seen in the most modern commercial or military aircraft.
- What’s more, the information provided by SkyOS is clearly labeled and identified for pilots of all skill levels; it does not use cryptic codes. Skyryse One uses arrows to tell the pilot what it is doing before it does it, using plain english like speed and altitude, so pilots are never second-guessing the system that is supposed to be guiding, not confusing, them.
- With SkyOS, pilots can either dial in or use a slider to input their commands, conversely, almost every autopilot system is using the same control panels—with finicky and tiny knobs—that have existed for half a century.
- SkyOS amounts to a flight operating system that’s never turned off or on, leaving traditional autopilots designed to be physically overpowered and unreliable in the dust.
Similar to any other fly-by-wire commercial aircraft, Skyryse One provides complete, dynamic envelope protection of the aircraft at all times. Pilots can program their flight path into SkyOS, or hand fly, in either case, receiving flight protection along the course. Basically, pilots can tell the aircraft where to go and the aircraft will maintain a safe profile along the way. No active control input is needed.
To put it simply, autopilot systems offer momentary navigational assistance, Skyryse One and SkyOS autoflight provide complete safety assurance every moment in the air.
Below are some recent aircraft crashes and fatal accidents that have at least one thing in common: the pilot relied on an autopilot system that failed them. If pilots were flying Skyryse One, these accidents simply never would have happened and these lives would not have been lost.
Recent airplane and helicopter crashes where autopilot malfunctions were a primary factor
Fault in Sikorsky S-92 results in an unexpected pitch up, fatal crash in North Sea
An unexpected, dramatic pitch-up by a Sikorsky S-92 was connected to an apparent trim servo malfunction that led to a fatal accident. According to survivors of the accident and published in an initial report:
The nose of the helicopter started to rise from the expected 10- to 12-degree nose-up attitude to a 30-degree nose-up attitude over several seconds,” the NSIA said. “When the crew became aware of the situation, they attempted to correct the unusual attitude, however the aircraft impacted the water and sank to a depth of 220 meters.
The event occurred after the co-pilot engaged the automatic flight control system (AFCS), resulting in Sikorsky releasing guidance for all S-92 operators.
Airbus H225 crashes into sea after pilot mistakenly thought autopilot was engaged
In 2019, a pilot off the coast of South Korea became disoriented, flying into a “black hole” during the dark of night in an Airbus H225 (a $20 million helicopter). Autopilot was listed as a contributing factor in the crash as the pilot mistakenly believed the go-around mode was set to on, misinterpreting his aircraft’s pitch for being in a climb when in reality it was in a sharp descent.
Here is more detail according to the report:
During takeoff…the pilot mistakenly believed that the autopilot was in G/A mode and, during the process of accelerating the aircraft, misinterpreted the strong attitude of the aircraft as a climb. [Additionally] Mistaking the aircraft's strong attitude for a climb, the pilot continuously pushed the control stick (Cyclic), rendering the autopilot ineffective (Override), and causing an increase in speed and descent rate.
Failure to recognize suspected icing causes ATR-72 crash in Brazil
Voepass Linhas Aéreas Flight 2283, an ATR-72, went down in a flat spin, killing over 100 passengers on-board in what is believed to have been caused by icing over the horizontal stabilizer, resulting in a complete loss of authority.
It is suspected autopilot was set to on and the pilots’ hands were off the controls, resulting in an inability to recognize the horizontal stabilizer was losing effectiveness until the autopilot could no longer control the aircraft.
As of this writing, the investigation is ongoing, however several fatal accidents dating back to the mid-90s have been attributed to icing and autopilot of the ATR-72. The FAA strongly recommends avoiding use of the autopilot in icing conditions for the ATR-72 and similar aircraft because these autopilots provide no feedback to the pilot of control system margins. In contrast, SkyOS provides Control Margin Awareness during all conditions.
Pilot declares emergency after autopilot failure, crashed PC-12 in Montana
It is likely that severe turbulence caused either a malfunction of the autopilot or for the system to disconnect in a PC-12 crash over Wyoming. It is believed an autopilot disconnect occurred while the aircraft was in an unusual attitude, and the pilot, likely over reliant on the autopilot, was unable to perform an upset recovery of the aircraft. Regardless, the timing of the autopilot disconnect was unfortunate, as it had allowed the aircraft to enter a dangerous attitude in the first place.
Cirrus SR22 crashes in Maine, Electronic stability protection fails to deploy
A 2023 Cirrus SR22 was involved in a fatal accident below minimums on an IFR approach. The preliminary accident report referred to poor visibility as a causal factor in the crash, with the pilot assumed to have lost control of the aircraft during an attempted go-around.
The Cirrus was equipped with Electronic Stability Protection (ESP), which is designed to use the autopilot servos to offer inherent stability when the autopilot is not engaged and guide the flight controls to prevent Loss-of-Control (LOC) events. It is unclear why ESP apparently did not perform in this instance.
Skyryse One vs. Traditional autopilot systems
Here’s just a few of the features of the most popular, modern autopilot systems and how they compare to the industry-first autoflight safety capabilities of Skyryse One:
Automatic trim
Automatic trim is available in modern autopilot systems but isn’t needed on SkyOS, as it is a full authority fly-by-wire autoflight system that manages actuation of the flight surfaces at all times.
Straight and level recovery
Dynamic envelope protection provided by Skyryse One’s SkyOS flight operating system won’t allow the aircraft to get into a position where straight and level recovery is needed. When no autoflight functions are engaged, if the pilot simply lets go of the control stick, SkyOS will return to straight and level flight, maintain the heading, and fly the commanded vertical speed, all within the safe envelope. No extra buttons to push.
Override protection
Aircraft autopilot systems often have a number of methods for disengaging, at least intentionally. One way of overriding an autopilot is to overpower the controls, giving pilots at least some peace of mind that the system doesn’t completely control the fate of their flight. This represents three things:
- Autopilot systems are reliant on human agency to determine when they may not be doing as told (the systems do not provide guarantees).
- Autopilot systems are not designed to function through all phases of flight, particularly some instances of turbulence, as they are literally meant to be overpowered.
- All general aviation autopilot systems are prohibited from use during takeoff and landing when the aircraft is below a prescribed altitude, typically 400 feet above the ground. Stability becomes entirely a pilot’s responsibility during the most critical phases of flight – the autopilot is not designed to be trusted.
Autoland
Autoland features are an emergency procedure. Their systems rely on a conventional autopilot system with parts that are not certified to be primary flight controls, and, because of this, they may only be pressed in the most dire of circumstances, like an incapacitated pilot. As of this writing, the amount of times autoland has been executed in the field is zero.
Contrast this with Skyryse One, which, thanks to SkyOS, was engineered so that any pilot, person, or passenger can fly an aircraft by touching only a few buttons on one interface.
Single-threaded
To reiterate, almost all aircraft autopilot systems in general aviation are single-threaded, meaning they have single points of failure, with an expected failure rate, and are backed up during failure by a pilot flying manually. Often, autopilot failures directly cause an upset when a sensor or servo fails, and leaves the pilot to recover from the unusual attitude. Equally as often, the pilot must recover in clouds, icing, or turbulence. Skyryse One offers a triplex system with a failure rate tantamount to the most advanced commercial airlines flying today, and it never asks the pilot to recover from failures by flying manually.
—
These are just a glimpse of the features and how they compare with each other. The larger point is that SkyOS never needs to be overpowered. It will not fail and leave the pilot to recover. And it is simple and safe for pilots to count on SkyOS autoflight through all phases of flight.
For one of the few times in aviation, with Skyryse One, pilots are actually ahead of the aircraft at all times, not behind it.
