Drones (both autonomous and remote piloted) have much higher mishap rates than crewed aircraft. Taking off is "easy" until something goes wrong, like a mechanical failure or runway incursion. It's impossible to anticipate and explicitly code for every possible failure mode, so developing autonomous flight control systems that would be safe enough for commercial passenger flights is extremely challenging.

Category IIIC ILS (full auto-land) does exist but requires special equipment for both the aircraft and airport. Human pilots have to actively monitor the system and take back control if anything goes wrong (which does happen).

Garmin also has the Autonomí auto-land system for certain general aviation aircraft which can attempt to land at the closest suitable airport. But this is only used for single pilot operation in case the pilot becomes incapacitated. It isn't suitable for regular flights.

▲

lolc 3 days ago | parent [-]

Consider that drones may fail more because failure is an acceptable outcome for drones.

▲

nradov 3 days ago | parent [-]

OK, I've considered that and determined it to be mostly wrong. While drone failure is an acceptable outcome, current technology still doesn't allow drones to be as safe as equivalent crewed aircraft across the full range of flight operations. Maybe in 50 years we'll get there.

	▲	lolc 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		Sure current tech does not allow us to safely automate flights. What I wanted to get at is that tech that doesn't need developing does not get built. Looking at drone failures does not tell us the max safety they would reach if we focused on that. Obviously a droneliner would look very different from the jets that are common today.