iff789, 'more or less training' is a difficult subject.
Re aircraft type divisions; that used by Airbus could be justified by the safety data, however I suspect that there would be many objections.
An alternative is to consider less training for modern aircraft - actually focussed training according to the design, vs existing training for the older types. However, some data suggest that exiting training is not providing the expected results and could benefit from a new approach; e.g. number of approach to stall incidents which could progress to LoC (depending on event definitions) requires more attention on airspeed - awareness and control. Also focus on avoidance might be more effective than training for recovery - avoid and mitigate the threat - thus better use of training time.
Much of this thinking presumes that the modern designs benefit safety; if so - most likely, then the task would be to identify those aspects which technology provides in new designs and consider the extent of human intervention which could help in older aircraft, but this is being questioned after several accidents where the older designs had assumed too much. The alternative is to retrofit appropriate (low cost) technology to aid the human; e.g. conceptually like EGPWS.