Why is automation dependency encouraged in modern aviation ?

[Vessbot]

Originally Posted by dr dre

As far as lack of hand flying goes, I say it’s not a problem. There is little hand flying value to be gained anyway when the aircraft is in a stable climb or descent. The real value of manual manipulation skills are shown on an approach onto a short runway in gusty, wind shear or variable wind conditions. Hit the main gear on the markers and then exit first available taxiway as there’s another aircraft close up your backside. Won’t be able to do that unless you have good manual skills, yet airline pilots do it everyday all over the world without applause, even the so called “children of magenta”. I’d say less than 0.5% of landings are Autoland, and a auto land is pretty useless in all but the calmest wind conditions anyway.

That’s why it’s skills, plural. Yes many airline pilots are skilled at landing reasonably accurate in a gusty crosswind (which is itself a combination of a few sub-skills) but isn’t there more to flying than that? Does flying begin when you’re delivered onto a 3 mile final on the GS, configured and trimmed with the thrust set?

Earlier you only looked for hand flying value in a stable climb or descent, and I’d agree that some pitch slop there, where the only consequence may be 10 or 20 knots, is probably not consequential, and the correction to that can be so slow as to not be felt in the back. But how about level flight, where an altitude error of 1 or 2 hundred feet is much more glaring? And where ham-handed corrections lead to a jerky ride? How about flap changes, where separate slat and flap movements can require a carefully timed sequence of anticipated corrections, and corresponding thrust? Or, even better, in a turn where you also have to maintain altitude? Or intercepting the localizer where you want to do it ideally without five S-turns? Shouldn’t one be proficient at of all those things?

I would hope.

But we have crashes like Indian 605 where in a perfect plane on a clear day, they fell into mode confusion on the approach and couldn’t bring themselves to just fly the airplane, instead trying to untangle the modes all the way into the crash. Or, Flash 604 where in IMC the AP failed to engage on departure, and instead of flying the plane they maintained a panicked and sustained effort to engage it, again all the way into the crash. Or, Asiana 214, with again a perfect plane on a perfect day where, unlike the other 2 examples and to their credit, they clicked the red button and decided to fly the airplane. But in doing so, they were so overwhelmed by suddenly being thrown into the pilot’s seat that they didn’t didn’t have the task capacity to make a single trim change over two flap changes and 30 pounds of added stick force! Etc. etc.

So I think that the maintenance of a level of comfort and willingness to fly the airplane when required, including at sudden provocation, is not too much to ask for. And, living every day in a world where it’s as rare as hen’s teeth to see someone fly it above 1000 feet, and seeing example after bewildering example of accidents like these, I don’t feel this general comfort level around me. I have to disagree with your evaluation that “it’s not a problem.”