BoeingDriver99 : I think 3greens mean cockpit automation rather than aircraft design , but I let him or her reply .
I will make myself the devil's advocate here . We had these heated discussions a few times before internet existed : first in the early 70s when the Navigator was replaced by the Inertial platforms and in the 80s where Airbus removed the FE from the A310.
For me as ATC the number of incidents I saw in my career caused by crews that would not had happened if the automation was switched on and/or had been followed is quite remarkable. I include EGPWS alerts here . Of course the number of incidents caused by faulty automation and prevented by crews is not recorded in the same way.
One remark however : we had and still have a very high number of TCAS incidents caused by crews not reacting or following TCAS RAs correctly . But none involving the A380 and 350s. why? because they have the RAs linked to the FD and those are flown automatically. One of the most tragic collision in recent time, Ueberlingen would not have happened if automation had been available.
But as I said ,am the devil's advocate here, I prefer and support the 4 eyes principle , both in the air and on the ground (ATC)
given the issues with autonomous driving of cars etc in 2D, one suspects that 3 D might be a little more difficult.
not really as the drone industry clearly demonstrates, but we are not talking about autonomous flight here , just reducing the number of the crew.