JT we are using the same hymn sheet (how to fly an aircraft), but I was wondering whether crews now-days use attitude as the control parameter instead of airspeed. Attitude is a good stabilizing (damping) parameter with good feed back (response) to control input, but the input was made to effect a change in the primary control parameter – speed, altitude, etc. This is not to question the basics of aerodynamics, debate stick vs throttle, or discuss speed on elevator or speed on thrust; it’s just to observe that the techniques used in modern aircraft appear to have changed from those used in less sophisticated types.
However I would be concerned if the apparent reduced speed awareness became be a problem on EFIS speed tape equipped aircraft when the FD / AT are off; then the attitude airspeed loop is vital with conscious effort required to relate the direction of pitch change vs speed change (rabbit hole, not for debate). Try a night take off with engine failure at rotate without FD and AT in the sim, use non standard weights, then reconsider the Ops requirements for the MEL !
4dogs I trust I have not miss understood your point, but PWR + ATT = PERF is only correct for a given speed; thus you first require the correct speed to achieve the performance. Thus PWR + ATT = PERF a not sound measure of speed awareness, you have to look at the ASI for that; remember the days when flight was visual using attitude for stability (airspeed a second order effect of attitude) and you had to look inside to check speed? That’s speed awareness.
Many light twin aircraft accidents, following engine failure, occurred because the crew flew a fixed attitude (as taught in some countries) without reference to airspeed.
Taking this thread, IMHO, beyond the overemphasis of attitude due to human laziness and ease of flying new aircraft (a simplification of PPRuNe’s points), has the industry also forgotten the basic instrument scan? Pilots were probably taught a ‘radial’ or sequential scan of the instruments; has this been adapted with the introduction of FDs and vector displays to become an over focus on a ‘primary’ parameter. What has this change done to the instrument scan during fully automatic flight? Obviously the needs of an ‘autos’ scan differs from that when flying on raw instruments; but who changes their scan pattern when on autos, and if so what is it?