A good 'state of the nation' address, PJ.
Here's a dilemma for discussion, following PJ's post, regarding the over-reliance on the 'automatics'.
Over the years I have struggled myself to become proficient and watched others struggle with the FMC page this and that, the modes, the buttons etc. The acquisition of these skills takes some time and effort. Is it perhaps correct that the new co's be turned out of the machine in the limited time available reasonably capable at handling the 'autos' rather than 'good' pilots in the basic sense? If so, and with the steadily diminishing 'skill' level at entry, where and how are they going to acquire these more basic skills? Do they in fact need them, or do we look statistically at the inevitable hull losses caused by the lack of, and say - that is acceptable?
Visual approaches are one further 'missing' skill I am finding. They can all probably fly the 'textbook' simulator visual, but put an airfield on the nose at 5 miles at 90 to the downwind and - gosh, it isn't set up in the FMC. So we fly a 20+ track mile ILS. Again - does this really matter, or do we accept the rare occasion when an a/c might be saved by a visual onto a runway and revert to an acceptable statistical hull loss rate, putting to one side, of course, the marginal cost-savings generated?
It is, in my opinion, going to take a radical re-think of (or in some cases introduction of) 'on-line' training to monitor and see the necessary skills built. Where will the pressure for this come from? Do we need them, or is 'automation' going to become so reliable that they will be a 'dying art' - no pun intended.
