Now my 2 cents worth. The coupled autopilot is great, but errors do occur even in the database. I am an experienced RPT jet Captain who flies these approaches every week or two. The Boeing/Jep database is sometimes in error & even if it is spot on there is a number of correct inputs some of which may accidently be overlooked by the pilots. I see it in the the sim every so often. Despite what is req'd(ie the FAF waypoint) all data should be referenced the Mapt or runway threshold enroute to the mapt section of the procedure. Some approaches like CBR 35 have waypoints reference off others in this way. Reading & matching FMC/GPS data gives very little situational awareness the way it is now. If reference is given from the airport gross errors will usually be picked up.(ie everyone knows how high they should be at 10nm etc). I believe CASA got off with murder with the Lockhart river crash. The Captain was at fault ultimately & from my knowledge wasn't overly conservative, but...CASA gave him a loaded pistol in the form of the modeled GPS approach depiction. Even with 10,000 hrs & most on RPT jets, in IMC I have a tough time tracking the approach as well as I could an ILS, VOR or even an NDB approach. The way the approach is represented needs to be changed. Everyone in my airline I speak to agrees. Most elect to do the GPS approach as a last resort because of the stated reasons. Please change this format to make it easier on everyone.