Kiwiguy;
Yes, I know DC-ATE and myself (and a lot of others here) have this view in common. Except where circumstancs dictated otherwise, I hand-flew, including autothrust OFF, almost every approach on the 320, 330 and 340 and encouraged my F/O's to do the same - I had very few takers, disappointingly. Disconnecting everything certainly focussed the attention of the other crew members...
Automation is a tool, not a pilot.
There are historical examples of multiple engine failures like that DC-8 that flamed out near Portland back in the days before I got grey hair.
There is the fuel exhaustion of AirTransat's A330 that dead sticked to Lajaes in the Azores (which in my humble opinion was down to incompetent problem solving by pilots - using crossfeed as a cure all)
In each of the above however fuel starvation was quickly obvious as the cause.
Then there are other examples like a couple of 747s, one in Indonesia and another in Alaska which flew into Volcanic ash and suffered multiple engine failures, but those incidents the causes are obvious and explainable.
We've disconnected here. I am keenly aware of all the incidents/accidents you cite including two you didnt' cite - Avianca into Kennedy and Air Canada into Gimli, (the volcanic ash one was BA, near Java if I recall - not Alaska). And re the Air Transat A330, it isn't just your humble opinion, that's what it said in the accident report and every A330 pilot knows it. I have spoken with both crew members of that flight and have some understanding of how the cockpit environment unfolded. The QRH procedure, which was not clear, was fixed after that accident but in any imbalance, the first thing to do is to add what you've burnt to what is on board to see if that's what you left with..QED. I wasn't saying fuel exhaustion hasn't happened before, I was challenging your statement, "now we have a second", which reads as though you are referring to the Turkish accident.
Are you seriously telling me that this is statistically common ?
And your evidence for this is what ?
Sorry, I don't understand this statement. Did you intend "uncommon"?
Nobody is bothering to investigate EMP disruption of digital aircraft systems.
There's a problem in that statement though, isn't there? Do you know for sure nothing is being done? Do you know that the question has not, or has yet to be, asked? It's that kind of a statement that belongs in the realm of speculation but it is being stated as fact.
Just curious...what evidence is there that gives you the certainty of your views re EMF? I'm not disputing it because I know what happens to my laptop when my nearby Blackberry is receiving data - it acts up with no input from me. That only proves the laptop/proximate blackberry case however. That said, the engines are FADEC'd I believe but the flight controls are not computerized. I think FADECs are known to be very robust in terms of such interference.
So...what specific system on the 737-800 is, or would be prone to EMF and what does system "misbehaviour" look like so that we know if it occurred or not?