When are you mere mortals going to ever learn?
You can't always out-think the HAL-9000 computer with it's committee derived FBW software loads in the last few seconds of gusty approach from hades.
Douglas always had a infamous history of over-stretching the fuselage to keep up with Boeing (e.g. MD88 which would not recover from stall/spin in certification; blew the drogue cute, signed-off anyway) but now you must add to the already prevalent PIO burden the specter of elevator control by software committee!
Whether you are talking about a FBW A320 splashdown in alpha, or the early FBW dino-tail of an MD11, there are FBW extremes of the envelope in which the infamous "man vs machine" monster rears it's ugly head and dooms the flight to all but the most current hand-job proficient pilot (Ref: AW&ST Apri-July 1995).
Sorry, all you great "Push-Button Pilots of Tommorrow", I'm talking to you.
You simply do this to yourselves and, to the pilot proffession in general when you advocate an anti-union flying philosophy of "just trust authority" and never "John Wayne" the machine.... "always fly at the highest level of automation"....etc. Always trust the Sim Gods who know all.... Always trust the government to tell you the truth about what happened in the accident...
Oh contraire, I say!
You are PIC's and you are the FINAL authority as to how that machine is operated. The ATP captain is supposed to train the crew as part of his regulatory responsibility, not just let the box do it each six months.
You ignore a hundred years of aviation hand-flying wisdom in favor of your new Automated Icarus Software Gods and you get away with it handsomely in 99 percent of all operations. But you set us all up for ridiculous airshows at best, and knee-jerk FAA actions at worst by being afraid to hand fly up and down from 18,000 feet. There is nothing wrong with the MD-11. It has the same fatality rate as the 707 did. John Travota still flys the 707 over people's rooftops. The USAF still flys 707's (KC-135's) over people's rooftops with very reasonable safety. You don't hear anybody demanding to ground the sixty year old USAF tanker fleet do you? (except airplane salesmen.)
"but, but, but, it's dangerous to hand fly in congested airspace..." I hear you recite religiously, as you spout the government line.
Nonsense. Exactly how many fatal MD-11 midairs have their been?
None. ATC most places is that good.
But with FMS garbage machines, I rarely witnessed both guys with their heads up under 10K anyway.... so you might as well stay current flying these things like the old big iron of yore.
"but, but, but, it might overload the co-pilot" I hear you protest
Well, if the co-pilot is overloading himself and can't transition to a lower level of automation and develop a skill-set of twirling a few knobs and talking on the radio at the same time, then may I suggest you get another type of co-pilot who will memorize the plates and charts before he shows up so as to be an asset to the operation instead of a liability.
There is nothing wrong with the MD-11. It's another "Pitch-Witch" stretched fusalage, like many before it. If airline policy makers will let you stay current hand-flying it, it won't bite you.
Read this well-balanced web page, before you sacrifice me on your auto-pilot alter:
That Tragic MD-11 Safety Record
"Click", whew!
