Effective use of simulators
Notwithstanding the outcome of any definitive conclusion, if there ever is one in this instance, the questions raised about the degree of automation and slavish adherence to same have been well reasoned and enlightening. As the Boeing aircraft become seemingly weekly more like the equivalent Airbus product (Cat II, Single engined 30 flap Auto-landings now possible on B737 NG) it seems to me that the training philosophy will go the same way for Boeing as it currently is for AI.
Mention of the apparent waste of time spent on LOFT exercises and the fixation on that apparent, 'worst case scenario' of an engine failure just after V1 has me nodding my head in agreement. There are several instances which can lead to the loss of an aircraft if a catastrophic event occurs, as shown by the posts here in this thread.
Some very simple faults have led to devestating crashes, as mentioned here, the Tristar in the Everglades and so on. If we can destroy an aircraft when a light bulb blows then how much more likely is it that we will lose one when the Flight Instruments suffer a total failure or we are overwhelmed by contradictory messages and signals from the ever more complex computers on board?
Time spent starting engines, manually closing start valves, taxying, climbing to FL 150 with a Hydraulic failure in the climb followed by a call from Ops to say we have a bomb on board so please return to base asap does nothing to enhance the pilot's ability to fly the aircraft. All of these events can be covered on a line check, and should be from today onwards. Training Captains of the world, unite and demand that sims be used for something useful, not the present folly and waste bent on ticking boxes determined by some retired pilot working for the various Ministires and Aviation Authorities.
Simulator time should be exclusively set aside for the very scenarios mentioned in this thread. These are the events which are killing people, not B or Yellow Hydraulic system failures or passengers with make believe heart attacks.
High altitude upset, stall recovery, unusual attitude recovery, total loss of Flight Instruments and /or total loss of Nav guidance/IRSs, flight with total loss of electrics and so on should be our first priority, however unlikely they might be according to the statisticians. I am sure this list is far from exhaustive, please add to it as you think fit.
The statisticians don't fly the aircraft, we do.
Btw, how many times has a modern engine failed a few knots after V1?