PJ2
Is it just possible that the automation of aircraft has contributed to;
a. lower costs thereby keeping the aviation industry afloat and
b. improved overall safety.
Could it be that it is inevitable that there will be aircraft crashes when systems fail and the controls are put in the hands of pilots trained as managers rather than pilots.
This could be the 'cost' of sustaining the industry and maintaining an overall safer flying environment.
It may just be that we get far less disasters using computer systems to fly the airctaft than if we relied only on live pilots - however well trained and experienced.
Expecting any pilot to cope with situations that are outside of the ability of the computer systems might just be asking too much.
In a situation where an aircraft knowingly entered weather for which the aircraft was not designed maybe one cannot question the systems if they fail.
Don't shoot me, I am being Devils advocate with these questions in order to suggest alternatives - we seem to be stuck on 'real pilots are better' & 'bring back the old days'