Automatic approaches to autoland are more demanding than a manual approach. The reason is that the pilots have to understand various complicated failure modes and how to handle them. Sometimes they can be recovered and sometimes they can't. I won't confuse the uninitiated by going into detail; the cognoscenti (Sp?) are too well aware.
As 411A will confirm, the L1011 flies an amazing auto approach, a technique pioneered and perfected by the Brits.
That's all just the final approach; how about the rest of the flight?
Think about en route Cb avoidance, local ATC taking offence and intercepting. Does the on-board computer understand what a fighter pilot means by flying alongside followed by a sharp break? Yes, a ground controller may understand; can we guarantee an uninterrupted datalink?
A 'difficult' country tried to deny us overflight at short notice. Turning back would have been hazardous and the pax wouldn't have been taken to destination. Our understanding of the local psyche and assets followed by an apology permitted a continued flight.
I could go on for paragraphs.
IMHO we are nowhere near an aeroplane with pax & CC flying with no pilot on board.