Just some notes to contrast with what has already been said numerous times here.
The US military allows (at least years ago) new copilots into line flying with maybe 300 hours total, although a limited number had a bit of civilian experience beforehand. This applied to tactical, single-pilot planes and widebody transports/tankers etc.
Some of our company pilots with 10,000 hours and years as jet captains were/are known to bid around trips which go to mountainous Eagle (KEGE), Colorado. I went there once as FO and can understand the desire to avoid it. There are so many unique procedures required for each arrival and departure there, using the FMC/autopilot (after extending the gear and full flaps abput twenty miles out), that the company requires a requal sim for each 757 crewmember every year for Eagle, in addition to the regular training/checking events. Among our various fleets, only our 757s are allowed in because of very demanding departure second-segment requirements.
Using an aircraft FMC for non-precision approaches in itself can expose us to extra serious hazards. This is why my company focused mostly on non-precision training during the initial full-flight sim approach syllabus. Unless I've forgotten, our pilots on the 757 rarely use the VS descent (versus VNAV/FLCH) mode except during some visual approaches or a rare VOR or LOC, i.e. at SFO.
Don't forget: for laymen, especially for certain species of know-it-all-journalists, even the phrase "non-precision approach" can tempt many to jump to very erroneous conclusions, since most have no knowledge of the subject (among many others which they "report" on, as if knowledgeable). Remember-even many "aviation experts" have almost no instrument flying experience. So many of them in the US have either no pilot license or little total experience, except for rides on cockpit jumpseats or watching in simulators. Some think they know it all, with exactly such backgrounds. One of our pilots (who flew all-night cargo Learjets for years before coming here: he once was on continuous duty for over 30 hours under Parts 135/91) has a father-in-law, who is such an "expert", but is only qualified in the academic sector.
[ 30 November 2001: Message edited by: Ignition Override ]