Airlines adapt their recurrent training to cover the most likely scenarios in the limited time available in the sim.
Granted, but some of us don't necessarily concur with the assessments as done. Having said that, the statistics ought to cover the bulk of the work (and the Regulator has a significant say) with the caveat that some time should be available for crews to extend themselves and maintain/develop skills
I've only ever had to operate 2 sectors on the 737 without the AP and we still had the FD and AT.
If that's an acceptable argument, then why do we similarly "waste" time with training for engine failures, given that modern engines are very reliable as well ?
you're kidding yourself if you think that hand flying enhances safety because the opposite is true.
Perhaps you might cite some objective evidence to support such a wide-sweeping statement. Certainly, in some circumstances we would all acknowledge that it makes more sense to drive with the automatics on. However that doesn't cover all bases ....