GDD
I think you have mis-interpreted my reply to arearadars post. He alluded to the fact that he has seen totally mismanaged go-arounds where the aircraft heads skyward straight through it's missed approach altitude which he put down to "the FMS". The FMS cannot "think" - it will do what it's told to do.
The point I was trying to get across is that, provided the missed approach coding in the FMS has been checked against the plate and the correct MA altitude set in the FCU/MCP then "the FMS" should make the MA a straightforward event - be it AP flown or manually flown (follow the FD's). The initial part of the GA should, of course, present NO problems to ANY pilot on the line but once safely in the climb with the gear up, what's wrong with engaging the AP? What are you trying to prove by hand flying the whole thing?
In busy airspace (e.g. CDG) it's better to let the autos fly the aircraft whilst you monitor...... Why load your colleague up even more than necessary but having him have to monitor you as well as clean up, RT, c/lists etc
There is repeated evidence that GA's are screwed up because some guys out there do not understand what their aircraft is about to do (or is doing). Couple that with trying to handfly and, with some guys, you have the potential for a total breakdown of SA with workload going through the roof...... Level bust...... Flap overspeed etc. How else would you describe the A319 GA which initiated this thread? A total breakdown of technical and non-technical skills.
I'm an advocate of keeping the basic handling skills in tune but there is a time and a place. Many airlines have a pretty restrictive automation policy which can lead to the erosion of these skills...... which has the potential to be counter productive when you actually need them at short notice.
Hope that clears things a bit for you,
A4