Contradiction?
xcitation #1973
No, xcitation, I was not contradicting myself. The discussion about manual flying, as is referred to in this thread, is about the so called danger from an aerodynamic standpoint, i.e. too great sensitivity of flight controls, or eeeeeek "coffin corner"!
The danger of inaccurate flying in RVSM is risk of collision. That is irrelevant in the discussion about AF447.
Are you not contradicting yourself - in one post you write about flying AT cruise altitude, in another one you query me about flying ABOVE cruise altitude.
To be sure, initially, the AF447 was AT cruise altitude, their real problem started when they went far above it through the setting of an unusually high pitch attitude.
Setting that unrealistic pitch attitude may be the result of never flying manual at high altitude, it is not the result of manual flying at altitude being somehow dangerous or exceedingly difficult.
And totempole, writing posts like this does not put me into the category of self aggrandized aces, I hope? Don't worry, my religion is to be highly proficient in automatics AND in manual.
Autopilots however, do not need training or recency to stay proficient - when they are one day unproficient, they announce it with a failure light. Pilots look physically the same when able and proficient or when not recent or unproficient. That's why I take every opportunity to fly manual and sure, some times or places are not opportune.