[quote]Safety Concerns
Lonewolf you should read my posts.
I made it quite clear early on I do not agree with removing pilots from the cockpit. I am merely highlighting the industry wish and the fact that some pilots do not help themselves on this issue by continuously referring to perceived safety issues that aren't there.
Do you have a reference for this? That looks like everybody who intends to improve his working conditions and the efficiency and safety of his work should loose his job.
I accept it must be difficult and I respect the loyalty shown to colleagues no longer with us.
That is a wrong assesment, the issue is for those who still live and work.
Safety is driven by statistics. You have no chance of getting stick feedback on a bus until accidents occur where without any shadow of any doubt lack of feedback was an issue.
You have seen the NASA results of A v B and the A320 over 20 years into service is doing just fine and is safer (statistically) than a 737.
Safety is not driven by statistics, that is the engineering point of view. Safety is the condition of being safe; freedom from danger, risk, or injury. You might use statistics to compare two items and clarify the relative safety against each other. According your point of view in continuosly comparing A v. B or past v. present you use the better one as reference.
So it would satify, if f.e. A would loose 1 frame per year and B 2 frames per year, then safety under your point would be high enough, because A is double as good as B. The truth would be, that there are 3 losses to much each year.
Dealing with safety you improve whatever is improvable, regardless of statistics.
Therefore my point was merely that if as a group of professionals you are hell bent on the return of stick feedback, you need to find a different argument because going on about perceived automatics issues with AF447 or Habsheim or anywhere else won't help your cause.
That is your opinion, others may have another one.
In between your sentence i read, that you think that this group of professionals see the problem AF447 only in the mentioned SS and throttle issue. This group sees training deficiencies since a long time, especially in the younger groups of pilots. It has been adressed in this thread and in a lot of others in this community. Go back and read them, you might find a lot of helpful information about flying. Problem being, that due to the statistically high rate of reliability handflying is not deemed necessary any more.
When however problems arise and the pilot has to handfly the system, he is not only missing the practice to do so, he must rapidly tune into a malfunctioning system and and must bring his knowledge and expierience (if there is one) flawless to work. For that he has to use a system, that was designed for 90% monitoring and 10% flying, in normal everything functional conditions. Therefore it is legit to think about improving these systems to assist the crew in those few occasions in a better way, like some of us described. If manufacturers and engineers are unable to do it and if the industrie is not willing to pay for it, then it might be that way and the pilots will have to cope with it. But not saying anything might be tolerable from your position in a practical kind of way, but not from the flying side in relation to safety matters.
Finally the manufacturers will makeup their mind, and either replace the pilot at all or improve the workingplace. Wether the initial cause for that will be Habsheim or Paris-Rio or any other happening in the future, we will see. And when the change takes place with a later design, then it will be ok as well.
The pilots and people advocating a change are not defiant children (which i have the impression you see them), but professionals in their world of responsibility and thus have a right and a duty to adress those matters.