Perhaps the industry should reflect on why some operators believe that it is necessary to fly ‘practice’ autolands. With modern, high reliability systems it should not be necessary to prove technical integrity.
Normal procedures are best learnt in simulation, normal (without failure) operations are routine which should only require minimal refreshing. The critical procedures involving reconfiguration, go around, or lack of visual cues, all involve assessment and decision making (and the use of normal procedures); these must be taught and practiced in simulation.
Any automatic landing must be aware of the need for protection. In real conditions large safety margins are applied with Cat 2/3/ holding zones (LVP), approach and takeoff spacing, dual transmitters, etc. However, in clear conditions, any effect of potential interference has to be anticipated and mitigated by the crew. Some aircraft / situations are easier to manage than others. Thus the risk in managing these vs the risk of a manual landing after a long flight or similar judgment has to be considered.
When there are incidents / accidents it probably indicates a mismatch in the risks. A key safety issue is to identify where the risks may have changed or which were mismanaged. Whatever is concluded, knowledge of the subject and the risks is always required, and this is a function of education – operator, airport, individual.