virginexcess is spot on - I am sad to say.
Capn Bloggs while your operation around the western GAFA provides ample opportunity to fly manually and maintain skills that is not true of MOST jet operations worldwide. For instance where are the opportunities for the crews operating between HKG and LHR or SIN and FRA or DXB and LA or NY and Paris?
I came to believe just after I started to fly for my first airline (after nearly 7000hrs in GA) that if you don't 'learn to fly' (have well ingrained basic skills) BEFORE you get in an airline jet you NEVER will - and that first airline jet for me was an F28 where we still DID hand fly a lot.
I have seen no evidence in the 17 odd years since that suggests that is, on balance, not the case.
At recent sim recurrent we were told in the brief that the grading
emphasis in our airline had shifted from manual skills to NOTECHS - Non Technical Skills.
For those unschooled in NOTECHS there are 4 categories;
* Co-operation
* Leadership and Managerial Skills
* Situational Awareness
* Decision Making
Within each category there are 'elements' such as, with SA, 'awareness of aircraft systems/external environment/time'
All very good and clever - BUT,
NOTECHS
assumes good communication skills (in English) and good basic technical skills are a given - which are two pretty unrealistic assumptions to make. Even if they're at a high level in a given airline NOW if you remove the emphasis eventually they won't be - its just human nature.
Less and less do airline management pilots have a background in GA/MIL these days
and those that don't TRULY don't see much value in the hand flying skill set in modern aircraft like the 777 - which is too clever by half IMO. Too, in many airlines (especially 3rd world airlines), if a high standard of manual skills WAS required their cadetship schemes would be decimated and they would have to bid on the open market for that % of pilots who do have good skills and/or put very significant resources into training.
Can't have that - it would cost us a fortune - plus we already spend a fortune on Airbus and Boeing so they can give us idiot proof aeroplanes
So we have a sort of downwards conflict spiral between airline CEO/beancounters - airline management pilots - aircraft manufacturers.
Array those 3 groups around a circle.
Airline CEOs/etc (except QF apparently) want more pax which means more aircraft which means more crews.
Management pilots are told X new aircraft are arriving in Y time frame - crew them! If they want to stay in management they do.
A/B want idiots to stop crashing their product which causes them much grief.
When A/B design a new idiot proof aeroplane that allows the airlines to go searching for a better class of idiot...and so the conflict spiral continues.
In the middle of the circle is this
which is/should be the internationally recognised symbol of regulatory agencies
The answer of better/higher standards is politically and practically impossible worldwide - so we will see cleverer/more idiot proof aeroplanes chasing after a better class of idiot until pilotless aircraft become a reality - then we will see LOTS of crashes/people killed when its found (shock horror
) that as flawed as a well trained, highly skilled human is - he/she is a damn site better than a computer incapable of feeling fear talking to a pimply faced computer geek in a trailer 8000nm away over a data link designed and produced by the lowest cost bidder.
Its all just human nature
