I disagree with this. The modern glass cockpit pilot must be a master of manipulating the FD/AP in all circumstances, especially when things are going off the rails. Disconnecting and hand flying is the easy option and in my opinion admits defeat.
There's nothing wrong with disconnecting and doing some pilot **** but it shouldn't be the first response when finding yourself in a "what's it doing now" moment.
I have always preferred the easiest, safest and most efficient option. And sometimes this requires the confident disconnection of the automatics, put the aircraft where it needs to be more quickly than the automatics allow, then re-insate the automatics.
A good Airbus example being a glide slope intercept from above, in a higher than normal energy state due whatever reason ( ATC or environmental ). It was previously simple to do it without the automatics and it is more limiting doing it with them. Fine, the new generation want a solution using the automatics. It has opened up a can of worms, with the automatic solution creating task saturation and the aircraft ending up in an undesired state on occasion. And the added risk that this task saturation with automatics, sees a tendency for raw data to be ignored, and the aircraft sails through the glideslope...
Unbelievable! The best solution is a pilot who is fully aware of the Flight Director limitations, a pilot who is confident in hand flying the aircraft, a pilot who never trusts the automation and monitors raw data. This delivers a pilot who will make the best choice under the circumstances. More often than not, he will use the automatics, but when airmanship dictates, a manual set up may be more desirable.
I am now realizing how lucky I was to be trained during the evolution of the glass cockpit jets. We were trained in the basics and built up the levels of supporting automation. The foundation of this training was always scanning and backing up with raw data. Yes, this is supposed to happen with the newer generation, but often they are task saturated with the automatics and cumbersome SOP's, that seem to complicate and blur scenarios where airmanship would deliver a common sense outcome.
Is this our problem? Pilots now live in fear of flying without the automatics or their SOP's limit their ability to do so. During uncommon events like a intermediate go around and a restrictive altitude, they encounter a startle factor as the SOP's haven't provided a solution and the limitations of the automatics are not understood or are unexplored. In this scenario, there is a chance the crew will just land long due a lack of confidence in doing a non-standard GA, or a 90% chance the GA maneuver is disorderly, due an inability to confidently manage the aircraft where the automatics may not deliver the best solution.