Originally Posted by Centaurus
Reminds me of a conversation I had with a Boeing instructor pilot with regards to the design philosophy of the Boeing 787. He said the 787 was designed on the basis it will be flown by incompetent pilots. Thus the sophisticated computer systems will do their best not to allow the pilot to crash. With huge orders for the 787 coming out of the Asian region you can see his point.
That was precisely the Airbus philosophy when it created the Airbus 320. But before a pilot ends up on such an aircraft, he must first learn to fly on a "real" aircraft. Can a cadet who is hired in the right seat of an A320 at 300 hours total be considered a competent pilot several thousand hours later when the automation and protections he's had all along fail him ?
A pilot who is taught that he is flying an aircraft that cannot stall or who thinks he can always just pull fully back on the stick, add full power and hold those inputs to get himself out of a collision with terrain or a wind shear is bound to get himself in trouble when the protections that allow such manoeuvres no longer work. The companies that have highly automate aircraft such as the A320 that require that their pilots engage the autopilot right after take-off and keep it on to the flare or even do auto-lands in VFC do not do themselves a favour.