I sometimes poke a stick at HC....but always respect his views as he is quite experienced and intimately involved in introducing new Types to the North Sea Offshore flying business.
Most times that stick poking is done with the intent to get a response out of him....rarely does it fail.
My point about the "Monitoring" vs "Flying" comment was to bring a discussion on about the division of duties and tasks in the Cockpit.
My concern is Crews get complacent over time and might not be as "engaged" as is the AutoPilot. Some talk has been made about perhaps the Crew were distracted by something that allowed them to miss the Airspeed/Altitude/Power deviations that led to the aircraft striking the Sea in an uncontrolled manner.
My thought was to question just what it could be that would have that amount of attraction for BOTH pilots. In my old fashioned view, one of the Pilots was supposed to be flying the machine...which connotes using the Autopilot to do so. I also firmly believe that when I am the Pilot doing that....I keep a very close eye on the Autopilots performance and accuracy. Any deviation from what it should be doing is my responsibility. In every Two Pilot Crew Operation I flew in....the other Pilot was tasked to keep an eye on Me and the Aircraft amongst his many other duties that he did to relieve Me, the Flying Pilot, to carry out my Primary Task of flying the machine.
In normal operations or during a situation where an "Emergency" or Aircraft malfunction occurs, I as the "Flying" Pilot still had the Primary duty of flying the Aircraft and the Non-Flying Pilot was there to assist in dealing with whatelse was going on.
If I were the Captain/PIC...guy whose signature goes in the Tech Log....I made the Decisions with the other Pilots input and assistance....but I retained responsibility.
If for any reason, the other Pilot who was "Monitoring" my flying saw a problem or had a concern of any kind....he was obliged to speak up (however politely he had time for....) and point out the problem and hopefully announce what he thought needed to be done.
I also believe that if it is a dangerous situation developing due to some mistake or lapse I have had....the "Monitoring Pilot"....should either make the control input that is needed or take control of the aircraft away from the "Flying Pilot".
CRM teaches us that is the correct approach to situations where action needs to taken to keep the aircraft in a safe flight environment.
Thus....If we as a Crew allow ourselves to become less attentive than we should....and it would follow (in my view) that if the "Flying Pilot" is not as engaged as he should be....then the "Monitoring Pilot" is going to be that one step behind....or will often find himself in the position of having to make a decision to speak up or not and over time....his willingness and timeliness will be degraded by custom.
I get back to a question I asked early on in the Thread...."Why did the Crew, Two Well Trained, Qualified, Professional Pilots not realize what was going on and catch the loss of Airspeed and the resulting increase of ROD?" Just what occurred in that Cockpit that allowed this to happen?
I agree with many others....we should reserve "Pilot Error" for those situations where the Pilot(s) intentional violate SOP's, Procedures, Regulations and use the Term "Human Factors" to describe these kinds of tragedies where good Men make mistakes that are the result of many factors largely outside their control and doing.