Elsewhere on this forum, I attempted to point out that it is the responsibility of the pilot flying to place (and keep) the airplane at the correct (and desired) condition – meaning the correct (desired) position, attitude, altitude, flight path, and speed (some would describe the combination of altitude, flight path and speed as “energy state,” and that’s perfectly fine). It also happens that most airline pilots have a choice as to how he/she is to accomplish the task of placing and keeping the airplane in that continually safe condition:
1) through the use of the manual controls … for elevator (pitch), ailerons (bank), rudder (yaw), throttles (power), flaps (lift and drag), and/or speed brakes (also lift and drag);… and
2) through the use of the auto-flight controls … which ultimately result in using exactly the same controls (albeit, the flaps and speed brake controls are quite likely to remain manually applied if, or where needed).
I think that many pilots, if not most pilots, have seen a pilot essentially abdicate his/her responsibility as being the “pilot flying” by simply poking “George” in the ribs, and saying “you got it!” Well, “George” (an affectionately neutered term meaning “Auto Pilot”), is very good at doing some things – but the best George can do is what those humans, who designed, assembled, and installed all of George’s parameters, have allowed. That means that whatever it is that George is being asked to do simply must be within George’s capabilities – George doesn’t see, hear, or feel anything. All of George’s inputs are achieved through prior programming – and the term “programming” denotes some level of computation (read that as “computer) … and we all know that computers never make a mistake, they never get tired, they never quit, and they are always correct in what they determine is next in a sequence of events. Yeah … right!
Don’t get me wrong – there is no one who uses and depends on George more than I do. However, I sincerely believe that the pilot flying should always remain the pilot flying – i.e. continue to make all the decisions that are necessary, monitoring the control inputs, and through that vigilance, confirm that what the Autopilot is doing is correct for the situation at hand. Anything less is turning over control of “your” airplane to an inanimate “George” who will do whatever the on-board programming understands with the input it has recognized through the interfacing systems from which flight conditions are monitored and compared to what the control knobs have “asked for.”
I fully agree that a better course of training is required for all pilots who will be provided the latest in computer technology on board their airplane. But that does not, in my view, release those pilots from learning everything they need to know about what, when, where and how, to manually fly that same airplane. Whenever the airplane changes condition, position, attitude, flight path, or energy state, when the pilot flying did not desire that specific change … it is the responsibility of that pilot to use those controls to put the airplane back into a condition, position, attitude, flight path, AND energy state that is appropriate and safe.
As a pilot, you are always at a given point in space … and very likely you are aware of and know specifically where you want the airplane to be in the next second, the next minute, etc., and you have to know what you need to do to ensure that the airplane will really be at, or in, those parameters at that point in time. To do that, you need to be able to recognize your current set of parameters, and know what controls to use, in what order they need to be used, and the magnitude of those control positions that will be necessary to achieve the desired set of parameters. Where “George” only knows what the existing parameters are NOW, where “now” is repeated over and over at whatever speed the computer is operating. “George” reads what parameters have been entered into the Autopilot controls at the same rate. Then, “George” applies the controls to achieve the desired “condition” (which will be in accordance with a set of parameters previously programmed into “his” memory). If YOU allow George to fly YOUR airplane, “he” will do the best he has been programmed to do. If you trust George to do all that – you have a lot more trust in “him” than I … and that is not necessarily a compliment.
So … bottom line … in my not-so-humble opinion ... George is a great aid … but with all “his” greatness, “he” should not, must not, and in my airplane, will not, ever be the pilot flying.