I’ve been watching this thread for a while now and it seems to me that everyone is mostly “chipping” around the edges. In effect, almost everything said here has some element of truth but no one has hit the nail on “the head” … and, of course, that’s just my opinion.
Anyone who thinks that “automation” has no place in modern jet transports just isn’t living in today’s world … but by the same token, anyone who thinks that “hand flying skills” are outmoded and unnecessary is also not living in today’s world – but both of those groups are not themselves living in the same world. Automatics provide a way for the airplane to be flown much more accurately than can be done manually. BUT automatics do not think – automatics do ONLY what they have been programmed to do. If the “ones” and “zeros” align in a particular way, the airplane banks right … if they line up in another particular way, the airplane banks left … but if the “ones” and “zeros” do not align with either direction, the probability is that the airplane will maintain wings level. Bottom line, today’s airplane control computers are vastly complex and are capable of things that the most imaginative engineer could think of … but … I am staunchly of the opinion that we’re still a long way short of full artificial intelligence that I’d put in charge of an airliner full of passengers and cargo.
The name of the game is MONEY. Dollars, Euros, Yen, or what-have-you. It is the bottom line that counts in today’s businesses … and it’s not just limited to airlines … everyone is on that same money-limited bandwagon. It’s the profit margin – the difference between the “in-come” and the “out-go,” plain and simple.
The only “Income” generator is passengers – and to some very small degree – some cargo. So, given this, how does an airline attract passengers … as there are usually more than one airline traveling between any two city pairs (except in very limited cases – and those are getting fewer and farther between)? You attract passengers by offering something other than simple transportation – and schedule is probably at the top of the list – because the most money is likely made off of the business oriented passenger (closer to or at “full fare”) presuming that the seats that are occupied are occupied something on the order of 40-60 percent by business travelers. Of course, the airline has to go from and to where the passenger wants/needs to travel – and sometimes that is on a rather extremely short notice basis. So, if you’re one of several operators serving 2 cities – and the schedules are somewhat equal … what can you provide that would drive the customer to your door? Service. Amenities. Comfort. And, what I think is most important to those business travelers … arrival time … which is directly connected to a “non-stop” operation.
Contrast this singular (or almost singular) income generator with the kinds of things that register under the “out-go” column: Airplanes, ground service vehicles, ground facilities (passengers, cargo, maintenance), office buildings, fuel, landing fees, parking fees, insurance (physical facilities and personnel), all of those other money-draining aspects of doing business (advertising, reservations, paper and ink supplies, etc.), and the biggie … personnel costs – the salaries of your employees. Oh, one other cost – training. What part of an airline personnel structure would you think has the biggest impact on training cost? Of course, there are some persons whose training can be expensive, but then you have to consider how many of those employees are necessary to do the job that needs to be done. Of course, you and I know that it is flight crew training that very likely close to the top or, in fact, leads this expense category. There only 2 requirements to train flight crews … logic (i.e., not everyone can fly a plane) and regulation. If there is any way in which an airline can reduce the cost of training the greater the potential to increase the profit margin for that airline. If there is any way to cause an airline’s profit margin to be impacted (outside of major physical facilities purchases – airplanes, corporate headquarters buildings, etc. and I'm not sure any thing would do it to the same level of impact...) is to increase the training provided to flight crews.
Being a long-time advocate of education and training – of course, I know where I would want to focus … but I also recognize that indiscriminate increases in training time or unproductive or potentially unnecessary training can have a significant impact on the highly important “bottom line.” But at the same time, there are very few things an airline can do to ensure the safety of their operation, and thereby maintain or improve their reputation with revenue sources … passengers, and, at the same time, provide an incentive for reducing insurance costs.
The difficult aspect is determining what is absolutely necessary for deciding what needs to be trained, how well, using what equipment, how to determine satisfactory training levels, how frequently should that training occur, and, well … I’ll let you add all the other aspects of training with which you are familiar. Most airline operations are governed by a regulatory agency – so … how much authority should that regulatory agency have with respect to these questions? What kind of competency should exist in personnel INSIDE that regulatory agency?
I think these questions are equally applicable to both manual and automatic flight control. Of course, I have thought about this for most of my career … and I have suggestions that I can make (and to some extent have made) … but my opinions, until heard and analyzed, are probably no better than anyone’s opinions – whether or not they have any knowledge or experience in this particular aspect of aviation.