Originally Posted by
Cool Guys
The lack of statistical evidence does not mean that someone cannot not have a valuable contribution or opinion.
I don't believe I was inferring otherwise in any way - it was a while ago, but I'm pretty sure I wasn't saying that.
Experience in the subject, as well as statistical evidence, contributes to understanding and decisions made in the subject being discussed.
Sure - however this thread definitely unearthed some examples of how the use and purpose of technology on the flight deck has been misinterpreted, and that those misunderstandings have become an accepted part of piloting lore.
Same with other threads - I recently read a post claiming that FBW was primarily intended to replace the flight engineer with technology, when in fact there were several jetliners from the '60s onwards that were well pre-FBW, yet deleted the FE station from the flight deck.
I know there's a romantic attachment to the days of yore, and that's not just true of piloting - but I suspect that were one to offer E.K. Gann and his contemporaries a control system that worked incredibly reliably, and also helped them stay out of the brown stuff by working against stalls and spiral dives, they'd have been rather thankful on those nights when the weather and visibility were against them!