Dozy, sorry, no, you're misunderstanding my statements. I'm not the expressing frustration in the least.
I'm characterizing a state of affairs and wondering, positing the question. [added] By far, these are areas, (the cognitive, the 'psychological'), of investigation/examination that would bear most fruit, so to speak. The frustration if there is any at all, is knowing that "more automation" may be the answer some arrive at and that is just a variation on a current theme and won't solve a thing. There is a basic level of complexity and speed in cockpits of transports that must be "married" to appropriate capacity, ability, motivation, propensity towards a disciplined mind and an abiding curiosity of those hired. None of these human qualities are decent partners with automation or more automation. Airline managements of the eighties made the fundamental mistake of assuming automation could be the third (or second) pilot and saw a huge financial benefit in terms of training and hiring, particularly when the "best-and-brightest" candidates as Sully put it, were no longer choosing commercial aviation as a profession. It's a huge story as I know you and many here already know.
AF447-type accidents are going to continue, (in fact, have continued), until this mistake and the turn towards such research and the resulting changes in design take hold of industry priorities.
The "fright" is part of aviation and part of the business. There are ways to work with it; it isn't a sword of Damocles, it is just a fact. But some pilots haven't read Gann and think because its comfortable and really safe that it's a nice office job. Seen it, flown with it - THAT is what scares me - not the possibility of losing it - I know SOPs and CRM work - used it, but the industry is changing. Re-read the last paragraph of the VF article. This is what it has become, and is what needs coming to terms with.
Last edited by PJ2; 27th Sep 2014 at 20:11.
Reason: add comments