Also...
The assertion that;
many younger pilots recognise the fact that the job is (to borrow a phrase) 'highly automated, semi skilled and really not that hard',
... is a common perspective often expressed by "the smartest guys in the room" (not having a go at Rudder Sir), but it is flawed in its inference that piloting could be done by an automaton. (Shut up & just fly the plane you moron!)
Granted, flying has become safer and more reliable with technology, but it's disappointing that
some pilots seem to complacently believe that
nothing could go wrong on their flights. The evidence says otherwise and, in those cases, there is NO substitute for the highest possible skills and proficiency from pilots!
There is a huge difference between the outcomes of examples like AF447 and US1549, but the more such "easy job" tosh is accepted as fact because it supports cost reductions and industrial agendas, the more de-skilled the pilots of the world will become and there is already plenty of evidence of where that leads.
Has any of the nay-sayers considered that pilots (like firemen or the peacetime military) are not there for what what they usually do in the day-to-day operation, but rather for what they're supposed to be able to do when the chips are down.
