Most areas of industry recognise that there is an emergent safety issue in modern operations, but not always agreeing as to what the issue is or mitigation required.
The Airbus paper calls for action within current training activities, particularly those associated with regulatory requirements and guidelines for operators training/checking. Manufacturers have little influence in these areas, but for initial type training they can make significant contributions.
Airbus has taken the initiative, well done. A new aircraft type provides opportunity for change, no doubt balanced by thoughts of common type ratings which other manufacturers might rigorously adhere to avoiding the expense of changing training.
A key item is the need to move from the regulatory based checking to teaching. Such a change is in the hands of regulators, local authorities, and operators; thus the paper provides a mild rebuke to these agencies for the apparent lack of action.
The industry is unlikely to find more time for training, nor money, thus any change requires alternatives for the efficient use current of resources. I agree that the industry needs to teach, but teach what and how. We have to move away from training for checking, and check again and again; pilots need to develop expertise relevant to current operations.
This does not necessarily mean more hand flying; there is little data indicating that the industry has a hand flying problem in normal operations its incredibly safe. However, there does appear to be a problem associated with automation, and reactions to failure or unplanned situations non normal operations. The latter point relates to managing automation and assessing situations with sufficient understanding to act appropriately. It will be difficult for pilots to absorb all of the knowledge required for these activities during type training, nor have sufficient experience to apply knowledge, thus there is a need to develop these skills over time, with operational guidance, teaching, and practice. An apprenticeship, continued learning, and knowing how and what has to be learned.
Hand flying can contribute to this, but only within the limitations of the need to use automation. We cannot escape the need for technology and automation in modern operations, thus training change and teaching must be automation focussed, together with situation awareness, and the reaction to and control of non/abnormal situations.
Well done Airbus for leadership, but how do we to get others areas of the industry to act.