But even now I fly with those who rely on vnav tod or just descend at a higher rate to always be below the optimum. I just think some people are lazy and that is where a cadet is strong. They are financed to the hilt and can't afford to f up.
I partly agree with you.
I regularly see old guys in the left seat with thousands of hours jet time who seem to have zero clue about energy management and descend planning, but at the same time the reason why they never learn is because they got/get rusty because of the fear culture in some airlines regarding the stable approach criteria. Descend planning at FL390 is the same as descend planning at 6000' with 20 track miles to run, and yet I see more and more guys pulling the speed brake to get an extra 1500-2000' below profile in order 'to be on the safe side.'
This is complete nonsense, as IMHO being "low and slow" is just as bad as being "hot and high." Both cases show a huge lack of situational awareness and not having a rough idea about aircraft performance.
The new 'magenta line' and VNAV generation is in this circumstance just as lousy as the old 'magenta line' VNAV generation.
The only way to learn descent planning is to have lot's of experience, doing multiple sectors per day, having a willingness to learn, but also having a capable person in the LHS who really knows his/her aircraft and knows how far to let somebody screw it up in order for it to have a learning effect.
During my multiple sector low cost days, I can say that I learned the most from the Belgian colleagues! These people
really knew their aircraft and I hold their airmanship and common sense in very very high regard!
