Regarding the training philosophy these days: firstly I'm concerned that the basic CPL flight training has been reduced from 250 - 150hrs. Not every pilot will end up in an airline jet. There are Air taxis & biz-jest our there. OK, the amount of VFR nav-ex we used to do was fun, but with GPS these days perhaps that should be reduced, but 100hrs seems a lot. MPL courses with a lot of sim based training might be considered OK for airliners, but it must be at the expense of developing manual handling skills. Perhaps that is where the problem lies; there is an attitude that manual handling skills above 500' are not required......until they are. Consequently airlines with modern a/c do not want to spend time teaching beyond the basic base check and do not like it when the number of Go-rounds increase on sunny days. So they discourage such frivolous activities as manual visual approaches; and the downward spiral continues.
I think back to B732 training. It had the most simplest of autopilot and the nav system was the same as you saw in flight school: a HSI with VOR/LOC display, a DME and a basic T instrument panel. It did not take any extra training. So we first learnt to fly/handle the a/c; then we learnt operate the a/c; then we added some systems non-normal, and then we added some emergencies. Todays TR syllabi is biased towards the operation of the a/c under normal & non-normal conditions. Because of the new sophisticated systems there is more FBS time, but then the FFS hours are also absorbed by a/c operation with systems non-normals and much FMC programming and briefing and set-ups and use of automatics. There is little time for handling, except for those mandatory in the LST. The basic mandatory manoeuvres required are the same as B732 35 years ago. V1-cut, SE LS & G/A are still the same. There has been very little evolution of modern day testing in modern day a/c. It has been static. The amount of FFS time is much the same. One possibility would be to add 2 sessions to the TR for handling, but that's cost, and for whom? The XAA's say their job is to set a base standard of handling and the operators can set their in-house standards and train their crews as required. To me that should include the manual skills that the TR course does not have time for. Base training is not enough to achieve all that is required. It needs daily practice and exposure, and principally that means approaches. Every take off is manual and following the FD up to CRZ with constant thrust is hardly difficult. Manual flying from FL100 down is another matter, busy TMA's excepted. There is a time & place; but even there, from 5000', it should not scare the horses or small children.
How many airlines encourage this? What does your employer encourage? And I'm not thinking just of EU airlines, but worldwide. We, the pax, climb aboard partner airlines from very different cultures. Their standards might not be the same as the host airlines we bought the ticket from.
It might be dream to have a worldwide standard and similar philosophies, but the first step on an adventure is always the most difficult and the most important. Who will take it? FAA? EASA?