Thanks Tourist, again a very interesting video.
I found your comment re dealing with tedium interesting. In the late 80s when the automation of the F/E was being done I suggested at meetings with manufacturers that the stated objective that e.g. the stated objective that "normal workload" on the B744 should be lower than that on the B757" was misconceived. What we actually needed was a not workload reduction but workload optimisation through a variable degree of automation.
E.g operating LHR-MAN-JFK in a 744 would require max automation on the 40 minute LHR-MAN leg, but it should permit much more pilot involvement when en route on the oceanic leg, as strategic issues could be more relevant as well as maintaining alertness and situational awareness.
I said in a 1987 paper at a Flight Safety Foundation meeting on this subject "We have to do better in achieving optimum arousal levels. If you were setting up experiments to study people sleeping, I suggest you might look for a person due for natural sleep on his body clock, in a comfortable chair, low light level, minutely changing light patterns, temperature about 75 deg. F, a white noise background, and the elimination of body movements and intellectual stimuli.
Anyone who's flown long night flights in oceanic airspace on a B-757 or B-767 will recognize the scene well! Our problem arises when something goes wrong, because on these aeroplanes the abnormal workload appears to be, and in some cases is, extremely high - certainly monitoring breaks down almost entirely for a high percentage of the time. It is the step function between workload levels which is hazardous, not necessarily the absolute levels."
Keep it coming...