Rat 5, your views at #18 represent old school flying. I am old school, but increasingly believe that this approach will not solve modern day safety problems; the world of aviation has changed.
Aircraft have changed beyond recognition, they are easier to fly, but require much more ‘operating’.
The technology changes are immense, affecting all aspects of aviation. With hindsight there were mistakes in the introduction of automation; yet the safety benefits far outweigh the negatives. Automation was seen as a saviour – ‘if an aircraft system fails engage the autopilot’ – it provides the pilot with more time, opportunity to fly different routes, new ATC structures, which then mandate automation, etc, etc. But who considered ‘what if’ the automation failed in the self-generated mental environment that considered humans as the weak link and automation the saviour.
Regulators must review their past activities in the above; how to train automation, approach to a stall, engine failure, … The regulatory process is more biased towards law, something which constrains opposed to enabling safer operation; who can read (understand) and apply all of the regulations. All operations are in regulatory ‘error’, it’s only with the continual adjustment by the front-line human that operators’ deviations are not discovered.
Thus, the operating environment is increasingly complex; it cannot be fully understood, even described in detail. Within this the human has also changed.
We do not live in the same social climate; our expectations have changed, seeking instant knowledge without considering its value (Goo and Wik), immediate self-satisfaction for minimum input, bombarded by endless distractions – TV adverts, 'must see' text messages, etc. There is no need to ‘learn’, remember facts, or even apply logical thought.
These aspects have changed behaviour towards and in flying/operating – pilots may expect the FD to provide the correct flight path without looking at attitude or heading, use FD to cross check AP, expect the AT to maintain speed at all times.
We are creatures of habit; we – the industry, have embraced the automation habit.
In this scenario it would be extremely difficult (time and cost) to apply ‘back to basics’ or ‘old school training’, which could still be inappropriate for the current aircraft design, operational environment, and social climate.
We require modern day solution for modern day problems. Following the FD might be a solution for pilots; I don’t know, but if it is then the solution must have the robustness required for operations to deal with unforeseen and surprising situations, and the even greater surprises of what the human is capable of in these situations. I suspect the current FDs do not meet these requirements, particularly in a stall.
Thus future systems, including training, will have to ‘protect us from ourselves’; this requires a new view of safety which must also consider the changes in the overall operational environment as above.