“… the opportunities for gaining experience have significantly reduced ... in rare situations”. “… then ask why & how?” (#3857 & #3862)
A backward looking ‘why’ often focuses on what went wrong, etc, ‘blame and train’, and thence ‘back to the old ways’. One difficulty is in understanding exactly what has changed (and why) and that this and/or the implementation of change might contribute to recent events. Thus there could be new hazards as well as impracticability in turning the clock back.
When looking forward, ‘how’ often focus on issues which we are familiar with – pilots’ training – and flight deck interfaces - automation. Whilst past operational implementation of automation may not have been ideal, the resultant level of safety is something to be valued, thus any change to automation will require a cautious approach. Furthermore, the timescale for change is relatively long; cf the A330 mandated pitot change, yet the holes all lined up; AF447.
Generally it is impossible to create experience of rare events. There is more opportunity for precursor events, but the rate of occurrence may not warrant further change and most outcomes are 'saves', but it should be possible to improve the process of 'experience' in normal operations.
This is not a call for more hand flying; the vast majority of precursor situations involved automated flight. The industry should consider improvement in the manner of learning, memory recall, and assessment of situations; these are generic thinking skills applicable to all situations – normal, the ‘seeable but improbable’, and the ‘unforeseeable’.
As an alternative or supplement to retrospective aircraft changes and oft ineffectual human training it should also be possible to reduce the frequency of encountering demanding situations. See BEA
ASAGA study – need to simplify GA procedures, charts, ATC calls, radio and nav management, crew callouts, and SOPs.
Complex situations demand a combination of small, relatively easy, and quick changes, which can be managed both at middle management level and on the front line, independently of tedious regulatory change.
Experience is a quality which is held individually; individuals and operators can improve their level of experience with continual evaluation and understanding of normal operations, but this requires a willingness to do this, unfortunately this appears to be a quality lacking in the modern social climate.
Thinking critically, civil operators can put aside the military aspects; for replacement examples choose amongst the range of posts in this thread.