Originally Posted by
RiSq
To be fair - the over reliance on Automation is a vicious circle.
A lot of carriers discourage manual flying and I know of some that will actively punish those that break such SOPs. The swing of that is, when the automation fails, its a case of crash and burn (Pardon the pun)
Truth is - to these airlines, you (Pilot), Me (PAX) don't really matter - the only time we do is when one bites the dust and lets face it - it's easier to blame the dead crew than actually get a handle on the core issues - probably cheaper too!
Training - Manual Flying - Working hours. It all stems back to a capitalist market, where profit is more important than safety. The irony is, the big carriers would rather spend millions of dollars trying to repair a Hull to avoid a write off then they would on training crew and improving safety.
Just WHY do some carriers discourage manual flying, surely an essential element to maintain flying skills to enable them to deal with the unexpected, but possible.
It seems bizarre to me that one major, at least, prohibits manual thrust operation BUT allows despatch with AT
Inop. The captain of the A320 which lost its cowls, had never, according to the AAIB report, flown the ac with manual thrust and then had to resort to split, PF PNF, speed control.
If an airline is employing captains who can't decide where and when to do a little hand flying to maintain skills they have the wrong people in the LHS!
......or perhaps they have the wrong people making such management decisions!