The magenta argument
 

The report also says (Para 1.17)
“The operator acknowledged that its Airbus crews were generally not well trained on manual approaches due to the routine practice of using automatic systems.”:(
“The operator prohibited flying manually with manual thrust in visual approaches during supervised flights, starting in the week after the event (22 July 2016).”
That pretty well says it all, not only about their practices but about how they deal with a problem. Sweep that lot under the carpet! Now that I am retired and have more time on my hands, if I do have to go to the “abroad” I will seriously consider going by sea.

“The operator acknowledged that its Airbus crews were generally not well trained on manual approaches due to the routine practice of using automatic systems.”
“The operator prohibited flying manually with manual thrust in visual approaches during supervised flights, starting in the week after the event (22 July 2016).”

There is an argument that the operator was 'contributory negligent' in having a philosophy that diluted the skills of its employees to be 'fit for purpose' when called upon. What part of 'piloting' don't they understand?

In other words, the pilots were not expected to be able to control the airplane’s attitude/flight path or thrust?

Pretty sad if this is the future of commercial flying: No training or talent needed, just push the Auto button and go flying :(

Glad I got to experience DC-3s, DC-8s and 747 Classics, we did the airplane attitude/flight path and thrust manually and took pride in it.

RAT5
Unfortunately it’s not just small Airbus operators mandating these SOPs.
Apart from the B744, British Airways SOP bans manual control of thrust management on all fleets,at all times during route flying.

Pretty sad if this is the future of commercial flying: No training or talent needed, just push the Auto button and go flying

Except the bi-annual competency check includes the mandatory items that are supposedly meant for us to demonstrate that we are competent to 'save the day' when the unlikely scenario of the mandatory item occurs. How are we supposed to do that if we are not allowed to remain sharp in the basics on a daily basis? This mob are not the only ones to semi-handcuff their flight crews. How can an XAA authorise such philosophies when it is abundantly obvious that when called upon to 'save the day' in a realistic scenario the pilots will be found wanting; and the pax very miffed that they didn't get what they paid for, and in blind faith assumed was included in the ticket?
IMHO there is a 'getting away with it so far' attitude creeping into the industry. When there is a smoking hole the investigators go at it to find the case of the crash. That is often a technical or human error or a combination. It's not often they go deeper into why the humans failed and how to prevent repetition. They did with the tail coming off the Airbus in USA. That was tracked to the airline's training dept and rectified. I'm not so sure that would work if the training was shown to be approved, satisfactory etc. but the lack of currency was a root cause due to philosophy; and it was that which contributed to the crash.

You must be joking! Which safety conscious operator would mandate such a thing?

I know Germania, as germans bottom feeder, isn't safety conscious and never was, but Big Airlines?

Operators who think they're safety-conscious do. Every individual flight is safer with automation, so to ensure safety what's one to do? Mandate automation, of course!

Buy they are for some reason blind to the safety implication of automation on every flight, where the "pilot" can't maintain his/her skills, or even develop them in the first place.

It's two sides of a coin, and true safety consciousness is based on both of them. Naive safety consciousness is based only on the one representing individual flights. It's an honest mistake.

So if they have a autothrottle problem they cancel instead of MEL it and go?

The subject of Big Airways and manual thrust (or not) was thrashed to death in a very recent thread yet again recently.

RAT speaketh the truth .. on those fleets equipped with full time auto throttle /thrust at BA the use of manual thrust on the line is forbidden....if the system is bust, it is DDG'd and get on with it...I now add my usual disclaimer about not shooting etc.

Hey Guys; slow down. I haven't put BA in the spotlight over thrust. My comments are, and have been for years, over the demise of basic piloting skills by the many. There is a humorous argument that some operators advertising for 'pilots' should be shamed for misrepresentation.

Unbelievable, this is what's it's come to, prohibit manual flight because, well, we're not good at it.

That's surprising. Didn't they almost crash an A319 recently, partly due to the crew's over-reliance on automation?

It's a sad destructive attitude, but I can understand it from a bean-counter's point of view. I flew for outfits where they had some scary visual approaches performed by a .001% of their crews. Solution? Discourage visual approaches for 100% or introduce 'gates' and use of automation that make ripping visual approaches so boring and unsatisfying that no-one bothers anymore.

That’s correct. Lost an engine due take off with cowling unlatched. Very poor power management by handling pilot with single engine manual thrust.

AB(FBW) were not really designed to be flown in manual thrust. Just look at the amount of throttle movement available compared to say a 757. Thrust control in a AB has to be done with finess. Hence practice is essential.

Serious? The buses fly very well and indeed better with manual thrust. I've found the levers to be smooth and precise, far better than the 737s & 767s I've previously flown.

I won't say that I wouldn't like a bit more movement of the thrust levers, but to say they weren't designed for manual thrust is just wrong. The 320 series is a joy to fly with all the automation off.

Yes agreed it is, but going back to the early 90’s I can remember the AB trainers telling us this fact, when we all wanted a/p off a/t off. We were instructed to to “always” keep the a/t on. This was also because of the variable target speed. (Ground speed mini)

Rubbish. If you think youve done a hard landing, you probably havent. When you have done a hard landing... you know!

The report says that manual thrust is not allowed for supervised flights (ie line training) on visual approaches. It’s not a blanket ban on manual thrust