I started my career doing almost exclusively backside of the clock flying. The skies are very much queiter at night and the boxes didnt mind their G&T being spilled so providing you're not feeling dog tired, then great, crack on. But as I've said, it's a right place & right time decision. We've all got IR's so should all be very proficient on instruments, being "instrument proficient" has cock all to do flying manually.

And I'd also say that bigger more modern aeroplanes are designed with maximum use of automatics in mind. I was pretty astonished at the level of redundancy to automation when I moved to my new type. It was briefly demo'd during the groundschool phase and we were both left amazed compared to the older tech on the 767. That said, the first few Non-ILS Approaches left me craving my good old RDMI and a basic DME readout.

Funnily enough (well....it was funnier after the event) I had a complete (all bloody 3 of them!) AP failure linked to an FCC Fault not long before leaving the 767. Ended up flying the entire descent and approach manually which was great fun. We subsequenty departed for the return leg after much engineering headscratching to discover the fault returned as soon as we got airborne. Given the conditions, we elected to continue and stay below RVSM. 2 1/2 hours later we arrived back at home base and I was satisfied I'd done enough to know I can still do it when required. Would I regularly do it out of choice....no thanks. It's not the safest and most efficient way to fly the aeroplane, which is what my company and the customers down the back want. And what I'm paid to do at the end of the day.

Recently been offered a share in a C172 with a descent instrument set up but even that looks expensive to buy in to and keep current.

I didn't say it was unsafe. I said it becomes less safe than another option. Being unsafe and less safe are totally different. That said there are of course exceptions to the rule and I completely agree that there are circumstances where trying to mess about programming a FD draws your attention away from the actual flying and that in itself isn't very clever either, especially close to the ground. Of course it goes back to the right time and right place conversation. Discussing and deciding on an appropriate level of automation for the approach being flown at the briefing stage helps. But my point remains that the company and our customers want us to fly whatever is the safest option possible.

Sometimes sticking to the absolute minimum of regulation will not satisfy even basic safety requirements. For example take an ATR FO who has 1000h of C172 and 500h of multipilot experience, upgrade him into the left seat of the A380 at 1500h TT and after 10 sectors of line training, he can be PIC in a worldwide longhaul operation. Legal....yes. Safe.... no.

Every airline has its own view on minimum automation required and as professional pilots we should respect this. As said, passengers pay for a safe flight from A to B, nothing more and nothing less.
​

Mate, you are way off of the path: maybe I didn't explain clearly the meaning of my post, or maybe you didn't catch it . What it was my intention to show here is that I ma an old fart like me (I think I can say it), used for most of his career to fly clock-and-dials old fashion cockpit: I should be for this reason one of those ranting against actual pilot screening, actual pilot flying with autopilot, the Airbus red carpet and so on; instead, I don't, and I much love the AB FBW; I have read many times what seems to me be some kind of nonsense, like in other thread someone praising Boeing and attackung Airbus for the layout of the AFCS, because with the Airbus pilots "lose the trimming skill". Seriously? Shall I lose my trimming capability because I have an autotrimming aircraft (not always but very often) ? There are so many sky lords out there ready to teach us the deeply hidden truths of aviation...

Long time retired now but just a thought ; are the regulatory licence revalidation exercises carried out with all the automatics connected ? I too enjoyed entry at highly selected level in the 70's. Basic pilot training was more difficult than today. Yes, we really did stalling, spinning, steep turns, recovery from unusual attitudes etc. I enjoyed quite a few heavy jet transports winding up on widebodies. I enjoyed increased automation as it made life easier. But final stint on a fully automated was least enjoyable. NO, you are not disconnected from the autopiliot, ever and no, the thrust levers are not throttles but thrust selector levers, etc, etc, etc. My point is, though, when it comes to Base check, I/R, comp exercises etc for you to prove to a Licence renewal examiner of, for example , your "CONTINUED ability to fly in controlled airspace, in IMC, in manual control " ( a requirement throughout my airline career for I/R renewal), do you chaps just push the buttons & let the autopilot do everything ? Lots of dumbing down going on here I suggest. Do you even call it a Base check, I/R ? I feared the change when it was renamed " Long event, Short event, CRM,....oh and whatever happened to that daft "Advanced Pilot Qualification Programme criteria ? Don't even get me started on non selection, Bank of Mum & Dad for financing, basic pilot training skills avoided because they are irrelevant or ( I have heard it said) too dangerous (!).


Mate of mine had the misfortune to be employed by a cowboy outfit in the nineties that discouraged handflying. He argued back (fatal) that in the right conditions, it honed basic skills and was, anyway, bloody good fun in perfect wx conditions. He continued to dig his grave by telling the CP that in order to pass the regular sim check (hand-flown exercises ) he would need to practice a bit, eh ? CP replied, with a smurk, that they made concession in the sim for the fact that the line pilots were encouraged to use, only, full automation, on the line from gear-up and 400ft beyond. For concession, mean, dumbing down.Accepted a lower standard from it's pilots then (?).


Like major air transport modern tech prangs (AF A340, GF A320 for example) moderntraining route , fully checked out and rated pilots had no idea what was going on when confused by autofunctions. In my day, autopilot out, autothrottle out, I have control...........now, what the F is going on as we are back in control........worked everytime.


OK. Agreed. It is what the beancounters demand. They bought us the high tech aircraft and when operated in full automoad from 400ft to to roll-out , ARE , very financially efficient. So, make the training fit the end product. Dumb it all down because you need no real piloting skills or background to pull back the stick, then, positive clb, call for gear up & co-jo actually reaches for and places a gear select lever in the UP position (wow) 400ft, autopilot on, Lnav, Vnav ....now what (?) oh yeah, hit the call bell & ask the CA what's for Dinner ! Agreed, shame to take the money.


Like the other old & bold bods on thread, glad to be out of it. Blimey, even my new motor has keyless ignition, several drive options that take away any skill required on the M25, Crz mode speed control, no need for spare tyre, drive for ages up to 80km/hr on a flat (ish) tyre.Gosh, need a drink (manual top up) and must read up on what to do if the speed control jams at 100 , Must move on eh ? Next, I will advocating that Nasa Space cadets must prove ability for a full manual launch, manual orbit escape to warp factor 6 & fully manual entry, descent, & landing at hostile planet. Not gonna happen eh ? Ah, forgot the modern expression, ....."It is what it is" !

For what it's worth, my basic training in 2008 included the requirement to demonstrate proficiency in stalling, spinning, steep turns and recovery from unusual attitudes (VMC, IMC full panel and IMC partial panel). We did full aerobatics as well (albeit not to a competition standard!).

Ten years flying the Airbus, and both operators encouraged manual flying during line operations. I took advantage of that at every opportunity, and when I became a captain I encouraged my first officers to do the same. Is it necessarily sensible to avail yourself of manual flying opportunities on a busy SID in the London TMA? Probably not. Airmanship probably dictates that in such situations you should make use of the various automated systems available. However, at a quiet airfield, and if the company SOPs allow you to hand-fly, why not click it all off at 20000'?

I would argue that a few dozen hours in a bugsmasher with foggles in clear weather and with an instructor/examiner in the other seat, does not adequately prepare someone for doing it in an airliner flying twice the speeds down to minimums, with oneself in command.

I'm trying to understand this statement. Can you please explain it?

Wouldn't you be comforted by knowing that you can "do it" BEFORE you were forced to by external circumstances?

It seems to me like an oddly cavalier attitude to carry on with everyday flight ops without being worried that you don't know you can fly a descent and approach.

Joe, don't quite get the point of your closing question or if it was aimed at Landflap. I know the guy very well and we shared almost identical backgrounds. Both of us wound up on A340 in our last types although within different carriers. In 40 odd years, we both accrued around 22500 hrs from Cadet to Senior Captain. Not that difficult to give you are "day,week,month,year" average but it varied a lot over 40 years. Not sure a definitive answer would satisfy the answer you seek. Thankfully, my last carrier had a highly visioned Training Dept and we were all encouraged to manually fly whenever we wished. Recurrent training ( I love that phrase) involved a mix of handflying, full auto and lots of CRM .

So, should we all go back to driving cars from the 70's - without airbags, ABS, traction and stability control, etc. - following the same logic, it made us better drivers, therefore it was safer

+1
The golden age are now.
Having automation while you enjoy looking outside, is great.
Looking forward single pilot plane (CS25) for one reason : no flights anymore with as@h@loes captains for example. This, will be the golden age.
The same as you would enjoy a flight in a flying club. The plane for you and only you :)
Just my opinion though.

In your previous post you said after your incident you knew you were still able to do it. To me this implies that before the incident, you didn't know. What changed?

No one's forcing you to point out anything pal.

But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt as I think we're getting in a muddle here. I was referring to hand flying the aeroplane earlier in the conversation and the capacity that can sap from the operation. That lead to me saying there are times when it's simply not appropriate to do it, especially now that the skies have become incredibly busy. Whether you're doing it while referring to instruments or looking out the window wasn't my point hence me dividing the skill sets. Knowing how to fly purely on instruments and being able to physically hand fly the aeroplane as well as we used to be able to as our hand flying skills all inevitably degrade over time makes them two separate issues.

And nothing changed, I think you're getting confused. I was simply referring to an incident where we had no choice but to hand fly the aeroplane and the capacity that sapped over the 2 1/2 hour flight was staggering. While fairly rewarding at the end, ultimately it was pretty knackering too.

Hope that makes it clearer for you.

Sorry everyone, but I think it is time for Enjoy...