I think "The Dominican" is right on.
I started out in the 727 with 500hr and never flew an automated approach for 6 years until I left. It just wasn't something you did, not to mention the autopilots were unreliable. If you turned the autopilot on in the sim you were hit in the head with a cain.


Hey bcrosier were you at ATA?

 

First off, with the increase in automation the task of being a pilot is being dumbed down. The manufacturers, as driven by their customers the airlines, are building aircraft so that there is less skill required to operate them. Note, I said operate, not fly. They just want the crew to push the right buttons, rely and depend on the automation. That's all well and good till the automation packs up or you have to do something outside the operating parameters of said automation. Then the authorities, manufacturers, airlines and the public point their fingers at the crews if there is a failure in them returning to their stick and rudder skills to "fly the aircraft". This is in spite of the fact that all they do is teach people to depend on the automation and let their flying skills atrophy, if they had them to begin with.

So at this point in time with the advent of ever increasing automation less actual skill is required to operate the aircraft. Since this is the case less qualified and skilled people can be hired and paid less. Welcome to the cheapening of the industry.

I have gone from the trailing edge of technology to the leading edge of technology. I welcome some of the automation and resent other parts. I will fly either the latest Electric Jet or the aging Quadrasaurus. For me I would rather have a mix of the two. Modern airspace makes it difficult to navigate without a capable nav system. That means something more than the mighty Carousel IVA.

What I see is that the automation can be a valuable tool, but it should not become a replacement for flying skills, skills that are built over years of experience. When operating heavily automated aircraft I see pilots (or is that operators?) being reactive and not proactive in the operation of the aircraft. Ask experienced Captains who they would rather have in the right seat, a 400 hour computer gamer or a 2000 hour pilot who has cut their teeth doing real FLYING. I'll take one single pilot night freight pilot over ten 400 hour RJ wonders that mostly have to be babysat.

Be a pilot, not an operator.

 

When I started working here we were divided in 2 groups. First group went to a turboprop, and second into a jet. Right now I’m flying a turboprop and we get to hand fly a lot. Airport elevations range from 0ft to over 8000ft and some runways are simply too short and add the nice tropical weather.
Now I’ll be going to the 320 with about 700 hours, maybe 800 and statistic say we do better than the second group that went into in jet with just 200 hours when it comes to ADM or thinking outside the box. (Just because of the type of flying we do).Flying skills are better, but do even out by 2000 hours in the 320. (Guys with no training problems). So I agree with you Dominican, but don’t you think 2500 hrs of flying a C172 teaching students power on stalls, etc are just a little too much?

MDT06

 

Why were you hit with one of Adam's sons? (Sorry, couldn't resist being the grammar Nazi for a minute there)

Re: ATA - I bear (or bare, as the situation merits) a certain resemblance to that remark. Et tu, Brute?

The moose is loose...