flappy and ottopilot, if your reading skills were as good as your approaches you'd have seen that: I've never said that you weren't skilled or that you are paid fairly

 

The AP, AT and FMS are all pieces of electronic junk unless a qualified pilot tells it what to do via programming. You seem to forget that little piece of the pie.

 

Computers (auto-pilots, LNAV/VNAV) don't take-off.
.....they don't know when to shut an engine down.
.....they don't put in aileron or rudder trim. (at least on a Boeing)
.....they don't know how and when to change altitude for turbulence.
.....they don't know which way to go around a storm.
.....they can't predict traffic conjestion based on radio traffic.
Here's the biggies....
.....they can't land with an engine failure.
.....they can't land unless there's a precision approach available to that runway.
.....they have lower wind tolerances for landing.
.....they can't fly visuals, a la the "Expressway Visual 13" @ KLGA or the "River Visual 19" in KDCA, or even a straight in visual.
.....they can't judge rapidly changing conditions, either mechanical, weather or ATC systems.
.....they can't double check to see that dispatch gave you a suitable alternate and/or enough fuel to get there.
.....they can't double-check to see if the logbook/MEL's are properly signed off.
.....they can't coordinate with emergency medical services.
.....they can't be flexible with ATC to make the system work.
.....he!!, they can't be flexible with anyone to make the US air transportation system work.

Question: If you have VNAV in your plane. How well does it work?

 

So, you work for someone who trains you to do single-engine approaches in an MD-11...at MGW in severe icing too I suppose?


While we may in the near future see entry-level pilots who grew up in a glass 172, most of the folks in the industry today can fly steam guages with no FD, AP, AT, GPS, or moving map.

I believe our justification as pilots is our judgement, experience, and leadership skills. The technical aspects, while often challenging, are not the defining aspect. My personal concern with the "flight academies" is that they provide jobs for many kids, often wealthy, who would have gotten weeded out of the Military/CFI/Night Freight tracks. These people usually don't acquire character, judgement, experience, and leadership skills in college/flight academy, and have missed the phase of their career where they would have the opportunity to learn these things. Some may figure it out as FO's, but some don't.

I think all 121 pilots should hold an ATP, period.

 

The day there are no pilots on an airliner will be the day after I've stopped flying commercially. The system can't even function with a single-pilot cockpit yet.

 

Agreed.

I also think that's when seniority on a national list should be based, and that it should be recognized world-wide.

 

It was part of the training in one of my former lives' major carriers. What's your point ?

 

Did I say you did call me unskilled or underpaid? I can post on my own without responding to yours.

 

It is company policy to use ALL of the automation that is available and working. Hand-flying straight and level for 6 hours is pointless- especially on a redeye. The automation is about saving money and safety.

Yes, I am confident in my ability to hand fly or use the automation as needed. I do feel positive in my abilities and so does my CA and PAX.

 

Are we talking about training in the aircraft or simulators?