Cockpit blues. Has automation made flying easier? Or are pilots forgetting how to fly?

I am kinda like Alistair, here we go again. Over the past 2-3 weeks, this subject has been batted around in comment strings on 2-3 different stories. The one under lying thread in all of it was "FLY THE PLANE". There is one line in Patrick's article that sums it all up, both previous and this current story,"A crew needs to know what its plane is doing, why it's doing it, and how to stop it from doing it if need be."
'NUFF SAID!!!!!!!!!!

Every time I fly commercially I use to look into the cockpit and see if it was a glass panel or steam gauges. I noticed I had a better ride on the flights with steam gauges. I figured this was because they put older pilots (more experience) in the planes with steam gauges and new pilots learned on the glass panel technology so that is the planes they flew. Now alomost everything is glass panel. Can anyone tell me if this is true?

@ Wayne Bookout --

Whenever I read anything under your signature on this thread related to whether 1's and 0's should be flying the airplane or the pilot should be flying the airplane, and when, your position seems clear and to the point, uncluttered. A USAF Command Pilot friend of mine says 'in flying, experience is everything.' Your positions always seem predicated on experience and clear-headedness: you rule the airplane, it doesn't rule you.

I think people are just running out of things to write about. When there's an accident in the cockpit or the control tower, they are so quick to rip to shreds the intellect and reputation of anyone involved. However here, nothing has happened, and they still want to bash pilots. Give them a break!

I found out awhile back that my "over utilization" of automation and reduction of stick time had a negative effect on my own flying skills. As a result,I resist the temptation of utilizing it every time in terminal areas in order to maintain my skills.

I kind of agree with this story. Yea I'm sure I will be attacked for it but if you look at quite a few accidents basic flying skills were ignored. For instance there have been too many accidents when the pilot inflicted a stall when pulling back on the stick when he should've pushed down resulting in a crash of a perfectly running aircraft. That's like pushing the gas when you want to hit the brakes in a car, it just shouldn't happen.

On the other hand there have been a few crashes because pilots didn't know about features in the airplane that nobody was trained on, or it wasn't readily published by the manu.

Lot's of opinions here. I have been watching this "story" unfold for a while now. I can see through the thoughts of others many ways to look at the percieved problem. I agree with position that most of issue revolves around money and/or efficiency. I fly a high performance turbo prop and have flown with and without the AP on similar routes. My experience has been that the AP is 12% more efficient trip to trip. Fuel is weight and weight takes fuel to fly. Power changes, pitch changes, heading changes all effect time and that equals fuel. At $5.00 plus for Jet A, the fuel difference for me is $33.00 per hour. Imagine that scaled up for say a 747 or a CJ that has to point to point three times a day. If everyone feels so adamantly about hand flying the airplane lets ask the airlines to set up an non flight management based route. Is anyone willing to pay the additional costs to fly that way? My guess is no.

The literary skills used in this response will not approach those used by Patrick Smith. It is with that said I believe he speaks for many of us that believe automation is an aid to flying, not a crutch. The pilot must make the necessary effort to state current. That is to say he/she must actually grab the yoke and hand fly the jet now and then for no other reason than to prove to him/herself they still have "it." Because, without "it" they are glorified gamers.

I saw a parallel in this article with my own occupation, when the author states that the autopilot is overly complicated and over-engineered.
The electronic health record that I use to take care of patients is the same way. It makes previously simple tasks more complicated and time consuming, because it was developed by computer scientists, with the too-frequent input of attorneys. I suspect the newer autopilot systems were developed in much the same way, without adequate input from the people who were actually going to use the system.

half the pilots still love hand flying the airplane as long as they can anyways

pilots should be paid 50% more.....that will fix the problem.

this crap again???!

How will more pay help pilots not rely on automation? Although pilots need better pay, that alone will not change the view of articles like this

guaranteed that passengers will be more happy with the autopilot on while traveling 500 mph through the air at 35000, then having the pilot hand fly the airplane, when going that fast, any little bump of the yoke, could send the passenger sitting in the last row right through the roof..

Modern technology is great, but pilots need not get "dependent" on it! For example, when I first started flying years ago, the cessna 172 I was training in had a garmin gps and bendix autopilot... My instructor was very serious about never letting me use this equipment!

not required, but strongly recommended, emphasis, emphasis. if you going to hand fly the sid's, you better make damn sure you stay on track or your gonna get busted. sometimes its better to let the automation fly you out. most of the time, in the md88 anyway, flying out of the smaller cities its more fun to fly it out yourself!!!! we are pushed to use the automation to the fullest extent possible especially as they keep looking down the road for those idle decents that take you to touchdown (not at idle of course). connect all the dots, stay in VNAV. again though, smaller airports and the 88 mean we can have a little more fun flying the sheen!!!

I agree with Shad Bell. If you can't fly a plane without automation, then you shouldn't be flying. I needed to demonstrate how to fly a plane in Alaska in 1961, long before there was automation. I flew the plane, the plane was not flown by installed equipment taking place of a pilot. What is going on now is pilots playing with cockpit games and don't understand the plane they are flying.

@ Wayne Bookout --

I looked through the articles in this current newsletter for 'airline loans' - couldn't find anything - give me a heading. Thanks.

Not sure how more pay will help pilots fly better (or make better use of the technology). Paying teachers more certainly hasn't resulted in smarter kids...

Why they put on the AP so soon kind of makes me think, because I fly 172's, climbing out at 72 knots. I would never get tired of flying out a climb at 3 times that! My old flight instructor who now flies for the airlines said that he never gets tired of hand flying the airplane as much as possible.

Here we go again.... ugghhhh :(

Yes, probably pilots are loosing some of the basic stick and rudder skills. These events are also VERY rare. The 2005 statistic was that there were 87,000 flights per day in the U.S. (30,000+/- air carrier) Yet how many of these "I forgot how to fly events are there?
DAL does not require the pilot to turn the autopilot on at 1000'. For a long time that was the limit as to when you could turn on the autopilot. (now 400 feet for some aircraft) You are required to use the highest level of automation available for the situation. That level might be "OFF"!
Aviation (especially the FAA) needs to get out the mentality of .."that's not how we did it on the DC-3."
Is a surgeon losing their surgical skills because they are using some type of robotic or scopic surgery?
As I heard an FAA inspector say .."Who has the type rating? You or the autopilot?"
Hand fly when you want to, so you are not caught off guard when you have to.

As a mechanic, I see a lot of different pilots. As is the case in any career field, there is a "bell curve" of ability, with a few exceptionally good pilots on the far side of the bell, most of them in the "hump" in the middle, and a few who should never be allowed in the cockpit on the left side of the curve.

That being said, I think that automation, properly designed and used, would help to smooth out that bell curve: that is, it would help bring everyone's level of ability to be closer to that of the really good pilots. Unfortunately, all too often it appears the various systems were designed by ivory tower thinkers who did not take into account the fact that the pilot will have other tasks besides operating this particular piece of equipment! If a pilot has to punch buttons, flip switches and twist knobs on five or sixteen different "labor-saving" systems, all the while trying to attend to the more traditional flight tasks (talk to ATC, make announcements to the passengers, etc.), he will rapidly hit overload.

Some attempts at system integrations have been made, with varying degrees of success. Some pilots really are pilots: that is, rather than just flying the plane, they actually control it, in all aspects. It has been said that "anyone can learn to fly a plane." This is largely true, in the most basic sense. However, it takes a lot of hard work and true dedication to become a pilot. Someone who can (in essence) "drive" the airplane in normal conditions, but can't deal with unusual conditions well, is a "flier". (Note that passengers who ride in a lot of aircraft are called "frequent fliers." Does this mean they're qualified to operate the aircraft? I don't think so...) A pilot is in full control of all aspects of the aircraft, in all situations, and is completely prepared to do whatever might be necessary and correct in any given situation.

Until the time comes, though, that all of this technology becomes truly and fully "automatic", there will always be the dichotomy of "flying" and "piloting" the aircraft. How many people that sit in the cockpit do you know are "pilots", rather than "fliers"?

In my opinion, it has always been a matter of experience and qualification in general rather than a nightmare of the “automation era”. I mean that we can always imagine and can find in reality around us very professional pilots who know there “iron birds” as good as there loved ones, and who can take care about them almost in every possible situation, and save the passengers and themselves. If they have mastered this particular type, than it is safe to fly at any level of automation. If they have not, than it is not completely 100% safe, both in 20th and 21st centuries. So, let the pilots be masters everywhere! Let them spend more time on training, on simulating more and more even rare abnormal situations, let them know all of the tricks and complicated responses of there newly designed and smart flight computers! They say “knowledge is power”. We can add: “knowledge is safety”.