[pabianice]

This was bound to happen, with more to follow. I teach pilots using the "old steam gauge" instrument method. The head-long rush to glass cockpits and whiz-bang stuff is and has been a mistake. Flashy Technically Advanced Aircraft (TAA) sell well to airlines and people with money because they promise to take risk and workload out of flying. They don't; they just save the risk for an all-at-once catastrophe.

Training for airlines and for civilians cuts corners to increase profit. That's ok for teaching Majhong but not for flying. In the 28 year span -- during which I navigated Navy P-3s for 17 years -- navigation went from sextant and DR to an automatic system that made the NAV basically a systems monitor (a la 447). When the system failed, we were always current in jumping back to basic instruments and a DR plot. But I have given BFRs during which I suddenly fail the GPS. Most pilots immediately lose situational awareness and have little idea of where they are.

Navigators are long gone in the civil world, of course. Too expensive and hey! The system is now fool-proof, right? Just let the FMS do the work. So why train pilots to recognize and recover from a stall -- something they first practiced during their third hour of flight instruction? I've been in a stall/spin entry in a P-3 once and it was no fun at all. But the co-pilot knew how to recover before we hit the waves.

We are approaching the beginning of commercial aircraft that will be unmanned -- no pilots, just passengers and cargo. These aircraft will be very reliable, right up to the time of the first unmanned A380-replacement crash. It's a fact of business. Nothing evil, just an exercise of "The Dismal Science."

The P-8 -- the Navy's replacement for the P-3 that won't actually be built as Obama guts the military -- will still carry two navigators and three pilots who can recover from a stall. Too bad the airliner you'll ride on won't.

[Nifster]

Just because it is new doesn’t mean it is always better. One of my profs banned calculators when they first came out (the lowly HP35) because he felt you should be able to use paper, pencil, and slide rule. After all batteries run out.....

[101voodoo]

Seriously, do you actually believe a commercial airliner will in in the near or even almost near future, say the next 50 years or so, be allowed to carry passengers without a qualified pilot up front?

Personally I would not board an aircraft to fly anywhere if I knew it was not being at least watched over by a qualified pilot. Some airliners already have the capability to take off, fly to the destination observing all way points and land without a pilot ever touching the controls.

[The Great RJ]

I remember the United flight that crashed in Sioux City, IA more than a decade ago. Hundreds of lives were saved by flying skills of the pilots in a situation that no computer could have handled.

[1rudeboy]

I haven't followed this story that closely, but my understanding is that the computers had little to do with the crash. It was more about humans not processing the information that the computers were giving them. Have you heard otherwise?

(Which makes the whole "glass cockpit" argument one for another day).

[Da Coyote]

I flew for my entire USAF career and was an instructor pilot both for undegrad pilot training (UPT) and also at the TPS at Edwards.

Nothing, nothing, nothing can replace situational awareness.

And it appears that those Air France pilots didn’t possess it at the time when it was most required.

As for upcoming pilots...the electronics are nice...but I always want those basic steam gauges (attitude, turn and slip, A/S, VVI, and altitude) available.

[ken5050]

Fascinating story. Always enjoy your posts and comments. A few questions, from someone who knows nothing about flight.

1. Doesn't the NTSB always release cockpit transcripts as part of its investigations? I understood that the actual VOICE tapes are NEVER released ( for obvious reasons)..but how can the BEA object to the transcripts made public?

2. Don't understand why you feel that modern jets need a navigator. Today with GPS and all other systems, isn't it redundant, and an unnecessaary expense. In the early days of transoceanic flight, navigators used to shoot the stars to determine their position..but today?

BTW..Reading the article, everytime it said BEA, I kept thinking of the old British European Arways, and it's then sister airline..BOAC...times have sure changed.

Have you seen "Pan Am?" Great job of showing the 60's..( I dated a PanAm stewardess for a few years..69-70..and it takes me waaay back) and all the 707 cockpit scenes show three crew in the cabin. Is it a flight engineer? Did he also double as the navigator?

[CTOCS]

Did you read all the comments in the original article? About the 3rd or 4th from the bottom, a pilot named Edd states that the pilots are not trained in stalls, only done by test pilots for certification.

Given all we know, do you believe a test pilot could have ascertained what was going on and saved AF447?