3 ms·

Yeah, I guess the logic goes that a group of aero engineers know better than average pilot, who may make bad choices under stress (panic).

• ethbro 8y ago
  The one engineering truism is "There's no free lunch." You're trading a reduction in something (hopefully that isn't important / used) for an increase in something (that is important). So when we see capacity increases, fuel efficiency increases, reliability increases... I'd hazard to say that comes with increased complexity. And at some point, it's more dangerous to let a pilot fly a highly engineered aircraft on full manual than it is to let a team with access to the technical specifications and time generate an approved, stepwise, degradation flowchart for pilots to work through. In the same way the best solution to an engine timing issue isn't "Work the valve timing by hand" but rather "Degrade to a less efficient but more reliable profile" through to "Degrade to a static profile that keeps the engine operating after multiple failures." You really don't want to be burdening pilots with more work. The failure here seems to be in a poorly designed degradation route, not in the idea itself.