Snowbird writes:

We obviously disagree on what is "extreme". The proposals regarding autoland
and pure simulator-based training strike me as highly extreme.

They aren't, though. Most training for airline pilots today takes place in
simulators, so pure simulator-based training is only one small step away from
the current practice. And landing with autoland is much easier than commonly
believed--that's the whole idea. It's certainly easy enough that anyone could
do it by carrying out instructions given by someone else. This is not the
case with hand-flying, which requires a certain amount of practice
irrespective of any instruction provided by others.

Your opinion. Aviation authorities accept compass and chart as sufficient
for VFR navigation. They also require it as mandatory.

I don't judge safety on the basis of what others say. I have a much higher
standard.

The magnetic compass is included in the minimum equipment list of any
aircraft I know, so obviously authorities disagree with that opinion.

Or they simply haven't bothered to change the regulations, and have little
motivation to do so.

The first sentence is incorrect, while I agree with the second and third
sentence. What you must do is check if the equipment required for the
mission at hand is in working order, per the minimum equipment list. You may
take off with some malfunctioning equipment, as long as it does not
jeopardize the safety of the mission.

I suppose if you consider malfunctioning avionics to be acceptable, you can
take off with that. I wouldn't. I know that even airlines are careless in
this way.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.