Depend on Automation…When Appropriate
By Jason Blair, ATP, CFI-I, MEI-I, FAA Designated Pilot Examiner | January 2015
Without a doubt, reliance on aircraft systems to control the aircraft can lead to
over-dependence on automation systems for pilots. In some cases tragically - think
of Asiana Flight 214 that crashed in July, 2013. According to the National Transportation
Safety Board’s Accident Report Summary, among the many factors that led to that
crash was a lack of understanding of certain automation systems during approach
and landing1. But those same systems can also offer significant benefits to safety
when they are used properly. Sometimes, it is a good thing to depend on aircraft
automation systems, as long as they are used correctly.
Some keys to avoiding over-dependence on automation systems are to actually know
how to use them, what they are doing and when they can be used to improve safety.
We all like to have an autopilot maintain straight and level as we cruise enroute,
but what about more critical phases of flight such as during an approach or, dare
I propose, to recover from an unusual attitude encounter?
I’ll preface the rest of this discussion with the general statement that if you
don’t know how to use the systems in your aircraft that automate functions, such
as autopilots, Flight Management Systems (FMS) and Global Positioning Systems (GPS),
you shouldn’t rely on them.
The most common use of autopilots and advanced avionics is generally during IFR
flying where autopilots are used to maintain straight and level, track GPS or VOR
navigation paths, or fly approach paths on both horizontal and vertical planes.
This is a good thing. When used properly, even simple wing levelers have the ability
to keep the aircraft on a path and at an altitude to reduce your workload. The reduction
in physical workload needed allows pilots to pay more attention to setting up on
an approach, not busting minimums, or properly planning for the weather ahead.
But let's take this further. Some modern avionics systems can do more. We all know
that when VFR pilots encounter IMC conditions, the outcome is all too often deadly.
But with new systems, we can increase the survivability. What if a VFR pilot is
flying an aircraft that has a three-axis autopilot or just a wing leveler? A wing
leveler can be used to manage workload and keep an aircraft straight and level.
And, for pilots with three-axis autopilots, it may be safer to engage the autopilot
to maintain straight and level in an inadvertent encounter with IMC conditions.
Once the aircraft is stable, they can select adjustments to headings or altitude
for the autopilot to perform at prescribed rates. This reduces the potential that
the pilot will lose control and go from inadvertent IMC to an unusual attitude.
I wonder how many pilots might have had better results in their encounters with
IMC conditions if their autopilot had been properly operated.
How about recovery from an unusual attitude? Some aircraft have an autopilot that
is capable of bringing an aircraft from significantly abnormal attitudes to straight
and level flight with just the push of a single button. Would this be safer than
having a rusty VFR pilot try to recover using skills they may have learned many
years ago and not practiced since?
The first rule of flying is, of course, to fly the airplane. The second is to fly
the airplane in a manner that stops it from hitting stuff (ground, other planes,
bad weather, etc.). How we fly the aircraft has traditionally been considered a
physical thing we do with our hands and feet. Perhaps we now need to consider that
“flying the airplane” also should include “directing the airplane” using automation
Even just using the autopilot to stay straight and level as we set up for an approach
can reduce our workload enough to spend more time reviewing the approach plate for
the approach. This can be the difference between catching and missing key information
on the procedure.
I will never advocate reduced emphasis on the training an improving aircraft control
(stick & rudder) skills. I will advocate training for pilots in the proper use
of the automation systems to augment their overall control of the aircraft, and
that may help them out of a situation that is above their aircraft control abilities.
Knowing when to rely on automation systems and how to use them properly is something
that might help save a few more pilots when things go from the planned to the unplanned.
If your plane has autopilot systems that can help, then practice. If you don’t know
how to use the systems, locate an experienced flight instructor who is familiar
with them and learn. Over-dependence on automation can be fatal, but utilization
of automation systems can reduce workload and in some cases, even save your life.
Let us know what you think of this PIREP. Please email to
To sign up for our monthly Avemco PIREP series, click
Jason Blair is an active single and multi-engine instructor and FAA Designated Pilot
Examiner with 4,800 hours total time and 2,700 hours instruction given. He serves
on several FAA/Industry aviation committees and is the past Executive Director of
the National Association of Flight Instructors. He also consults on aviation training
and regulatory efforts for the general aviation industry.
does not provide technical or legal advice, and is not affiliated with companies
whose products and services are highlighted, advertised, or discussed in content
contained herein. Content is for general information and discussion only, and is
not a full analysis of the matters presented. The information provided may not be
applicable in all situations, and readers should always seek specific advice from
the FAA and/or appropriate technical and legal experts (including the most current
applicable guidelines) before taking any action with respect to any matters discussed
herein. In addition, columns and articles solely reflect the views of their respective
authors, and should also not be regarded as technical or legal advice.