Why would pilots use auto-land?

[Jeff Nielsen 1,385]

I'll tell you what folks....After reading this post, I must have busted regulations several times in FS9 while flying into airports with both the queen and 737 where I busted out practically over the numbers in 1/4 mile vis, then disco'd the a/p and landed manually. LOL. Hmmm. Then again I'm not IFR certified inrl. Good thing huh. :-)To the poster about flying online. I couldn't agree more. When we fly in FS with these complicated add-ons we forget sometimes that real world crews are splitting the work load, flaps, gear, radios, etc. When you're online you still have to do it all, so yes, auto-flying down to about 300 feet or so is generally the way to go.Great thread guys. :-)

[nor969 0]

I am not sure about actual rules about autoland. On vatsim, however, I find that I can fly manually even on approach as long as I have the radio freq's programmed ahead of time. I also turn off a/t and just set n1 to something that approximates the speed I want. If there is turb the speed bounces up and down but no big deal. Even if I have to let go of controls for a few seconds to change freq's or even enter a freq the plane more or less continues in the direction I left it in, so long as you are trimmed properly and also have proper power settings. At least for me that works.christoffer

[Guest D17S]

To second the thought, I like the discussion aspect of the forum too. In that spirit, here's a post from the SW 737 runway excersion topic. It seems appropriate here too. I'm going to argue that the simple answer to 'Why Pilots use autoland' is 'Because it's safer. Automation can do it faster and better.' As far as the landing manuver, pilots are a 'failsafe' device. I will proper that this is not just my opinion. I will suggest that it was the design intent and remains the current concensis that automation be used instead of the pilot. During the the final stabalized approch for the landing manuver, both designers and operators are directing that the safest place for a pilot's hands is in his lap. "Just to follow up a bit. I had a chance to look up some MEL stuff. I don't have access to 737 docs, but I have full sets for some other stuff. The 747/1-200, 757, 767 and MD11 MELs all speak to the same philosophy. Autobrakes, autospoilers and reversers are all systems necessary to allow an airplane to remain normally operational. For instance, if the airplane is certified for Cat 3b, then 3b would be considered its optimum capability. There's nothing magic about Cat 3b . . . actually it's totally magic, but it is not a bonus. From a performance / technical standpoint, it