Earlier quoted context omitted.
Having systems like autopilot in planes can make pilots worse at flying because they don't spend as much time practicing at the controls and monitoring what's happening. Then when something goes wrong, they risk not paying close enough attention to catch it, or not being practiced well enough to correct it. If you get complacent and just assume the computer knows what it's doing (because it usually does) this can and…
That's one of the implicit reasons why US based airlines in the past used to recruit retired pilots from U.S Air Force. In case instruments fail or contradictory signals are present, pilots with physical skills (kinesthesia, etc) can steer away from dangers. Two incidents demonstrate that: 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asiana_Airlines_Flight_214 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_447 Pilots on both…
In the case of the Asiana flight, the captain chose a visual approach when he could have let the autopilot land it. And from there it's simple pilot error.
In the case of the air France flight, one of the pilots chose to ignore a stall warning and pull up instead of pushing down to gain speed. Sadly, in the case of no pilot input the plane actually would have ended up avoiding the stall on its own.
I of course agree that military pilots with real experience will likely perform better than civilian pilots, I just doubt autopilot had any part to play in either of those accidents, like the comment you replied to implies.