Quote:
This pommie canuck should long be put to pasture! Have never come across such fake and insincere piece of work. Teaches rubbish during his sim sessions.
I know this guy, a real vindictive chap but seems extremely nice to those who have not seen his bad side. Once I had a session after he had given sim PT to some guy. He was complaining to a fellow Alteon guy(my checker ) about his earlier trainee...it seemed that he was pissed that the trainee, a south east asian gentleman, had remarked that his ( the instructor's ) conduct of a sim exercise was negative training! He sounded peeved and vengeful.
What I learnt later was that it was a CFIT exercise. The trainee was vectored and put through a high descent rate towards the terrain, the goal was to
induce a " terrain, terrain " and subsequently a " terrain, terrain, pull up, pull up " GPWS warning. However with the high descent rate coupled with the fast reducing radio altimeter reading, the trainee stowed the speedbrakes first. And just as the speedbrakes are stowed, the GPWS warnings came and the trainee made the standard recovery with full power up, autothrottle/autopilot off, wings level, pitch 20deg up, then recomfirm speedbrakes stowed, etc. He was lambasted during the debrief that he had the procedure wrong! He MUST HAVE THE POWER UP, AUTOMATION OFF, WINGS LEVEL, PITCH 20deg, then only speed brakes!
The trainee argued that he was just stowing the speed early because by the high terrain closure rate he sensed through the radio altimeter, he had instintively stowed it earlier out of sequence BUT HE HAD SUBSEQUENTLY ENSURED THAT THEY WERE REALLY STOWED. The instructor maintained that was absolutely wrong! Follow SOP! The trainee then argued that in real life flying, he would NEVER EVER leave the speedbrakes deployed with such a reducing terrain closure rate as indicated by the fast reducing radio altitude, remarking that the exercise could be negative training. That must have riled that 757 hero! I was not sure if language problem ( the trainee was some south east asian chap ) was the case of the remark of negative training making the instructor upset, because the trainee might not have articulated it very well.
I understood the trainee's contention but I guessed there was miscommunication as the real intent of the exercise was to activate the GPWS warning, then recover. So I think instructors should be able to communicate their intent well before hand to avoid being " badly stung " by comments of negative training by a perceived upstart!