Why do Regionals, RFDS etc treat Instructors like SH*T? [Archive]

Zhaadum

1st May 2005, 12:28

I would like someone to please tell me in a PM if possible what I can do to get into one of the above with my experience mostly as Instructor not charter.

Briefly, 3200hrs total, 2800 cmd total, 1600 multi, 1500 multi cmd, 450 ngt, 400 night cmd, 130 if, ATPL, META, GR1, CIR 4 renewals. 2700 Instructing, mostly IFR Multi (Rough numbers only)

I seem to keep coming across ex charter guys who hate detest wont consider pilots who are or have been instructors. What is with this? Flying is flying I think.

Maybe they consider:
1 The instructor has not much stick time.
2 He flies circuits and abinitio always.
3 Not motivated to move where the work is.
4 Silver tail so poor work ethic.

I AM NONE OF THE ABOVE!

1 Always demonstrate and when not doing same as PIC always way ahead of aircraft and student.
2 I fly predominently IFR navs day and night good and bad wx and use correct procedures always and current with rules (as much as one can be).
3. I moved across the country for my present job and would do so again. Not my home city ATM.
4. Borrowed to pay for my way. NO silvertail. Work ethic very high.

Perhaps they think Charter is more difficult due customer relations?

I have many years customer relations in person and by phone. Not always a pilot you see, have had real jobs prior to this career. Also worked in RPT ops as Operations Officer so KNOW how, what to do etc.

Unfortunately, even though all this is on resume no luck so far with applications. I am so sick of it at the moment. What am I missing? Or why are so many operators or CPs, biased against Instructors and lump them together just because maybe one individual gave them a bad performance?

Can anyone give me a clue? Serious replies only please,

Thanks in advance,

Z :confused:

EngineOut

1st May 2005, 21:36

Tell me this, as an instructor, have you ever had this situation (all in one flight).

Here is the scenario.

You are asked to do night freight and have minimum fuel on board to the litre (well as good as GA fuel gauges are) because you are required to carry a full load (not just a student), weather is forecast to be not too bad, a bit of cloud en route freezing level above LSALTs.

You departed, are now up at cruising level and you are icing up, descend to LSALT, but still icing up, but it is intermittent as you are in and out of cloud now. Centre tell you new area forecast and TAFs issued available on flightwatch ['great' you think to yourself, why couldn't they have done that 2 hours ago].

You grab your new WX it is not so good, your destination has holding for cloud BKN 008 vis 3000 RA. On departure, you didn't have enough fuel to hold on the destination aerodrome and the Auto METAR doesn't sound too flash! (now remember this is a CHTR so you can't just turn around and go home or do your practice approaches elsewhere)

It is moonless dark night outside and CBs are forming (which you can only see by the odd lightning strike as you don't have a Radar), so you do your best to avoid them but generally you don't know where the wx is until you are in it, as they are mostly embedded.

Now, with rough turbulence that the autopilot can't handle and ice forming on the wings you need to get wx for all the aerodromes you might have enough fuel for. You are attempting your best at juggling flying in rough IMC, getting out charts and ERSAs and approach plates. All airports within your range (that you have worked out actually have fuel available) are the same or worse than your destination and none are any closer than your destination now, and most of them need alternates for PAL anyway!

With now other options, you have worked out that by re-calaculating your reserves to have used all your variable reserves over the top and reducing to max range power settings, you just have enough fuel (but it is very very tight).

You arrive overhead, do the approach get down to minima (and guess what happens next) you're not visual, do the missed approach and come back around and do it again, the whole time being smashed and keeping one close eye on those fuel gauges. Next attempt, same thing happens, now you are getting a little anxious. On the second missed approach you notice a small break and you see the lights of the town, (you can't dive through the hole though, it is night remember). You do the approach again praying that the hole won't close up.

Next time around, and you get visual right on the minima, circling very tightly in a torrential down pour, knowing you can not let that runway end out of sight. You land with you knees shaking so hard you can hardly brake properly.

"Wasn't that fun" you think to yourself, and all for $170 on casual GA wages.

You can also substitute the above scenario with un-forecast fog everywhere, the first anyone knows about it is when you hear other aircraft missing out everywhere.

Now, please don't tell me that when instructing you see a forecast that has embedded TS with low bases, possibly hail written all over it and you still go flying in your non-wx radar equipped light twin, or for that matter, you always load minimum fuel on. I know I wouldn't if it was optional. Charter/Med/RPT is just a different game, you need to go when you are told to go (unless it is really impossible, and that has never happened to me yet!). It is how you get through this sort of wx and that type of experience you are gaining (even if it does take a few years off your life each time). Almost anyone can fly an appraoch on a good or even semi-bad day.

On top of that, you have usually got tight schedules to keep, and the company wants you to be as effiecient as possible with the aircraft as they don't get paid by the hour like flying schools.

To answer your question:

Unfortunately, even though all this is on resume no luck so far with applications. I am so sick of it at the moment. What am I missing?

I dont know what "all this on my resume" attitude is either. I think that the fact that with 3200hrs you have not even got 500hrs of any CHTR, let alone multi IFR CHTR, that is the worry to employers. That is what you are missing.

Like most things, you don't know what is like until you have "been there, done that", and that is the experience operators want.

BTW,
2700 Instructing, mostly IFR Multi

doesn't add up with
1500 multi cmd

2FarCanard

1st May 2005, 22:47

Z,

In my experince. Employers don't care too much about how much about instructing time you have as long as the job you are doing before your interview is charter/ bank running or of the same ilk. By the same token they don't want to see you sit on your arse for ever instructing waiting for the call.

EOs long winded point is that they want to know that your brain still can function once you are out of the comfort zone. Lets face it all you are doing is correcting somebody elses command decisions.

Once you get into a charter company you will find that having a multi instructor rating will come in handy to do some check/training, endorsements for the boss. The airlines do like that!

Out of the 10 instructors i new well at the school a was at in the mid to late 90s, all but one are flying turbo props, jets.

My advice is take a leap (and probably a pay cut from full time salary instructing ) and get some other flying under your belt. You can always become a casual instructor until the charter/Bank run flying/ pay increases.

Advice from somebody who has been there done that.

Just as an aside. Having too much bank running/ charter time has the same effect as too much instructing time. I have seen plenty of guys struggle going from an embedded single pilot routine into a multi crew role. The Airlines take this into account when they are hiring.

Good Luck!

Bula

2nd May 2005, 00:52

Engine out... by definition, holding a CIR means you know that the weather is bad enough that you should be on the ground... though it is true with what your saying in your reply that wouldn't be the best example of why charter guys are viewed in a much better light.... well by the few and uninformed anyway.

even after 10 hours of FREIGHT charter like you said, a 3000 hours pilot should be able to easily adapt to that situation... no matter what background they have.

There are instructors out there who would not be able to do what you just said. But in my experience there are alot of instructors out there who would rival alot of charter guys in character aswell as attitude.... and whose flying abilities lead little to be questioned. Instructors have a better understanding of the rules, pilot who have flown charter all their lives dont live by the rules, and instructors who move into charter know how to "constructivly" apply the rules.

Were all pilot, and weather some faces in the industry want to blow sunshine up their own perverbial to stand out from the crowd is up to them........

Personally the attitudes of such people need a serious realignment with reality.

My two cents.....

bula

PS 2 Far Carnard........ experience is not doing the same thing 1000 times, but 1000 things one time.... think about it.

swh

2nd May 2005, 01:15

Zhaadum,

Many instructors make it into the RFDS, your times dont seem to meet the mins normally advertisied. Thought the benchmark was 200 i/f, and 5 renewals, with demostrated remote area experience, in particular black hole approaches.

The initial RFDS training is not easy, know of many that have not made the grade, they have cut people after 40 hrs of training if you cannot meet the standard.

As an instructor you cannot log i/f while teaching, see CAO 40.1.0 para 10.9.

:ok:

EngineOut

2nd May 2005, 06:01

Please don't get me wrong, I have a lot of respect for most instructors. I remember the instructors I had that had done some charter time under their belt and had come back to instructing were much more practical in their application of the rules than the ones who had never left the comforts of a flying school, and were also able to prepare you much better for the Charter world. Charter guys who have got instructing time are also better off once they get into a bigger operation as they are more likely to be upgrade to Checking or training.

Bula,

I don't think you would last long in a Charter job if you told your employer that you aren't flying 'cause the weather looks a little scary.

It is true what you say about a 3000 hr pilot being able to adapt fairly quickly (maybe a little more than 10 hr IMHO).But, the point of the story is that Zhaadum was wondering why he can't get into Regionals/RFDS work, not simply into a charter job. These guys want you to have the above situations under your belt already.

I was just using single pilot night freight as a 'worst case scenario' as you generally can't see built up clouds (unless the moon is good), you need to pick up a torch to flash over the wings for ice every couple of minutes, 24H fuel not available everywhere and PAL alternate requirements to contend with. You could also insert 'passengers throwing up everywhere' if you like.

WRT to rules, Charter guys who don't know the rules are just lazy, that is an individual thing; whereas instructors are teaching them all the time, so it is inherant that they will know them.
:ok:

VH-UFO

2nd May 2005, 06:32

EngineOut;

I don't think you would last long in a Charter job if you told your employer that you aren't flying 'cause the weather looks a little scary.

So what are you saying?

Are you a candidate for "pressonitis" ?

EngineOut

2nd May 2005, 07:22

No. Nice to see you have learnt your 'theory' but you also have a job to do.

I have delayed departure and arrival a couple of times to let a line of storms pass over the field, but you still need to get the job done.

Continental-520

2nd May 2005, 09:52

It's also a LOT easier to make a "no go" decision at some remote outstation as a charter pilot cause the boss isn't there saying "It's not too bad, I reckon you'll be right", or "it's not that heavy, you'll get off orright", or something such.

As an instructor, you may never have had to make that decision. How often do you fly the plane heavy, as Engine Out pointed out? Would you find yourself in deteriorating weather often enough to recognise it developing by merely what you see from on the ground?

I seem to recall when I learnt to fly that the weather didn't even have to be less than VMC for dual CPL level naxex's to be cancelled.

520.

splatman

2nd May 2005, 11:16

Zhaadum

I am not sure that regionals treat instructors like sh**, but they certainly look at your experience when making a decision to interview and then subsequently employ. They will then make a balanced decision that encompasses not just your experience but also your performance at the interview, sim ride etc.

My personal experience tells me that experience as a charter pilot (that engine out details) is not necessarily an indicator of success through the training program. In fact I have seen many pilots with a strong charter background find the upgrade to multi crew RPT turbine operations a significant challenge.

However when you consider instructing versus charter experience at the interview stage, you need to recognise that experience gained flying instrument approaches at night down to the MDA followed by circling should bring about an increase in manipulative skill. Compare this potential level of manipulative skill gained by a charter pilot after a year of this type of operation versus that of an instructor who knows how to do it but does not get the hands on exposure that the charter pilot gets as he/she is monitoring and coaching trainees through the process. I am sure you will see why it is necessary to consider the overall experience of the applicant and not simply the hours.

I do not beleive there is any bias in the industry toward instructors but rather a very thorough review of each individuals past experience occurs prior to interview and if the experience is pertanent to the position then things progress.

Good luck with the career prospects and when you finally get into the regionals and find youself in a full motion flight sim, in an asymmetric situation, at the base of an NDB circling to the runway with a flight vis of 2.4km in heavy rain - you will need to draw on every bit of the manipulative skills you have developed over your career to obtain the required outcome.

You may be one of the very few who have the skill levels to succeed without the experience (and there are some out there) but could I humbly suggest if you desire a career in regional airlines then an appropriate and broad experience base will facilitate your career progress.

IMHO for what its worth

:ok:

MOR

2nd May 2005, 11:33

Good answer. Nobody knows how well you will do until about the third sim detail.

However, what you should do is what I did - get hold of every Chief Pilot you can on the phone, and ask him what he is looking for in a prospective employee. Then go and get it.

Some will hire you just because you showed a bit of initiative and made the effort...

Zhaadum

2nd May 2005, 11:39

Gentlemen,

Thank you for your advice/comments so far. Mostly all valid real world advice. SWH, I am aware of the regs re IF when Instructing, If you check my post you will see I have only 130 hours IF in 3200 hrs total, so I ONLY log IF when manipulating controls. No VH-BIC for me. Thank you for the info though, many wouldn't know it or follow it. You are correct about 5 renewals for RFDS WA. Other states are different.

I guess I have no choice but to drop $$$ to go and do charter for a while. Dont know how to do that with a house to pay off...... Oh well.

520- I don't cancel navs because of some bad wx. We go as long as fuel, alternates etc are as per the rules, not just when its comfortable for the student. How else do they learn?...

Thank you all again for the input. I guess it confirms what I was feeling was the case in the industry. For good or bad.

Cheers! :ok:

cold

2nd May 2005, 12:11

hey engine out

sounds like you had only moments to live!

do you use that story as a pick up line?

:yuk:

Centaurus

2nd May 2005, 13:01

Zhaadum. There will always a bit of sniping against you for being an instructor and a biased perception that you are not the "Right Stuff" to be a charter pilot.

Similar attitudes have prevailed for decades and you learn to live with them. For example with thousands of hours of military and airline time under my belt, I was knocked back for a charter job because the chief pilot said he would never employ ex RAAF or airline pilots because they would expect too much in terms of good serviceability and couldn't hack single pilot IFR. One year later the same chief pilot got into an airline as a 737 F/O. He was no ace either, although he is now a millionaire in Dragonair.

Back in another lifetime when I was 27 and armed with lots and lots of command hours on four engine heavy bombers, I tried for Ansett. Never got past first base. They said I was too old at 27 and in any case (at the time) that they prefer not to employ ex RAAF pilots. Yet at same the time they were hiring 200 hour pilots who had only flown Tiger Moths and never had instrument ratings.

Never mind Zhaadum, keep trying and heed the good advice of some of those who have replied to you on these pages.

slice

2nd May 2005, 13:07

BWAHAHA! Nice one cold. I have to admit reading that scenario it seems as if you need big balls of steel to do IFR charter. But everything described there has an out if planned properly - sounds like alt or hold fuel should have been carried when it was not.

Dodgy NSW bankrunner perhaps?

swh

2nd May 2005, 13:35

Zhaadum,

No probs, not trying to tell you how to suck eggs, just know how they think and they will wonder how you got your i/f time if you have not done any charter. RFDS are fairly hot on the ifr side of things, thats what has let a few people down in the past, single pilot ifr in the middle of the night is no fun.

To be honest, whats really letting you down is networking, not experience.

:ok:

EngineOut

2nd May 2005, 13:43

Please guys, I think you know that for the most part IFR CHTR is not that bad, but the odd bit of **** happens every now and then, and it is all character building. I was trying to give a guy with 3000h who has not done CHTR a 'worst case scenario' example of why it is generally classified as different experience by recruiters.

Cold,
Yeah, All the time, Chicks really dig guys that fly a nineteensevetysomething model bugsmasha and earn $400/week gross.:confused: :ok:

Slice, the truth of it is, there is not always an easy out, wx changes that are not forecast happen every now and then. 99% of the time this is not the case and things are fairly straight forward. If there is no requirement for alternates or holding on departure, and you have been asked to take a full-load, why would you be carrying so much extra fuel? I'm sure the boss will ask you a few questions when client is not happy because you can't carry the payload advertised by the company and there are no wx requirements anywhere!

Hugh Jarse

3rd May 2005, 10:07

Zhaadum,

Some sage advice from Splatman.:ok:

Edited due to high coefficient of Lager:yuk:

Desert Duck

3rd May 2005, 22:50

All RFDS sections require a 'demonstrated remote area experience' as well as other requirements.

The Bunglerat

4th May 2005, 12:39

It seems to me that the only people in this industry who continue to slag instructors are those who have no instructing experience themselves, or the bottom-rung, back-&-beyond charter operators that I probably wouldn't want to poke with a stick anyway. Maybe if some of you spent a while in an instructor's shoes, you might find you have an entirely newfound respect for some of the daily challenges we have to contend with!

Of course, there's instructing - and then there's instructing. Admittedly I wouldn't be too impressed either with someone who boasted thousands of hours - if most of it was teaching basic sequences in a piston single-engine job within the circuit or training area. On the other hand, a significant amount of multi-engine IFR instructing experience would, in my opinion, count for quite a lot. Why? Because every flight is effectively a multi-crew operation, where the instructor has to work very closely with the student to ensure the best and safest outcome for the flight (not unlike a captain and F/O in a RPT environment). Furthermore, every flight is guaranteed to have an abnormal situation occur (typically engine-out operations, although not limited to), thus requiring considerable decision-making on the part of the student AND the instructor (who ultimately oversees the safety of the operation). In the case of my employer, all of our IFR training operations are conducted along the lines of RPT, such as strict departure deadlines, last minute (simulated) fuel and/or payload alterations, requirements to be at a particular waypoint or destination within a specific timeframe - all of which is designed to teach better time management skills and foster an ability to 'think outside the box.'

With regard to my earlier 'multi-crew' reference, let me offer this for you to consider: A significant part of my current job description involves training pilots for a major airline. I am required to be fully conversant with the airline's checklists/SOP's and other operational standards - to the letter. The LOFT sessions that I run in the sim require my students to exhibit multi-tasking, decision-making and crew coordination skills to the highest level. On that note, I have seen some of those aforementioned charter aces, with their thousands of hours' single-pilot IFR experience, completely fall apart when faced with some of the exercises thrust upon them in multi-crew/LOFT training. Many of these guys are simply ill-equipped to adapt to a multi-crew environment. I remember only too well my first exposure to such an operation. When you've been used to doing everything yourself, it takes a considerable amount of effort to learn to manage and delegate tasks between more than one person on a flight deck. On the other hand, I have seen cadet-level pilots with minimal aviation experience, perform to an exceptional standard on the same exercises.

The fact is, whilst I am not taking away from the invaluable experience charter pilots can bring to an airline environment, they don't have the market cornered either. This point is reinforced by the fact that one of our client airlines regularly employs a number of our instructors (with little or no charter experience at all), and continues to provide us with feedback that they are very happy with the product they are getting.

Maybe the best candidate is someone who can boast experience in charter AND instructing. However, it is my experience that anyyone who has 'the right stuff' (whatever it is) and wants it badly enough - eventually gets to where they want to be. It's just a question of which road they take to get there...

404 Titan

4th May 2005, 15:01

Firstly let me say that I have considerable experience instructing and single pilot IFR operations. I have CFI and CP pilot experience and worked in GA for ten years all single pilot ops before moving on to a major airline. The first time I worked in a multi crew environment was flying an A340. After 7000 hours of single pilot ops I had no problems adapting to a multi crew environment. Instructing as far as I am concerned is not a multi crew environment.

Some of the posts I have read here are to be frank, garbage. The belief that instructors are not as good as a charter pilot is just a laughable as the furphy that single pilot charter pilots with considerable hours find it difficult to adapt to a multi crew environment. There is absolutely no evidence to prove that this is the case. There will always be isolated cases of some finding the going tough but in my experience the failure rate is the same right across the whole industry whether the applicant comes from a charter, instructing, multi crew, military or cadet background. The ones that I see that sometimes have the greatest difficulty in our operation are cadets that have been S/O’s for three or four years and come up for their F/O upgrade. Having not flown for a number of years and having very little experience to fall back on they sometimes have a hard going of it.

The Bunglerat
I have seen some of those aforementioned charter aces, with their thousands of hours' single-pilot IFR experience, completely fall apart when faced with some of the exercises thrust upon them in multi-crew/LOFT training. Many of these guys are simply ill-equipped to adapt to a multi-crew environment.
I have never seen a LOFT session that is truly representative of the real world and the types of pressures a line driver would experience in abnormal operations. I have seen it so unrealistic that you would see multiple failures that were totally unrelated to each other. Frankly I think they were designed to load the crew up to breaking point rather than to teach them something. I have seen just as many very experienced captains fluff it up as I have F/O’s and new S/O’s. All are from a wide range of backgrounds.
Maybe the best candidate is someone who can boast experience in charter AND instructing.
I agree totally. I was fortunate enough to do both for about five years each and I know the strengths and weakness both bring to a major airline, multi crew environment. I can assure you though having a large amount of single pilot IFR hours isn’t one of those weaknesses.

EngineOut

4th May 2005, 22:24

Nice post 404 Titan.:ok:

Maybe the best candidate is someone who can boast experience in charter AND instructing

The bunglerat, I agree completely WRT the above, but the rest of your post I do not. I remember doing LOFT training in a sim then a duchess as a student. I have since done plenty of real multi-crew turbine operations, and it is nothing at all like the real world.

In some ways the cadet is easier to train into the multi-crew environment initially as the have not flown enough to have developed habits, and aling with that they also do not bring any experience. An experienced Single-pilot IFR, may (and will depend on the individual entirely) take longer than a 200hr cadet to get up to speed with PROCEDURES, but will bring with him/her a hell of a lot more experience.

Knowing SOPs and checklists does NOT make you a good pilot alone. Many people that train QF cadets, for example, never make it into QF (i am not suggesting the QF recruitment process is perfect either!)

maxgrad

4th May 2005, 22:24

This rears it's head every now and then, ah well, my 20c worth.
1. have done both Instructing and single pilot IFR.
2.either or...no
3.It is the attitude and approach taken by the candidate to training and line flying that will see them through. Experience will certainly determain to a degree how easy it will be but as has been said previously, If the candidate has the apptitude and overall experience then there is a good chance.
4. this instructor v charter cr@p just gets up my nose

FarCu

4th May 2005, 23:35

Seems there is plenty of good advice here. I personally know quite a few instructors in good Regional/Airline jobs. But, I don't know any that have gone straight from instructing to Airline. They all gave away the instructing and got charter experience first (whether you agree with the necessity or not). Several gave up good jobs, to go and live in some less than comfortable environments, just to get charter time. But in the end it worked.
Also, with instructing you tend to be dealing with people at the bottom on the up, in charter you make a lot of useful contacts, guys that have been there and done that (the real ones).

Also, not meant to be nasty, but you sound like my ex....
Not always a pilot you see, have had real jobs prior to this career
When are ya gunna get a real job???

Good luck. Hope my 2 cents worth helps.

The Bunglerat

5th May 2005, 00:25

Thanks for your input Titan. If some pilots' experience with LOFT have been one of being loaded up with non-normal after non-normal followed by umpteen catastrophic events until they break, that's certainly not the way we run it here.

A typical exercise would take the form of a BN-SY sector, with a late departure due to connecting pax. Weather at destination is always at or close to minima, and in some cases a limited alternate may need to be invoked. If the crew experience a non-normal in flight, it may be something like an EICAS message advising of a bleed duct leak or maybe a generator failure - hardly anything of an immediate life-threatening nature, but enough to keep the crew on their toes. As always time management is of the essence, but I don't see anything in this scenario that comes across as unrealistic in the way you inferred.

As I said in my earlier post, I am not having a go at charter pilots. They have their own set of skills and experience that can be invaluable to an airline operation. Nevertheless, I get fed up with some peoples' attitudes that instructors simply have nothing of value to provide an employer. However, I did qualify my earlier remarks by acknowledging that there's instructing - and then there's instructing. I have experience in both, and I believe they complement each other.

And I personally know of quite a few instructors who have gone directly to the major airlines.

404 Titan

5th May 2005, 02:25

The Bunglerat
I have seen some of those aforementioned charter aces, with their thousands of hours' single-pilot IFR experience, completely fall apart when faced with some of the exercises thrust upon them in multi-crew/LOFT training. Many of these guys are simply ill-equipped to adapt to a multi-crew environment. As I said in my earlier post, I am not having a go at charter pilots. They have their own set of skills and experience that can be invaluable to an airline operation. Nevertheless, I get fed up with some peoples' attitudes that instructors simply have nothing of value to provide an employer.
May I suggest that you have fallen into the same trap as those that bag instructing experience? While you have Acknowledged charter pilots do have qualities that airlines are looking for, the first quote doesn’t do your argument any credit.

It is a fact that airlines in this region employ a wide range of pilots from various backgrounds. They do this for a very good reason because they all bring qualities that the airline is look for. They also bring with them bad qualities, which their training department will have to spend time knocking out of them. It is true that some single pilot IFR drivers find it a bit tough adapting to a multi crew environment but no more than an instructor going into his first multi crew job. Airlines employ commanders, not F/O’s or S/O’s. They are looking for someone that can make command decisions. One of the qualities that single pilot IFR drivers generally display if they make it through an airlines selection process is a very good command decision ability.

Centaurus

7th May 2005, 10:31

404 Titan. You say that airlines employ "Commanders" not F/Os or S/O's. Try telling that to any interview board that you are there to be a "Commander" and not a snotty nose second or third in command. There is no way that an airline interview board can tell whether or not you will eventually get a command. What they are looking for at the time of interview is a qualified bum in the right hand seat or in the third jump seat at the back. In later years after exposure to the particular airline culture, then and only then, will the system (governed primarily by seniority as well as ability) assess the copilot as a potential "Commander".

I must say you must be pretty damned good yourself to go straight on to an A340 after only single pilot time. There are a few hundred single pilot IFR drivers would like to know which airline offers such jobs. Do tell.

MOR

7th May 2005, 11:34

Airlines employ commanders, not F/O’s or S/O’s. They are looking for someone that can make command decisions.

Well, Qantas might, but most airlines employ people that will be good F/O's, and who may make good captains. Nobody knows how they will do until they get to a command course. It would be more correct to say "airlines try to employ commanders".

One of the qualities that single pilot IFR drivers generally display if they make it through an airlines selection process is a very good command decision ability.

...and one of the other qualities they generally display is an inability to work as part of a team. An airline has to decide which is more important to them, and that will often be determined by their training budget.

It is a fact that airlines in this region employ a wide range of pilots from various backgrounds. They do this for a very good reason because they all bring qualities that the airline is look for.

No they don't, they do it because the available pool of pilots is from a diverse range of backgrounds. The only way to ensure consistency is to train pilots from scratch, which is why those airlines that can afford to, train cadets.

Airlines may be looking for some of the attributes of either a charter pilot or an instructor, but only in a secondary sense. What they really want are those who can adapt to an airline operating environment quickly and effectively.

...the furphy that single pilot charter pilots with considerable hours find it difficult to adapt to a multi crew environment. There is absolutely no evidence to prove that this is the case.

There is.

404 Titan

7th May 2005, 14:11

Centaurus

Oh boy where do I start? When I made the reference to the fact that airlines employ commanders, I didn’t mean that they employ direct entry commanders. They employ people that have command potential and are promotable to commander when their number comes up. There is absolutely no point employing someone that is going to be a career S/O or F/O in a career airline. That is the way we interview at CX and it is to my understanding the way QF, KA, EK, SQ and NZ do it from people I have spoken to in these companies that would know. We make a very very big deal about it in the selection process and spend a considerable amount of time after the interview discussing command potential of all applicants regardless whether they are being interviewed for S/O, F/O or cadet positions. It is imperative for us to get it right as we don’t employ direct entry captains. This is not to say that we don’t get it wrong because we do. Like all airlines, we do have those that fail their commands from time to time.
I must say you must be pretty damned good yourself to go straight on to an A340 after only single pilot time. There are a few hundred single pilot IFR drivers would like to know which airline offers such jobs. Do tell.
There is. CX hires direct entry S/O’s onto the A340 and both CX and QF do the same onto the B744. A number of applicants only have single pilot IFR time.

MOR
...and one of the other qualities they generally display is an inability to work as part of a team.
For the last 4 years we have been using team work exercises as part of our selection process for S/O and F/O recruits. Applicants from single pilot IFR backgrounds don’t fare any worse than instructors. Even military guys aren’t perfect though they do stand out as being better than most.
It is a fact that airlines in this region employ a wide range of pilots from various backgrounds. They do this for a very good reason because they all bring qualities that the airline is look for.
No they don't, they do it because the available pool of pilots is from a diverse range of backgrounds.
We on average employ people from much more diverse backgrounds on a consistent basis than most Australian airlines do because there isn’t any domestic supply of pilots readily available. If we wanted to we could employ all ex-military drivers from North America, Australia, New Zealand and Europe for the next ten years to supply our expansion plans. They are well trained and very experienced and come with a known reputation. We don’t do this because as you say there is a diverse range of pilots available and for us we are looking to have a diverse range of qualities and backgrounds that each bring to the company. They all bring bad qualities as well which we have to deal with in the training environment.
Airlines may be looking for some of the attributes of either a charter pilot or an instructor, but only in a secondary sense. What they really want are those who can adapt to an airline operating environment quickly and effectively.
I agree. I will also add that if any particular type of pilot brings bad qualities that resulted in them taking consistently longer to adapt to an airline operating environment, we would avoid hiring them. Single pilot IFR drivers in our experience aren’t any worse or better than instructors. The only group of pilots that sometimes stands out are older experienced drivers from all backgrounds that are sometimes stuck in their ways.
...the furphy that single pilot charter pilots with considerable hours find it difficult to adapt to a multi crew environment. There is absolutely no evidence to prove that this is the case.
There is.
Show me.

MOR

8th May 2005, 07:18

For the last 4 years we have been using team work exercises as part of our selection process for S/O and F/O recruits. Applicants from single pilot IFR backgrounds don’t fare any worse than instructors. Even military guys aren’t perfect though they do stand out as being better than most.

There is no correlation whatsoever between a team exercise in a recruitment setting, and actual multi-crew training. The first simply involves highly motivated co-operation, the second the re-learning of complex behaviours.

If we wanted to we could employ all ex-military drivers from North America, Australia, New Zealand and Europe for the next ten years to supply our expansion plans.

No you couldn't. Even if you could, you would introduce a major culture problem into your pilot workforce.

Single pilot IFR drivers in our experience aren’t any worse or better than instructors.

I never said they did, that was somebody else's point.

Show me.

I can't show you our stuff as it is proprietary information (commissioned studies and the like). However, there is a lot of stuff on the net if you care to search for it. I don't have the time for that, so I'll leave you to it. However, I will say that any competent training department should already have most of the studies into this area of Aviation Psychology.

druglord

8th May 2005, 13:25

agree with MAXGRAD
this my background is better than yours is baby-ish. Everybody needs to grow up. Where I work there are 1500 hour flight instructors that can fly better than 7000 hour B-52 pilots...(the B-52 guy washed out of training the instructor did not). Everybody thinks they're better. Like death the sim is the great leveler.

404 Titan

8th May 2005, 14:06

MOR

This is getting boring. I will leave you to believe what you want to believe. We work on what we have found to be the best formula for us over many many years of recruiting pilots. One thing we a very good at is selecting people that work very well in a multi-crew environment. Our previous LOSA audit by the University of Texas showed we were very strong in this area. If your outfit has a problem with a particular group of pilots then maybe there is something wrong with your recruitment process and you need to take a look at it??

I have read many studies on the qualities of pilots from different backgrounds and frankly they are not consistent in their findings. I have my theories as to their inconsistencies which are too long to explain here. Anyway this thread is getting off topic. If you want to debate it further maybe we should start a new thread instead of hijacking this one which is about the Regionals and the RFDS and why they treat Instructors like crap?

druglord

Agree 100%.

MOR

8th May 2005, 15:24

I will leave you to believe what you want to believe.

I'll do the same.

I'll also point out that, after 4 or 5 years in CX, I don't believe for a minute that you are in any way involved in training, in fact I don't believe you even have a command.

I therefore have no faith whatsoever in your views on the subject, irrespective of what you might have read. There is little point in discussing it.

Now you have a very nice day...:cool:

404 Titan

8th May 2005, 16:34

MOR

I never said I was, mind you I could get one tomorrow on the freighter fleet if I wanted to. Our recruitment department is made up of many people of various backgrounds, not just senior captains. Do you always look down at F/O’s with such contempt? You would get on real well in our organisation, NOT. You would be the type of captain that would be a pain in the a**e to fly with. A real dinosaur. :yuk:

Capt Snooze

8th May 2005, 17:56

So it eventually got to the my d**k's bigger than yours............

Jeez................

404 Titan

8th May 2005, 19:40

My point was that Single Pilot IFR drivers are no worse or better than instructors when it comes to getting airline jobs. The RFDS though quite rightly want someone with considerable bush time as well as IF etc etc. A person that only has instructing time may find themselves at a considerable disadvantage for this type of job.

MOR

9th May 2005, 02:44

Do you always look down at F/O’s with such contempt?

It isn't F/O's I treat with contempt - my F/O's get treated like princes.

Nope, any contempt I might have is reserved for people who come on here and wax lyrical about areas they have no expertise in. You claim to have all this deep knowledge of the issues surrounding the transition from single pilot IFR to multi-crew flying, but the reality is that you don't carry out that training, are not present when those assessments are made, and have only second-hand knowledge of the training issues involved.

The use of such phrases as "we work on..." and "we have found..." are somewhat misleading, what you mean is "our training department works on", etc.

The fact that you now feel the need to become insulting and abusive tells me all I need to know about the "culture" you work in, and reveals who would really be a PITA to work with.

Now I'll let you get back to impressing everybody with your intimate knowledge of airline training departments.

Have a VERY nice day. :}

Chocks Away

9th May 2005, 03:12

Zhaadum ,
To answer your query and divert from the above slagging match, may I suggest trying to leave the instructing for the moment and gain some other experience.

You have "ticked" the Instructing box for now... you may get back into it latter with a Regional/Major as a Checky, who knows... but it sounds time to broaden your perspective and experience.

This can be done with another field of flying (Low Level - Ag/Float/Turbine charter/Mustering/Fire spotting/Corporate jet/Jump pilot/Cargo...), in the hope of developing a more rounded and stable individual with a wider background of experience to call on... This is what WE look for in prospective applicants.
I hope this makes some sense and best of luck, as the industry in this region (Asia/Pacific) is to boom.
:ok:

swh

9th May 2005, 03:58

Zhaadum,

RFDS should have an add in the Australian on friday. As an organisation, seems to treat their staff well.

:ok:

Chronic Snoozer

9th May 2005, 11:25

I have MOR ahead by quite a margin. 15-11.

MOR

9th May 2005, 11:28

:p

What round are we in then...

;)

cjam

9th May 2005, 11:40

ZHAADUM;

Instructing....charter....it doesn't make what sort of pilot you are as much as your attitude does. Some employers think it does though, so snake em by having both.

I have a plan for you my friend, if you follow it I bet you a months worth of meal allowences that you'll be flying with a regional within 12 months.

Move to Darwin, you'll get a gig driving a chief or 310 no worries with those hours and they'll love the fact that you can check people to line etc.
Laugh lots and don't take things (like the wet) too seriously. Be genuinely interested in what all the other pilots etc have done (network), go to Shinnanigans and the beachfront hotel with people from work every time you are not rostered to fly ....(everytime now)
and get plastered, dance badly and chat up girls from europe, don't worry too much that you are out of cash, go home with the girls from europe if they will let you.
When flying think "if I do this am I going to crash?" not, "if I do this am I going to break rule 13 sub-part 4a of CAR's 135", ie let your natural god given survival instinct dictate whether the job gets done (within reason).
The best bit about this is that it's a piece of piss, ....sort of, the wet is much easier to deal with than winter down south, lsalts are low and the cells move through quickly, there are always TS tempo'd so you always have an hours gas up your sleeve. The employers like the look of it and know you're not a stick in the mud instructor . The most important part of the plan is to party hard and laugh lots.
There ya go, if ya follow that plan let us know how it goes.
C ya.