Qantas applicants Simulator Assessments.

[Centaurus]

As a matter of interest, when Qantas (aka Qantas Links, Jetstar) carry out the simulator check in Sydney on applicants who have passed the first hurdle of interviews, are there two check pilots doing the assessing in the simulator -or just one?

Reason I ask is that after all the money up front that applicants have forked out to reach the simulator assessment stage, it would seem a trifle unfair to fail the simulator check on the word of one check pilot. There is always the problem that at the end of a long day, where doubt exits, a fail assessment is more likely?

[RaTa]

Having just spent all those $$$ up front, do you have two check pilots when you do your intitial CPL or IR check flight?

[Hugh Jarse]

Centaurus,

There are 3 Check Capts. doing QF's, 2 for QantasLink, and 2 or 3 for Jetstar. All are standardised by QF so you would expect very similar results between assessors.

However, there is usually only 1 assessor in the box with the candidate, unless there is the aforementioned standardisation or training being carried out.

I can't see why there should be more than 1 assessor in the box under normal circumstances anyway.

I have to disagree on the "word of 1 check pilot". Those guys have the attitude that they want everyone to pass. It's up to you to prove them wrong..Not like the old days..:E

[vneandbeyond]

What aircraft are QF using for sims at the moment? Used to be the 767-200.

If it is the 300 now, can someone please post the power and attitude settings they are using (from the sheet they send out prior to the ride).

Cheers.

[ITCZ]

Centaurus, I have to admit that I find your question a little concerning.

The sim session is a simple assessment of your basic IF and attitude flying skills.

No asymmetrics, no emergencies, moderate weights, simple manoeuvres, all using the biggest and easiest to read panel you have yet seen. Especially the AI!

If you are not ready for that, don't go.

The person doing the assessments is most likely a motivated person that likes to do more than just fly the line, and probably has an interest in developing new pilots and enjoys seeing them improve.

He or she will be working to a plan developed in consultation with his/her training and checking colleagues, not an ad-hoc routine designed to have some fun at your expense.

If your greatest concern is whether you will be 'cut' on the opinion of one rogue c+t pilot then mate, my friendly advice is stay at home, don't waste your money on the airfare and accommodation, and don't waste the time of someone who probably has better things to do with their time and knowledge.

I have lost count of the number of times that an ATO, C+T pilot, or other examiner has been described as 'hard' or 'tough' or 'out to get you' or 'getting even' etc.

Most pilots that have supervisory or checking responsibilities WANT YOU TO DO WELL.

Read that again.

Most pilots that have supervisory or checking responsibilities WANT YOU TO DO WELL.

Fail means extra paperwork. It means a nice day turns into a **** one, especially if the person who has 'failed' has clearly turned up less than fully prepared and wasted an expensive and limited resource. It is a total drag.

It is much more interesting to see someone try hard and overcome some obstacles, or fly a sequence really well, and open up the opportunity to pass on a tip or technique, to discuss the subject we love... professional aviation.

Don't question the checkies attitude.... question YOUR attitude!

Don't look for excuses or loopholes or public service style procedural fairness before you even get there... put your energy into study, IFR practice and self discipline.

Make it HARD for him to fail you by being tenacious and switched on!

[VH-ABC]

Well said ITCZ.

Couldn't agree more.

[HEALY]

Vne

I am doing the sim assesment next week on the B767 - 300. I believe all assesments are now on this.

cheers

[Centaurus]

Hugh Jarse. Thank you for your reply which answered my points succintly. Interestingly, a highly experienced GA Jet Star applicant recently failed his sim assessment ride after he went outside the five degree tolerance during the latter half of an NDB approach on a 767 simulator. There was just one other pilot in the simulator - the chappie that failed him.

When Cathay, Dragonair, Hong Kong Air Express, and Skynet (Japan) test candidates in the simulator, there are two or sometimes three observers who assess the applicant's progress. Afterwards, notes are compared and decisions reached. Like the Qantas and Qantas Link (Regionals) assessment simulator tests, the sequences are straight forward raw data, except that a one-engine inoperative basic ILS may be thrown in.

RaTa: The difference between an initial CPL and IR flight test and an airline assessment simulator test, is that you can always have another crack at the CPL and IR. On the other hand, once an airline assessment is failed, it usually means your hopes for an airline career are dashed for good. Big difference, I am sure you would agree?

ITCZ: Thanks for going to all the trouble in your lengthy, albeit somewhat emotional, reply.

[HEALY]

Centaurus

The claim that failing a sim test means an end to any hope of an airline career is b######t!. Im sure plenty of people have failed sim rides and are in the left hand seat now sitting pretty. Having that frame of mind is not the go dude. I am sure that if things dont "go to plan" for me in the sim im sure I will learn for the next time and think positive of someone else giving me a go.

I agree their is a perceived difference between a CIR test and sim asssment for an airline but at the end of the day the examiner will have a checklist of what they want (that of the companies im sure!!!). Yes you may fail one of them in your career, or maybe both...it happens but look at it more of a learning experience rather than a nail in the pilot career coffin.

[Centaurus]

Healy. A knock back in an airline simulator assessment as a "Learning Experience" is something that most pilots I am sure, would prefer not to go through. In fact it can be a shattering and very expensive experience. Exactly what good you can learn from that experience, I am not quite sure.

[ITCZ]

Centaurus, pleased to see that you at least read it.

I am on the other side of the fence you are trying to cross.

Take from it what you will, disregard it if you like.

[Hugh Jarse]

Gidday Centaurus,

Im wondering how your colleague knew that his performance on the NDB (or twin NDB, or whatever it's called this week) was what caused the fail assessment? One of the key rules imposed on the assesor is that no feedback is given to the candidate whatsoever. Reason? There are some pretty litigous people out there, and in the past, action has been taken against QF by some of these people. The actions of a few have spoiled it for everyone, and therefore you walk away with no idea of how to improve yourself.:( I have strong doubts that the assessor told your colleague he blew the NDB. Perhaps he's being too critical of himself?

I suspect there may have been more factors involved than the NDB on its own. Going out of tolerance in itself is not necessarily a "fail", if the error is not sustained (he/she takes action to correct the error). The assessor is not looking for perfection, but would expect the candidate to have sufficient awareness and skill to recognise and correct undesired flightpath deviations....A pass/fail assessment is based on the candidate's overall performance.

[HEALY]

CENTAURUS

I totally agree one hundred percent that its alot of money to 'fail' but in the scheme of things when you look how much you have already invested into your career it is pointless thinking worst case IMHO.

I still think a knock back can make you stronger and the beer taste colder when you do achieve your goals at the end of it all.

[Chief Wiggam]

I think Hugh Jarse and ITCZ are on the money. CENTAURUS, do you want to have a crack at the title or not. Not having a go at you but your attitude or lack of desire may be what holds you back. Really, you shouldn’t have to be motivated by others. Personally I think in today’s recruiting environment the assessors would be wanting to pass you, not the other way around. Q I’m sure doesn’t want to waste 50min of sim time on someone they want to fail.

What happens if you get in. Will all the other sim checks be biased?
I still think a knock back can make you stronger and the beer taste colder when you do achieve your goals at the end of it all.In a nutshell :ok:

[Cronus]

Chief Wiggam and others have really nailed it IMHO.

In 2003, my dream job and goal for the best part of 10 years was shattered when I received the 'thanks but try again later' letter. I was certain elements of my Sim ride were to blame for the result.

At first I was convinced my poor Sim performance was due to a general lack of accuracy and put it down to nerves. On further reflection and then participation in a Sim program at a later RPT job, I came to see the sim as a game and a challenge and not as an evil “Lurching cave”.

When I got another chance at that Sim and that dream job, I spent a lot of time and effort preparing for it and tried to fly it like I was playing percentage football.

Any potential candidate will be assessed on a variety of skill areas to see if they have the aptitude and attitude. It’s not only about flying accurately and not accepting sustained errors. It’s about Airmanship, Command judgment, Checkilist use, CRM, Situational awareness, the ability to let mistakes go and move on to the next task, the ability to prioritise etc etc.

Centaurus, I reckon you’ll find there is probably more to it than a sustained out of tolerance tracking error on an NDB approach.

You can learn a lot from failure and it made me even more determined to achieve my goals.

Regards,
Cronus

[Centaurus]

All replies much appreciated. You are right that the sim failure was not pinned down to solely a stuffed up Twin Locator but was probably a combination of other things. However the applicant just thought it may have been the Twin Locator deviation from lateral tolerances as he felt the rest seemed to go OK.

My original query was about the policy of having just one observer for the recruitment assessment sim check. My views haven't changed from that written and are probably a little biased from occupying the best seat with a view for too many years!.