This is for YOUR benefit

[falconeasydriver]

Recently one was involved in a training "event" that resulted in good marks and an adequate write up.
I came away from my two days in the sim with more "techniques" disguised as procedures ringing in my ears than I have had hot dinners. "This is for YOUR benefit" seemed to be the stock standard response if when being shown something that was clearly designed by the training person to show how much more they know than I...when I would respond, "but why?" Or "that merely complicates something that was complicated enough to begin with"
I've been genuinely heartened through recent phases that the standard of "training" has evolved from a Neanderthal inspired series of Apollo 13 rehearsals, into a much more practical and inclusive expose of the knowledge and understanding that it is deemed we require.
Now it seems that old habits do die hard and infact certain individuals are slowly reverting to type.
Am I being unfair fellow EK brethren? Or maybe I'm just a sensitive soul?

[nolimitholdem]

I believe the actual phrase of choice is "More for your benefit than mine".

(Sounds more like "Mow fo yowa benefit than moine.")

:ugh:

[Old King Coal]

Rest assured that there are a lot of their ilk in 'Training'... wherein it would seem that incapable wankers are often drawn to it like moths to a flame... and in response to them, your stock question must always be "can you show me where it says that in the manual?"... and even if they can, you must then proceed to make them explain it to you, i.e. as why it says what it says (wherein many of them haven't got a f'ing clue as to the why's and wherefores of what they're supposedly 'training').

That said, there are occasional gems amongst their ranks, but they are few.

[fliion]

FALC,

I think we all feel your pain.

In the last couple of years I have played the purest form of OIC and the results were positive.

I paid lip service to it in the past but at times would genuinely pursue a line of question if I thought it was worthwhile.

Then I flew with an old timer on a ULR 2 years ago - completely sublime operator - who had some really good insight (for me at least). He said he says two things on a PPC - "hello/goodbye"

Now I literally don't say a word - I just sit and nod - even if I know the guy - LITERALLY not a word.

If I'm asked - I mumble the minimum.

Cynical? Yep . Does it work for everyone? Nope

But my PAMS have shot through the roof! from all 3s to " 3s gusting 4s!"

; >

f.

[donpizmeov]

Wow! Flash backs to the Boeing here. The days when men were men and if they didn't like you, you failed.

The don

[glofish]

It's not their fault because it's all they know. They do know much, but it all originates out of the books. For them aerodynamics happen in the OPT, fuel decision in some office by pushing a button and RNAV approaches in the FMS.
Airmanship and common sense is something of a past time, quite often denigrated to the image of Denzel Washington's interprettion of a "real" pilot.

It's the fault of the airline. As long as they shun experience, especially gained outside of the EK cocoon, as long as they promote the Pampers-Captain fraction to TRI/E's almost the day after passing the upgrade, with the eventual exeption of a former BA buddy, this will not change.

I agree with fliion, just nod and do what they want, it's in the sim anyway. On line keep doing what's safe and reasonable.

Don, i might agree that this could be a flashback to the Boeing days, but did you ask yourself the question why the distance between trainers and line-swines is supposedly smaller on the dugogn? The answer can point two ways ......

[Boeingrestricted]

'Airmanship and common sense is something of a past time, quite often denigrated to the image of Denzel Washington's interprettion of a "real" pilot'

This disease is spreading to all of the airlines. Sadly and the B787 is in my opinion proof of that the B has also given in. Just wait for another AF over the ocean,.....or something alike.

[Straight & Level]

Do you remember getting that email after your recurrent training asking you for feedback? Did you fill it in? I'm gussing no. So rather than go through the proper channels of you (the customer), providing constructive feedback to the training department (the service provider) you'd rather have a whine and a moan on Pprune. :ugh:

Try it, you might be surprised at the results. Trainers that have been identified as being deficient or not training the way the company expects have been themselves retrained, or in some cases removed, but it's up to you to highlight that your expectations weren't met.

[Am NOT Sure]

I take it the essence of the subject is the briefing/debriefing

Alas all airlines in the ME are similar in that regard

The best practice is to nod .. Left and right .. Marvel at the information received like you are on coke .. And don't ask questions unless you are seeking knowledge and not just standing your ground

:D

[falconeasydriver]

S & L

Do you remember getting that email after your recurrent training asking you for feedback? Did you fill it in? I'm gussing no.

You guessed wrong, I am indeed the customer (having been a customer in a previous life) so yes the feed back form is sent after every training event.

:ok:

[Straight & Level]

Good for you Falcon! :D

[ekwhistleblower]

It was always going to happen, the seeds were sown when they had they last management restructure and got rid of many of those that were driving the change towards seeing the big picture rather than the trivial detail. Anyone with the balls to challenge the system got them chopped off!

The feedback form has to be worth a stab.

[whossorrynow]

Someone recently posted on this board about their experience with the training feedback email.

The gist of it was they had submitted the form a couple of years ago and the training department eventually acknowledged receiving it just a couple of months ago. Based on this it may be that training feedback is not of much interest to the training department.

Like other things here it may be more about what appears to be done rather than what is actually done.

[Payscale]

Is that the Boeing fleet? I dont know anyone leaving the BigBus

[ExpatBrat]

whossorry now wrote: Someone recently posted on this board about their experience with the training feedback email.



That might have been me. I filled in a training feedback form many years ago and two years later it came back to my inbox "deleted. unread". It actually said that lol...

So yeah, no more wasting that time for me.

[scandistralian]

This is more for YOUR benefit than moine, don't take your 777X with folding wings down the pub in Australia...:E:E:E

https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/25402639/pub-run-pilot-faces-charges/

Seriously though, as fliion said; the less you say the better. Sit back, smoke the shisha, smile and nod...guaranteed 4's all around.

[FNGDXB]

A large number of TRE's have left the training department in the last 3 months with more planning to go. Most of these had a lot of experience - and not simply the "magenta line" type. They also had many hours on type and in training. Most importantly they were big picture guys and were constantly pushing the training agenda against the checking and box ticking mentality that was constantly being pushed by a company obsessed with data collection but not entirely sure how to use the data it collected.

They will go and be replaced by less experienced checkers that will tow the company line and check against rigid policy and the letter of the OMA. "Resiliance" and airmanship will be a thing of the past. That will not be good for any of us. We've been down this road before to the point where new captains were terrified of making any decision lest it be the wrong one. Better to endanger the aircraft than risk a grilling from Fleet.

How the company is not alarmed by the drain from training can only be explained as ignorance and arrogance. In time it will probably cost them dearly. A lower grade of training, robotic checking leading to unneccessary failures, leading to more training, lower standards and on and on it will go. Hopefully nothing more serious than a simple loss of profit and standards.

While the bean counters cannot measure experience and never will get it, one would think the cost of replacement alone would give pause for thought.

There has been little attempt on the company side to offer much to training captains to entice them to stay. I dont think there's been an increase in pay for years and apparently the rosters get worse and worse. Little wonder that they choose a life they have more control over by going back to the line.

They purged good training management, and are now purging the trainers themselves. Good for rotation I suppose - everyone can have a go and get it on their CV.

But we will pay for it two or three times a year at least. Every year.

Now do you see?

New joiner here. I wasnt going to post being more of a lurker than a poster but I am concerned. I got through the initial EK training Programme recently and was quite happy with my trainers and checkers. After a chance meeting with one of them, a TRE, at a recent social event he told me that most of them are now back flying the line citing QOL issues as the main factor. I also flew with a real good line captain recently - the sort of character I would like to see in training - ex B744 TRE, no chip on his shoulder and nothing to prove. I asked him if he was interested in Training and his reply was Yes very, but not here.
It does seem a waste that good talent appears to be forced out of training and that experienced and highly capable line captains with a decent attitude and strong training background are not inclined to apply.
Or am I wrong?

[Outatowner]

Falcon I'm trying to determine your real complaint. You seem to be saying that if a procedure or technique is not in the book (ie SOP) then it shouldn't be done and/or taught. Is this it or were you critiqued on the techniques and annoyed about that?

There is a preponderance of de facto "SOPs" in everyday use now. If the company defines the way of doing EVERYTHING then when something is not included crew will not know what to do. If they don't, then the result is techniques creeping in. If they don't teach techniques, everyone else creates their own.

Airmanship was mentioned but that is being well and truly stifled; now even a defined procedure/patter for the load sheet data which means something new on which to be critiqued. Fantastic, what next? This has to be one of the most anal retentive airlines in the industry yet, oddly, those in charge do not stamp out the tendency towards divergence such as, off the top of my head, missing or incorrect standard calls, or even something as simple as the "takeoff" call before (not after) TOGA. How does someone get through training without being told the call is Positive "Climb", not "Rate"? Or am I wrong? The other day someone made a standard (I think) call telling me he was in "managed descent" FFS. One guy in WX radar, the other in TERR for take off, every time - when did that become SOP?
I thought we use taxi lights on during taxi but you have guys switching them off when stopped and no one else around and in broad daylight! But they rigidly make sure the logo lights are off at 10K. It's amazing which things are adhered to and which aren't.

For an airline that defines itself by SOPs, the lack of adherence to so many details is amazing. SOPs or techniques, I'd be pleased if they could just hammer into people's heads not to press their greasy fingers all over the f**k**g screens!

[TransitCheck]

Falcon is spot on.

Teach me every technique you want to. I have no problem taking a look at another persons way of doing things.....BUT....don't grade me down or write comments because I don't like your technique so I chose to still use my own method.

Safe flight...safe outcome...no doubts about safety of flight...should always be a 4........3 if you miss regular standard calls and have to be consistently prompted to complete items when they are supposed to be done. Easy as that.

[what_goes_up]

Outatowner

Although I agree with some of your post, I still cannot quite see, how you you can get irritated if someone calls "Positive climb" instead of "positive rate". This chap probably flown Airbus before where the call is "positive climb". Same with managed descent. Don't we all mix up things once in a while?

On the other hand: I thought we use taxi lights on during taxi but you have guys switching them off when stopped and no one else around and in broad daylight! But they rigidly make sure the logo lights are off at 10K. It's amazing which things are adhered to and which aren't. you might want to brush up on the OM-A:

8.3.0.3.1
c. During taxi, any time the aircraft is brought to a complete stop, the
parking brake shall be set. To signal intent to other pilots, consider
turning taxi and runway turnoff lights OFF when stopped, yielding,
or as a consideration to other pilots or ground personnel. Lights
must be turned back on when resuming taxi.

Just saying... :)

Live and let live:ok:

[Outatowner]

WGU, I may not have made myself clear. It's not one word instead of another which irritates, it's the company insistence on adherence to SOPs while allowing a regular divergence from them in practice. Do we need to do everything to the letter or not? Why chip people in ALCs but no one takes any notice when on the line? Anyone who holds up the standard is "uptight", etc. You've quoted the OM-A but who decides which SOP in the FCOM or OM-A is okay to ignore or do incorrectly and which isn't?

On that topic, it says in your quote "Consider". My beef is, as I said, that in broad daylight when lights are not blinding and when no one else is around anyway, guys switch them off for no particular reason because they seem to think this is the SOP. If its done for a reason, then fine, but sometimes I ask (nicely) and there is no reason. This is not something that keeps me up at night, just an example.

"Live and let live" - does that mean we can ignore ANY of the SOPs? if so, please let the checkers know so they back off! :ok:

[Trader]

The reason for turning off taxi lights is to indicate that you are not moving. Back on indicates you will/may be moving. Standard in many parts of the world and within many airlines.

[Al Murdoch]

What's the deal with the fuel synoptic? Why do so many people get bent out of shape if you don't watch it like a hawk when switching off the centre tank pumps? I don't see any requirement from Boeing to do so.

[Outatowner]

Yes, another good example of what I'm talking about, Al. No idea where it came from but it seems to be an "SOP".

Trader you're way off track. Try reading the above posts again including the OMA quote.

[what_goes_up]

Trader you're way off track. Try reading the above posts again including the OMA quote.
I think Trader is spot on.
Do it, if you think it makes sense. If it doesn't, don't. For me it makes sense even in daylight for said reasons. Same as offsetting from center line on T/O roll (not for you 380 guys ;) ). You don't have to, but you should consider.

What's the deal with the fuel synoptic? Why do so many people get bent out of shape if you don't watch it like a hawk when switching off the centre tank pumps? I don't see any requirement from Boeing to do so.
You're right, no procedure, no requirement. But is it wrong to watch the switch?

It's no requirement to do a greaser... most of us still try to do a smooth landing...

With what I do agree is... Those things may be worth a discussion but should never reflect in the grading.

[Al Murdoch]

You're right, no procedure, no requirement. But is it wrong to watch the switch?
Agreed. I don't care if people want to do it. What I don't like is being shot a glance like I'm mentally backward for not doing it. As far as I am concerned, the important part of the procedure is going on on the overhead panel, the actual switch positions and indications. The synoptic, interesting as it may be, isn't telling you much of use, unless you can put me right on that? Some people have tried to tell me that you could have a flameout because you have to make sure the wing tank pumps are running before switching the second pump off... :ugh:

[what_goes_up]

Some people have tried to tell me that you could have a flameout because you have to make sure the wing tank pumps are running before switching the second pump off... :ugh:
:D :D Back to tech groundschool with them.. ;)

[320goat]

"Now this isn't NOP bit it is a good TECHNIQUE.."

[FNGDXB]

The above is a good example of how I was helped on the line recently. Captain just said to me whenever you are messing about with the fuel panel always make sure you turn something on before you turn something off. Simple, helpful advice and delivered in a very nice way. I know I wont ever forget that.

[Am NOT Sure]

My thoughts exactly mate

Or chipsy greasy mike

Back to the standard deviation - many use a different call out or a different technique because they truly believe is system enhancement

Because airbus and Boeing spent so much time building aircraft that they missed on refining their callous .. No matter - the boys had that covered

And please stop switching off the inner radar knob behind the ND's or the alts knob on ATC

Basic SOPs and - I don't blame any airline that's becomes frustrated after sometime

[Capn Rex Havoc]

Emirates CCQ onto the Boeing-
:O
Part 4 - Some Mothers Do 'Ave 'Em. Learning to Fly - YouTube

[Schnowzer]

I can't believe you are not incorporating all useful techniques from the Dawn of flying. Pre-EFIS and pre-jet are the most important ideas to fit in when you get a chance.

When a knowledgeable gentleman was spouting his up to date techniques at me I responded with "Needle left, ball right, numbers decreasing, horizons steady!" This was met with "why would you do that; it's not relevant" to which I replied "exactly!":ugh:

[ManaAdaSistem]

Airmanship and common sense seems to be missing completely from this discussion.

Takeoff and landing with FPV selected (and forgotten ON after shutdown)

Seriously?

[The Outlaw]

What airline are we talking about here anyway......?

[MrMachfivepointfive]

What airline are we talking about here anyway......?
...the usual one...

[The Outlaw]

Figured as much but just wanted to beat Mana to the obvious statement

[ManaAdaSistem]

No need to worry about me, the ME forum is a nice and tidy place these days.
Now, if I only could get my original handle back, I would be really happy.
It's not fair to lock me out because I said I was sorry for being an @rse, but I promise I will never do it again.
Please?:ouch:

[trimotor]

Outatowner and Neektu

Like your style. I could be described as one of the more senior trainers and have long been trying to gently polish exactly some if the rough edges (need to retain the big picture though)you describe in routine checks/training...you are going to be mistaken for me by anyone who knows me and quietly been asked to justify all thei extra little technique foibles!

I also have a particular beef about greasy fingers on the screen and recently left a TRI I was checking in no doubt about my thoughts on the matter!

[fliion]

Trimotor

Pardon my ignorance...but which manual and section did you reference in your debrief on screen policy to said TRI?

Fascinated.

f.

[Silky]

I reckon it was the one that said....this is not and Ipad, so no matter how much you tap the screen it ain't gonna move! Or the one with the white out.....yada yada... Oh right! It's not written down, so it must not be true!:confused:

Nothing worse than when the sun shines on the screen and all you see are some previous numptys prints all over it.... Why I ask...why!:ugh:

[ruserious]

Why I ask...why!

Because for time immemorial, the semi literate have always needed to read by pointing and moving their lips :}

[fliion]

Silky

You miss the point completely - it's not that we don't dislike the "thumb print screens" - none of us want that, but it's none of my business if he/she chooses to do it.

It's the debrief "in no uncertain terms" from one professional to another on a completely irrelevant issue. If you want clean screens, clean them.

Should we as Captains debrief our FOs in "no uncertain terms" every time we see something that we don't like? ...because it's one of our beefs...?? Well the FO on that flight will now see that it's acceptable for a senior trainer to admonish a TRI for pet peeves and said FO may take it upon himself to do same when he goes left...as we've all seen.

f.

[Tube Rider]

Ok Flion,

Next time I'll coil a three ring steamer and leave it on the seat for you. No where does it say I shouldn't.

Simpletons that need to have it all written down for them.

[White Knight]

Ok Flion,

Next time I'll coil a three ring steamer and leave it on the seat for you. No where does it say I shouldn't.

Simpletons that need to have it all written down for them

Post of the week:D:D

I too hate seeing greasy splodges on the screens. If you're going to make 'em dirty at least wipe 'em clean before you leave the flightdeck! And take your nuts off the RMP screens too - if you know what I mean!

And what's with greasy hair marks on the side windows? Just horrible:yuk:

[Oldaircrew]

Hear hear! Thank you for making my day tuberider.

[JAARule]

simpletons that need to have it all written down for them.
Never before have so few words conveyed so relevant a comment so succintly.

The airline has really ended up in this place where people will argue against common sense all because it "isn't written anywhere...." It's a bit like political correctness, a blight creeping in that no one likes but it's there anyway.

[fliion]

It's got nothing to do with the screens...read my post...it's our culture in training of admonishing anything that is a peeve in no uncertain terms..when it's not policy.

It could be anything from leaving charts out to not leaving them out.

Who the fcuk are you to tell me what to do with my fingers/charts/knob centering...

Checking thumb placement techniques now are we?

What's next seat belt folding styles?

Priceless

f.

[Capn Rex Havoc]

Who the fcuk are you to tell me what to do with my fingers/charts/knob centering..

This is exactly the problem :yuk:

You have been smacked down by tube rider - you are the dick head here fliion.

[fliion]

Still waiting for the manual reference.

f.

[BobDole]

I believe it is under section A, chapter N, sub-section A, item L of the good book...
:E

[BYMONEK]

fliion

I hear what you're saying regarding teaching technique and I agree but I always view that aspect more in regards to direct operation of the aircraft rather than general advice. The screen issue would definitely come in under the latter. Why some people with relatively low experience seem unable to take general advice seems to be lost on me and is appears to be an increasing theme here.


You site leaving the charts out as an example yet there have been specific emails in the past reminding pilots to leave the flight deck in a neat and tidy manner. However, from a practical view, I see little point in putting away the destination charts at outstations when I know all too well the crew are standing on the air bridge waiting to take over. They're left in the small folder, in order, neat and tidy. If the aircraft is not going out within the next few hours, they're replaced into the main binder, same as Dubai. I try and apply common sense.

The problem is we have too much pre scripted for us and guys lose the ability to think for themselves and deal with each situation practically. What would you prefer, my example above or straight handover at outstation with charts away and window blinds drawn, at 9pm in the dark, in the rain......in Manchester!

We sometimes criticise the cabin crew for being robotic yet I've seen a few android numpties here too!

[BigGeordie]

Charts? We still have aircraft with paper charts? How agricultural!:E

Anyway, as a humble line pilot, I am quite happy to have trainers teach me techniques and airmanship as long as they make it really clear it is not the "official" way of doing things- and they don't mark me down for it if I think they are talking rubbish (they rarely are but it does happen).

[fliion]

BYMON

A well written response and points understood....the discussion is actually NOT about thumb prints - it's about TRAINER BOUNDARIES.

I have no issue with a gentle professional to professional (cue Big Geordie) nudge "Listen man we're trying to keep the screens clean - keep your grimies off the screen if you can". Fair cop as the English would say.

My issue is a debrief in "no uncertain terms" for a pet peeve - Perhaps if I couched the question this way for some of my colleagues above

DO YOU THINK ITS ACCEPTABLE FOR AN EK TRAINER TO GIVE A STERN DEBRIEF IF AT SOME STAGE IN YOUR TRAINING EVENT YOUR FINGERS TOUCHED THE SCREEN?

YES or NO?

You know where I stand....it could be any minor issue. It's just that we've seen some of the guys give these dressings down on issues that are so far from big picture and have no SOP to back it up - that galls one.

I'll leave it to you lot to answer the above..

Right I'm off to find an A v B or Yank bashing thread

; >

f.

[ManaAdaSistem]

Dare to think outside the box.

Clean the screens yourself. :ok:

Even if the ME is full of: "The company will take stern action if (insert just about anything)" doesn't mean you have to bring that attitude into the cockpit. And not on a peanut issue like a fingerprint.

[Am NOT Sure]

I must agree with the picture flioon is trying to draw here

If it cannot be backed - let it be known it's a good habit / practice if you like

Praise the big picture and banish the little ego tips

[myekppa]

And what's with greasy hair marks on the side windows?

WK, the mind boggles as to the cause…..

Trimotor, Outatowner, Neektu :D