Dxb-Dme info
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: guess where
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
KD
I agree with a lot in that well written and common sense post but one genuine question. Why would selecting meters be frowned upon? Perhaps I'm missing something but I always have it set when operating through Chinese airspace. Charts are the first referral, meters selection is a reminder to verbalise my RT in meters, not Flight level and as a gross error check.
Harry
I agree with a lot in that well written and common sense post but one genuine question. Why would selecting meters be frowned upon? Perhaps I'm missing something but I always have it set when operating through Chinese airspace. Charts are the first referral, meters selection is a reminder to verbalise my RT in meters, not Flight level and as a gross error check.
Harry
Because in China you get meters/QNH as opposed to Russia where it is meters/QFE. So you have to re-calculate feet/QNH with a table which is Airport/RWY specific.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: guess where
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, it's not the answer. But it's a tool to help justify a sub par grading in monitoring skills and thus helping to re-train. This was nearly impossible with the old word picture and thus pilots with deficiencies in that aspect passed without properly being noticed.
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Midlands
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
KD
I agree with a lot in that well written and common sense post but one genuine question. Why would selecting meters be frowned upon? Perhaps I'm missing something but I always have it set when operating through Chinese airspace. Charts are the first referral, meters selection is a reminder to verbalise my RT in meters, not Flight level and as a gross error check.
Harry
I agree with a lot in that well written and common sense post but one genuine question. Why would selecting meters be frowned upon? Perhaps I'm missing something but I always have it set when operating through Chinese airspace. Charts are the first referral, meters selection is a reminder to verbalise my RT in meters, not Flight level and as a gross error check.
Harry
Ouch.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: guess where
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So you'd rather not have those individuals re-trained before they fly your family around? That is a real problem. But I admit, there are many others in managerial abilities. But re-training (helping) those colleagues that have a deficiency is a step in the right direction. But first they have to be uncovered.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Formerly resident of Knoteatingham
Posts: 957
Received 116 Likes
on
57 Posts
So you'd rather not have those individuals re-trained before they fly your family around? That is a real problem. But I admit, there are many others in managerial abilities. But re-training (helping) those colleagues that have a deficiency is a step in the right direction. But first they have to be uncovered.
Route Cause Analysis - it doesn't just apply to simulator checks.
Last edited by BANANASBANANAS; 27th Sep 2017 at 13:06.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: guess where
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If there really are so many 'sub par' individuals flying the line, surely we must first look at the system that has assessed, recruited, trained, checked, managed, moulded and endorsed them, shouldn't we?
Route Cause Analysis - it doesn't just apply to simulator checks.
Route Cause Analysis - it doesn't just apply to simulator checks.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Behind you
Age: 76
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If there really are so many 'sub par' individuals flying the line, surely we must first look at the system that has assessed, recruited, trained, checked, managed, moulded and endorsed them, shouldn't we?
Route Cause Analysis - it doesn't just apply to simulator checks.
Route Cause Analysis - it doesn't just apply to simulator checks.
"What did we do wrong"?
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Springfield
Posts: 278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bananas you're correct, this event and the others the email refers to happened under the author's watch. If you consider that the assertion made by what-goes-up to be true re the new PAM, then we should ground the Fleet and recheck all of us for monitoring skills. If a trainer can't determine poor monitoring skills without a PAM specifically reflecting that behaviour then its the trainer who needs the retraining. Support requires effective monitoring doesn't it? The PAM change is white wash....
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Formerly resident of Knoteatingham
Posts: 957
Received 116 Likes
on
57 Posts
Emirates has made a deliberate decision to lower the recruitment experience bar rather than pay the going rate for experience. It has done the same with the 'pay as you train' trainers contracts, is driving experience out of the company and is now only beginning to experience the high cost of its cost cutting.
Last edited by BANANASBANANAS; 27th Sep 2017 at 14:17.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: MIDDLE EAST
Posts: 1,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What goes up
Thanks, not been to DME for a long time and thought they were now working QNH. Better re read all this thread from the start me thinks!
One of the problems I see here in EK is the need to pigeon hole everything into something that can be defined or graded. It may 'standardise' training and perhaps make grading easy but for some less experienced trainers, it may detract from the real goal. This should be to encourage basic airmanship and awareness and promote the crews ability to operate big picture into a multitude of challenging and complex environments that our variable route network provides. it's almost impossible to expect individuals to know the books, or should I say the EPT, backwards. Yet these minor debriefing points, especially if noted on the report, will have consequences, especially for those approaching command as their focus will now be detail driven.
They say the devils in the detail and to some extent, I agree. All professional pilots should be well prepared and have good basic knowledge of systems and procedures, however it's the big picture and common sense stuff that will ultimately save the day.
Harry
Thanks, not been to DME for a long time and thought they were now working QNH. Better re read all this thread from the start me thinks!
One of the problems I see here in EK is the need to pigeon hole everything into something that can be defined or graded. It may 'standardise' training and perhaps make grading easy but for some less experienced trainers, it may detract from the real goal. This should be to encourage basic airmanship and awareness and promote the crews ability to operate big picture into a multitude of challenging and complex environments that our variable route network provides. it's almost impossible to expect individuals to know the books, or should I say the EPT, backwards. Yet these minor debriefing points, especially if noted on the report, will have consequences, especially for those approaching command as their focus will now be detail driven.
They say the devils in the detail and to some extent, I agree. All professional pilots should be well prepared and have good basic knowledge of systems and procedures, however it's the big picture and common sense stuff that will ultimately save the day.
Harry
And that's the rub Monarch. EK has to either pay up or shut up. They are letting experience walk out the door, and don't care. They know the package they offer is no longer competitive, so they lower the entry requirements. By trying to save a few dollars they are offering a training package only a newbie would be interested in, so those experienced fellas left are not being tapped to share their wealth of experience. The outcome of this penny pinching are events such as this.
The fix is achievable, however those with the purse strings need to take responsibility.
The fix is achievable, however those with the purse strings need to take responsibility.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Dubai
Posts: 768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This should be to encourage basic airmanship and awareness and promote the crews ability to operate big picture into a multitude of challenging and complex environments that our variable route network provides.
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: earth
Posts: 1,098
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
..... or when getting one of a multitude of 1000' descents in the Desdi hold and constantly hearing the Pavlovs':
"FL 190 descending FL 180"
but he missed the "keep outbound heading" call .....
"FL 190 descending FL 180"
but he missed the "keep outbound heading" call .....
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: MIDDLE EAST
Posts: 1,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jack D
Indeed they do, but they also have oodles and oodles of training that supports that frozen ATPL, such as 120 minimum sectors. Most cadets in other airlines get around 60 so by the time our young cadets join the ranks, they're fairly efficient, certainly in the procedures, calls and general operation of the machine.
It's when you have the '400 hour trainer' added to the mix that the package becomes diluted. And this is where Don's post is spot on. This Company has the solution but doesn't wish to pay for it. As well as the debacle of low experience and pay as you go trainers, we also have other flawed policies. Short of current rated Airbus candidates, we're now pursuing Boeing type rated new entrants onto the A380. When asked why not reduce the risk by offering the position to current EK B777 pilots familiar with the SOP's and route network, the answer was a resounding no due to the requirement for two separate type ratings and the inherent cost increase. I'm sure that's the big frustration amongst us all, knowing that they have solutions but choose not to adopt them due cost. Far easier to blame a 'minority' and change policies that effects us all without really addressing the concern at hand. It's a token gesture by an SVP to placate those above and although it may remove a small amount of dead wood, it's like fitting an ashtray to a convertible sports car. Mostly useless.
Well, they say you can't have your cake and eat it. Maybe someone needs to tell EK that.
Harry
Indeed they do, but they also have oodles and oodles of training that supports that frozen ATPL, such as 120 minimum sectors. Most cadets in other airlines get around 60 so by the time our young cadets join the ranks, they're fairly efficient, certainly in the procedures, calls and general operation of the machine.
It's when you have the '400 hour trainer' added to the mix that the package becomes diluted. And this is where Don's post is spot on. This Company has the solution but doesn't wish to pay for it. As well as the debacle of low experience and pay as you go trainers, we also have other flawed policies. Short of current rated Airbus candidates, we're now pursuing Boeing type rated new entrants onto the A380. When asked why not reduce the risk by offering the position to current EK B777 pilots familiar with the SOP's and route network, the answer was a resounding no due to the requirement for two separate type ratings and the inherent cost increase. I'm sure that's the big frustration amongst us all, knowing that they have solutions but choose not to adopt them due cost. Far easier to blame a 'minority' and change policies that effects us all without really addressing the concern at hand. It's a token gesture by an SVP to placate those above and although it may remove a small amount of dead wood, it's like fitting an ashtray to a convertible sports car. Mostly useless.
Well, they say you can't have your cake and eat it. Maybe someone needs to tell EK that.
Harry
Last edited by harry the cod; 27th Sep 2017 at 21:05.
Do you think " fairly proficient " is good enough ? Never mind good knowledge of procedures or calls .. that is of secondary importance initially in the big scheme of things . Oodles of training I agree . Spare a thought for the trainers who sit in during those 120 sectors , now if the trainer is only "fairly proficient" as well ...
120 sectors ... that's more than good + massive amounts of simulator etc , they should be at the very least fairly competent , and some are it's a big step after all , but just try the old 3 x table test ( no calculators allowed ) when you next feel like undergoing a sense of amazement .. but not in a good way . I think they struggle for good applicants as well these days , always exceptions of course .