Originally Posted by
73qanda
Previously answered.
"Some member states exceed the minimum ICAO standards for differing reasons."
The US implemented a 1500 hour requirement after an accident, but failed to address the fatigue component of that same accident.
I can cherry pick countries of that have good/great safety records on narrow body aircraft, that comply to the minimum ICAO standards/requirements.
Several of the countries you list are pretty much minimum required.
Then there are countries that have higher requirements than the minimum, but the interesting thing is there are companies that have their own higher minimum requirements than the country's ICAO requirement standard.
There is no real "training to line standard" and each regulator sets it's own regulation for such training within the limits of ICAO requirements.
The old saying "there is more than one way to skin a xxt" is very true for pilots.
There are schools and cadet-ships that produce highly varying skilled pilots at 300 hrs, compare that skill level with most of the military pilots from around the world and it is mostly chalk and cheese.
The B737 And A320 have proven over a good period (greater than 10 years) pilot skill levels in general can be fairly low and still have a acceptable safety record, the MAX in 3 know flights and numerous simulator flights has proven not to be safety acceptable per skill level of the pilot pool around the world (US pilots included).
Should there be now an international change to training/licencing requirements at the ICAO level?
Keep in mind the MAX was a product of commercial pressures and a dubious certification under grandfather rights. If MCAS was fully declared even it it's original very poor design and hypothetically allowed certification with "proper" and correct training with no deception - There would most probably be no crashes and no MAX discussions on safety.