Originally Posted by
tossbag
Perhaps the US views the ATP they issue to a pilot being something the pilot is using every day and makes the written relevant to the aircraft the pilot is actually going to fly, not an aircraft that is rarely used in their airspace anymore. Now there's a thought! And perhaps the FAA puts the onus on the airline that is training the pilot to train them in the operation they are going to operate in? Now there's another thought!
And perhaps an Australian pilot that returns from the US with a few years under their belt has experienced more weather than a pilot operating purely in Australia will experience in a lifetime? Maybe, just maybe a pilot not operating in Australia is worthy of a CASA ATPL with a weighting on practical experience and command decision making rather than the lofty, theoretical Austronaut standards that are brainwashed from birth as the worlds best?
Really gotta laugh at the continued debate over the 'cheats' that head over to the States, spend years over there gaining experience, have an absolute ball then return to the land of ignorance and arrogance, thought the ignorance and arrogance was meant to come from the other side of the Pacific?
Indeed, it is for good reason that we are derogatorily called Austra-nauts.
We produce way too many Swiss Cheese theorists. I think it’s a result of too many former hairdresser colleges now churning out Aviation degree holders. The ivory towers of academia have little else to hang their PhD hats on.
In my experience, I’ve found FAA ATP holders to be of generally superior quality to our home grown Austra-nauts. There are of course exceptions to that observation, but it is a generalisation that covers an uncomfortable majority.