Originally Posted by
morno
2 events from 2 different airlines doesn’t spell out problems with training departments to me. It spells out bad design, or, just bad luck. How many times in the past has this occurred?
If they put every approach that doesn’t get used very often but could potentially be problematic, into every sim, there’d never be time for anything else.
However, if we stopped wasting valuable sim time on familiar stuff (long-winded briefings, engine starts, taxying, SIDs & STARS at home base, ILS approaches etc) and reduced the amount of time spent on things we should be able to handle (rejected take-offs or engine failures), maybe we could devote more time to the tricky things more likely to be encountered. Some of the recurrent training and check matrixes I have seen seem to be there to give an impression all eventualities are being covered, without consideration for probabilities and relative risk. Often run from the pilots' home airport or over a familiar route. Pointless box ticking.
Note I said LESS time, not NO time on RTO's & engine failures, but realistically if these were visited once every two years it should be enough. More aircraft have probably crashed due to mismanaged approaches than mismanaged systems failures.