Originally Posted by
dr dre
The US does a lot of things different to the rest of the world. Doesn't mean that it's better.
They seem to have a love affair with military trained pilots. For instance under their ATPL rules a military pilot can qualify for a restricted ATPL and sit in an F/O's seat with only 750 hours total time, whereas most civilian trained pilots would have to wait until 1500 hours is obtained. This is discrimination in favour of military pilots (or alternatively against civilian pilots). Thankfully most of the world doesn't follow this and treats candidates equally and fairly.
As several posters have pointed out for this person to get his G1 FIR it would only be about a year or so of instruction, so that by the time he reaches G1 and is granted privileges like supervising brand new grade 3's he has enough relevant experience in that environment he can supervise them properly.
I think the way I look at it is that CASA relies on arbitrary hours to assess whether a candidate is any good, which we all know is not the measure of a good pilot, it just says they have some rudimentary experience, of any kind. In the US quality of training, and measurable positive outcomes allow you to reduce the amount of hours required for a number of things. That means somebody who excels in the area can get ahead faster and get recognition for having higher standards.
Again the Australian GA accident rate is double that of the US, despite having virtually no terrain, benign weather and seriously less concentration of traffic, also without a massive variation in the mix of types and speeds of relative traffic. The real eye opener is that Australia has over 3 times the Mid air collision rate of the US despite having mostly empty skies. You can not seriously say the Australian system is even close to being good, it's terrible. The FIR system is not producing quality outcomes, as the proof is the rate of accidents. Or is it that US pilots are just naturals vs Australians who struggle with the concepts?
There are many CFI/CFI-I and MEI in the US who are ex military, who have converted from military instructors to civilian. There is absolutely no proof they are any more dangerous without supervision than the civilian trained pilots. The proof is there that the Australian system is preventing this cross over for absolutely no beneficial reason.
Other good parts of the US system is the requirement for teaching skills at the start, not at some later stage, again a practical and evidence based approach.