A37575
Assuming you are serious regarding the meaning of the swiss cheese model to aviation safety I recommend a google using "aviation safety" and "swiss cheese model" as your search terms. It's a rather standard model in CRM training. When the holes in a stack of cheese slices line up that represents a mishap. Rotate any of the slices so the holes don't line up and the mishap is prevented.
Get real. During WW2, pilots were getting commands on heavy four-engine bombers at 600 hours or less total time.
Yes, and hull/personnel losses in
operational training mishaps were often as high or
higher than losses due to enemy action. The system rolled the dice on those lads and like it or not, the system could make good the losses because the net effect was winning the war.
That analogy holds true today. Military and civilian aircrew are apples and oranges as regards the effects of a mishap. Military mishaps generally kill military personnel and cause a hull loss to a system that passes the cost to the taxpayer. Civil mishaps generally kill lots of paying passengers and cause hull losses that have driven more than one airline out of business.
Economics and insurance companies therefore play an important part in determining the "minimum safe hours for upgrade" in civil aviation. Flight experience is quantifiable. It’s called hours. The more the better. Ask an insurer.
Not even seniority will trump that bottom line.