Eurolyer and Royhudd.
You're basically both right. Experience gives the ability to focus when the sh1t hits the fan, and introduces the possibility that you've met whatever the problem is in some more benign situation, so you have the knowledge required. Training on the other hand is the distillation of other peoples knowledge, and the elimination of incorrect knowledge and techniques.
Naturally then, we would all like experienced pilots who have benefited from excellent training. Now, if you can't have both, who would you rather fly with? Personally, I'd take the well trained lower hour guy. Yes, an experienced pilot could well be better, but can also be a total donkey with dangerous attitudes to boot. In my experience:
1. Well trained low hour pilots usually recognise the limits of their experience.
2. High experience pilots are moderately likely to NOT recognise the limits of their knowledge.
A well trained pilot can always gain expereince. But experienced pilots are sometimes untrainable.
And in this game, its not about how good you are on your strong points, its about how bad you are on your weak points. So in the absence of an endless supply of experienced well trained pilots, a cohort that mixes both on the flight deck is often a pretty good starting point.
But, having said all of that, I don't think anyone would disagree that inexperienced badly trained pilots are a menace. Where is the incentive for a company to do anything more than notionally tick the required boxes when they know that bloggs junior will be flying for a couple of months and then replaced with the next fee paying mark?
Thats the issue here. We can argue until we are blue in the face about whether expereince or training is more important, but the current state of the industry is driving towards neither.
pb