I was in discussion with some flying buddies the other day and the conversation drifted on to reminiscences of the 'good old days' when we used to fly manually, before the advent of automated flight decks.
The comment was made by my two friends (one CFI and one former airline training captain) that the pilots coming through training today - and ending up in the airlines - don't know the 'basics' regarding aircraft handling and airmanship, let alone the 'trade' of the commercial pilot.
I have never been an advocate of the 'learn to drive in a week' philosophy and, it seems, the 'learn to fly in a year' is, in some respects, no better.
It takes time to absorb not just the theory and practice, but the environment in which you operate (whether driving or flying).
Although we're all trained for simulated emergencies (and in most sim checks know what to expect - V1 cut, emergency descent and the like) I wonder what would happen if completely random emergencies were thrown in to the mix?
I know this won't happen because the airlines would not want to risk failing pilots by making recurrency training too difficult, so we all get the same standard (regulatory) tests - predicable or pre-briefed.
As an instructor, flying light aircraft, when I have thrown an un-briefed emergency on to a student or PPL (briefed there would be an 'emergency' but not what it would be) the results have generally created the 'panic' of the real world as people are not primed.
How about simulating some 'real' un-briefed emergencies with the inexperienced pilots - such as the BA BAC1-11 incident - pilot incapacitation, emergency descent, diversion etc. NO WAY the airlines would say - too expensive, too time consuming and pilots might fail ...
The airline industry has settled into a 'comfortable' routine of training and testing - a production line of pilots all tested to the same standard in the same way. Not a bad system, just predictable and routine - something aviation, by its very nature, certainly is not.
Maybe, with the reliability of modern aircraft, engines and systems, that's all that's required?
Maybe it might also mean that when things go badly wrong it's almost certain to be a lottery whether the crew as a whole has that 'wealth of experience' to pull one out of the bag?
SITW
