PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Is this a dying breed of Airman / Pilot for airlines?
Old 12th Apr 2011, 11:22
  #310 (permalink)  
Piltdown Man
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 68
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
These guys are the leaders of the new generation

I could easily be wrong, but I think this thread was started because OP questioned the likelihood of a similar outcome to the QF32 occurring with the current generation of 200 hour "zero to hero" types. There's no doubting that the QF32 crew's performance was excellent, if not exemplary. But I'll suggest that most of their problem solving skills used came from the training and experience which they had acquired through operating complex airliners over the past years. But like it or not, they were products of a system, in this case the Qantas system. They were also working for a company that has excellent in flight support. I'm not trying to take anything away from these guys, but they were products of the system - in this case as trainers, a system which they helped create.

Bashing around the sky in C152s, meat bombing or doing fire patrols for hours on end or operating IFR in wretched pistons twins with dubious maintenance histories does give you some experience - but is it transferable to complex modern airlines? I'll only go so far as to say "maybe." There's a reasonable chance that guys with this background end up with 2,000 hours after a couple of years, but is that one hours' experience 2,000 times over? The pilot probably is transferable, but his experience might not be.

The new generation of pilots, like the ones beforehand, are firstly products of the selection process. Without the right candidate (personality, enthusiasm, intelligence, trainability, motor skills, discipline, health, etc. - not necessarily the standard HR rubbish!) you won't end up with a capable pilot. The second and most important thing that creates a capable pilot is the training and support systems inside the airline that will shape, guide and support them in the future. Their previous hours matter little, it's the persons basic skills and their mental suitability that count. Just because you had to waste a few years of your life flying a bug smasher doesn't mean to say that this is the only way to get good competent pilots who will save the day when the chips are down. Over the years I've seen 200 hour cadets who are excellent and 5,000 hour pilots who I wouldn't let park my car. (There are also some 10,000 hour pilots who I'd happily leave at the side of the road in a rainstorm as well.)

As for dealing with automation, if fitted, I've learnt that the sooner you learn to understand it the better. This will enable you determine if it's working properly. If it is, use it and it will "unload you" enabling you to get on with the next task in hand. If it's not, you know to ignore it and then proceed a little more slowly. Turning the automatics off when they are working perfectly but other things are not, is not the wisest of moves in my opinion.

I'll agree that there are too many people who can't fly who are actually flying for a living. But this is a product of the system we work in. Weakness in employment law, union agreements, government oversight, poor training and checking systems and corporate greed are all responsible for these people remaining in their seats. What should be done is to work out a fix. Is it training or chopping or a bit of both? It would be difficult to add more technology as the law of diminishing returns has probably set in - so solutions have to be sort in other areas.

Oh, and I nearly forgot - we're still working with Mk I human beings.

PM
Piltdown Man is offline