jcjeant wrote :
From the BEA report Perpignan
Crew maybe not very very experienced ... but certainly more than those of the AF447
.............
The crew of Toulouse test flight:
Very more experienced ? .. maybe as test pilots ......
What a lot of confusion regarding flight hours !
It's hard to admit for a lot in the industry, but flight hours don't have the same value, depending on the background... Even if it doesn't prevent them for having accidents (see Toulouse Airbus crew, also british Trident stall in the 60's, dozens of others...) hours in a flight test environment have thirty (or more ?) time the value of hours in an airline environnment, with nothing happening in cruise, and landings always identical - if not in external conditions, but for sure in performing. Comparing flight hours of both sides is like mixing strawberries with potatoes.
Maybe there will be an understanding of all this after ?
The Perpignan crew was conducting an acceptance flight, and they had no training for that, period. To call them test pilots is totally unappropriate. I know that in the companies (including mine) you have supposed experienced pilots, calling themselves "test pilots" when they just perform "out-of-maintenance" check flights ....
One day airline pilots will have to admit that their hours don't have big value, compared to other backgrounds ... but as flying big jets is supposed to be the pinnacle of careers, its' not going to happen soon, I'm afraid.
So jcjeant .. please document yourself a little bit about flight testing, ask people or read books...