So, I take it that you are of the opinion that all Non-AQPers simply “train the test” and as soon as the pilot trainees complete the requisite number of hours, they are deemed “proficient,” and are handed the keys to the jet? Come on … you no more believe that than I do. Actually, I think that the national average in the US for simulator training (soup-to-nuts training … where all the training is completed in an appropriately qualified flight simulator) is more like 28 hours – which is then normally followed by a simulator check (for whatever time that takes) and then is followed by a 4-hour Line Oriented Flight Training (LOFT) period. A lot of folks contend that this results in 32 hours of simulator training – which is true if you don’t count the time spent on the check and you count the LOFT time as “training.”
No, my opinion is not that our current standards just "train to the test", obviously some airlines are better at training than others, however I do
know that some air carriers take advantage of the ability to "train to the test".
I can list a dozen air carriers using the standard system for checking that do an excellent job, and I can think of several that do not. It's not that the current system is bad, but it lacks standardization in the quality of training - leaving a lot of the responsibility on the air carrier. Some airlines do well with it like Expressjet, Horizon, and Skywest....while others train to the test and pump out undertrained pilots to save a buck. The fact is that AQP and N&O eliminates the ability of the airlines that look at training as a cost rather than an investment in safety to minimize training.
While I agree with you that training of situational evaluation and practical technical skills as a pilot are critical, I disagree in your assessment that AQP neglects the technical flying skills. Pilots will make their judgment and the instructors/check airmen will have the ability to evolve the situation and "force" a pilot to perform functions critical to the safe operation of an aircraft (such as a single engine missed approach). Additionally through careful monitoring of pilot deficiencies AQP allows for the training and checking of known weaknesses in a pilot's skill.
I know for a fact that repetitive mudane line operations can be bypassed during AQP training. Just like you can quick start a simulator during standard training, you can do the same with AQP. As for the line experiences, I can't tell you from my own experience because the air carrier I work for flies almost all its legs in under an hour.
I know one of our popular AQP test scenarios we developed for "task saturation" is a departure with a prop overspeed that requires an engine shutdown. The pilots can either return to the field (a small airport in mountainous terrain with only a VOR approach) or go to their destination 25 minutes away (a major airport with full facilities). On approach the weather degrades and they have to initiate a single engine missed approach. tower tells them the rain squalls are blowing through and visibility is up and down, the crew must decide whether to go to their alternate or try for another approach. Dispatch is simulated as pressuring them to land where we have maintenance. On their second attempt into the main airport the check airman may or may not cause another missed approach. If they go to their alternate they conduct a normal single engine landing.
That is one of twenty-four situations the pilot will encounter during initial new hire training. The check airmen and instructors will be able to draw on over 300 scenarios for training and evaluation. When training is complete all maneuvers that are listed in the PTS will have been accomplished, but put in a real-world context with difficult decisions and pressures. If the pilot lacks either the judgment, CRM, or technical flying skills on this evaluation, those deficiencies will be specifically trained until the pilot consistently demonstrates proficiency.
Our qualification standards (as I believe is the case with most AQP operators) do not allow for a crew to show non-proficiency in any area without that area being trained to proficiency. So in other words no matter how amazing their CRM, a pilot won't pass until they can perform a satisfactory missed approach as well.