raven, I know firsthand that MY "command course" was not training, it was checking, and only checking.
I am not diminishing the profession by making this statement. How you could think that is beyond me.
The HKCAD considers a P1 rating a "Pilot-in-Command" rating. Look it up. Many airlines do not P1 rate their copilots and therefore train and check them to lower standards than the pilots at that airline who have a P1 rating. Cathay does not. Although some at Cathay TREAT copilots as lower-class citizens, the checking system expects the same level of performance from all pilots with a P1 rating. Whether one is pilot-in-command or not purely depends on getting through the PCA, T sims, CALC, board assessment and "command course" gauntlet, none of which appeared to me as anything but checking.
I bet if you get the information (which you can't) you'd find that many of Cathay's copilots have more flight time and more experience in more types of aircraft flying in more varied locations than many of Cathay's captains.
You ask,
Just who is licensed, by virtue of their experience and qualifications, and held responsible, by the CAD to make the final call?
Well, I would say that would be anyone the CAD has licensed with a P1 rating! It's Cathay who determines who among those with a P1 rating are captains and who are copilots, not the CAD.
Where do you get the inspiration to add the part to your post about telling passengers that what we do is "monkey business?" I never implied that.
raven, your use of the term "proper upgrade" just set me off! But, since you think,
Cathay's training system is not perfect, but it is one of the best I've ever been involved with....and I would put it up against any other system out there.
my arguing otherwise would be like talking to a brick wall.