Thread: PC/RT
View Single Post
Old 12th Nov 2012, 03:49
  #18 (permalink)  
BuzzBox
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Here & there
Posts: 765
As others have said, the ultimate aim is tailor the training (and checking) to where it's really needed in order to get the best value for money (ie the best safety outcome). If most people can fly a V1 cut to an acceptable standard without practice (and I sincerely hope they can, given they're not going to get a practice if it occurs for real!), then do we really need to spend all that time practicing V1 cuts and engine out work during RT sessions? Perhaps the time could be better spent practicing other things that would provide a greater safety benefit. Taking it a step further, the likelihood of a V1 cut occurring in the real world is very low, so do they really need to be checked every 6 months or should they be part of a 2-3 year cycle?

The biggest problem in implementing such a system (apart from convincing the pilots!) is convincing the regulators, who are notoriously slow to accept any kind of change. The airlines need data in order to convince the regulators, but that data is skewed when everybody gets to practice beforehand. On the other hand, if the airlines can show that most people can fly a V1 cut to an acceptable standard on the first attempt, then perhaps the regulators will be more willing to change.

Last edited by BuzzBox; 12th Nov 2012 at 03:54.
BuzzBox is offline