Yes, at this stage we are of course speculating. I did hear through the grapevine that the copilot was pretty new. If that is true, he will presumably have done his type rating etc via the 3rd party trainer. Reluctantly I can accept one highly experienced pilot making a big mistake, its rather harder to believe two can, u less there were other factors that made the second pilot less than optimal.
TBH I have no idea whether the 3rd party training is a big deal or not, but at first glance it seems a really bad idea. That's why I was hoping to provoke some response from those who do know.
HC - you are encroaching on a controversial subject here and one that has certainly been the subject of many a heated discussion. Third party training is definitely cheaper to the accountant. Quality
can in theory be just as good if controlled properly. Therein lies the problem.
I do not know for sure if type rating courses are done by exclusively by CAE in the UK, but interestingly in CHC HS in Norway they are not involved at all. Company instructors carry out all training including type ratings. Whilst it was the desire of the company to use third party training, it was actually the customer - Statoil - that stopped this and insisted that all pilots flying their contracts will be trained by operational instructors flying in the North Sea and with a minimum of 5 years experience in Norway.
The customer has had to accept that this will ultimately be a more expensive option but they appear to have made this more of a priority, therefore ensuring CHC in Norway conduct and control their own training. They also insisted on increasing the minimum amount of time required in the sim for OPC and LPC training, which has been in effect for 2 years.