I was that 200 hour kid just like everyone else was at some point and it's not like I'm so old or massively experienced now (2K A320 and 1.5K DH8D). It's not only about the amount of hours that you've logged. Some people will be early adopters, others will never learn no matter how hard they try. I'd be inclined to say that it has everything to do with your aptitude, attitude and approach to the profession. If you take things seriously and do the work, you can learn quick and progress through the ranks at a steady rate. If you always remain an immature kid that got put behind the controls of a big bus, then there is no hope of ever bearing responsibility. Not even mentioning the fact that I think it's a really bad idea to put people on Airbus type airplanes straight after initial flight training, flying with SOP's that are so hammered down that you never get to see anything beyond your current company envelope. Autopilot on at 200, off at 200, auto thrust all day every day, no visual approaches, barely any practice really apart from the 6 monthly simulator. I consider myself lucky that my current operator doesn't do things this way and encourages us to fly and hone our skills, but the industry is suffocating people that never got significant experience in conventional airplanes. Consequently they wonder why people can't fly worth a damn anymore and blame things on pilot error. How about 'Systemic industry shortcoming resulting in pilot error'? In a lot of cases that would sound pretty fair to me.
Your exposure is so low to actual flying and what you are required to be able to do that as an inexperienced 200 hour cadet I am afraid you will never gain experience in the basic skills that make an aviator and hence become a computer operator. That part is easy; it's when things go wrong when we really have to work and that's why we are there and deserve good working conditions. But I guess I am drifting off topic.
Last edited by drfaust; 20th Jun 2014 at 19:36.