PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - A Part 61 conundrum for Australian ATPL applicants
Old 7th Jan 2016, 06:39
  #148 (permalink)  
Mach E Avelli
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: All at sea
Posts: 2,197
Received 168 Likes on 106 Posts
As the supply of suitable applicants dries up airlines will have no choice but to drop the requirement for the ATPL on day of joining and incorporate the test into their training programs.
Even though it is not the best way of attracting the best candidates, and certainly saves little or no money in training, some misguided airline HR departments may try to import pilots via the 457 visa route.
If they attempt this, disadvantaged local pilots as a collective group will need to smack them down with the widest possible lobbying, publicity and, if necessary, legal process. Or just wait it out until the error of their ways becomes self evident when they tally up the cost of bringing people in from overseas and inducting them to our strange ways, only to have half of them bugger off home when they realise the grass is not so green here after all.

Back to the ATPL debate; having had time in more than one CAR 217 organisation I do not accept this is a guarantee of quality training or checking.
In a former role, I was quite amazed at how bad some pilots from this system could be. Only a few, but enough to cast doubts on placing absolute trust in operators to uphold standards. Some of the training I received in these systems was excellent, some of token value only and some just plain bloody worthless.
The same goes for flight schools and independent ATOs authorised to renew instrument ratings. Two pilots that I had assessed as unsuitable as F/Os (in the days when we had co pilot ratings) went out and next day got command ratings in a Duchess or Seneca. If someone who is type rated and current on type can't meet co pilot standards in a relatively automated aircraft with the assistance of a reasonable Captain, how come they are OK single pilot IFR in a light twin? Did all it really take was an hour's dual to get them up to speed, then an hour to meet all the elements of the test? Hmmm.
This admittedly happened about 15 years ago and was well covered up at the time, but some readers here know what I am referring to. A highly experienced Captain who had years of service with a very respected airline, paired with a F/O (who was also within the 'umbrella' of the CAR 217 system) nearly replicated the Papa India disaster. Events leading up to the incident, and the incident itself were uncannily similar.

So, no - time under CAR 217 or a history of IR renewals in a bugsmasher twin does not automatically an ATPL make.
Mach E Avelli is offline