STP,
I agree with most of what you say in your second last para:
"Agreed to some extent but that's a different argument, industrial versus professional, although I do concede that they are interlinked to a degree. Sadly, the world has changed and the traditional sources of 'experienced' pilots have all but dried up; not only that, so has traditional training for prospective airline pilots and much of the world is drifting, rightly or wrongly, towards the the MPL style concept. Further, airline managements around the world will pay only as much as they need to to encourage pilots to join, or remain at, their companies. The American majors are offering the current packages because they have to, not because they’ve suddenly become generous. The same is true of ME3 and mainland carriers offering attractive packages. The same was true of CX in the late 80’s and early 90’s. It’s business and, whether we like to admit it or not, respect for us collectively as a profession or individually as people has nothing to do with it."
As to the questions you raise prior to that:
Yes, a second officer undertaking upgrade training to JFO is inexperienced. A sum total of experience limited to operating radios and sleeping in the cruise does not qualify as experience.
I can't reconcile how we go about training our inexperienced pilots. STP, it's not my system....I don't agree with it, it seems that you do. You should reconcile the inconsistencies, or explain why or what is different.
Below, at the end of this post, please find a link to a great article entitled "Cockpit Crises". The article cites accident statistics to argue that a crises exists in today's cockpit, brought about by a combination of automation reliance and not enough real-life flying experience in new hires.
Here is a snippet:
"Charting an entirely new direction for pilot training isn’t going to be easy. Thanks to a global pilot shortage stemming from the rapid growth of airlines in Asia and the Middle East, the industry has been more focused on finding ways to get pilots into commercial airline cockpits with less real-world training, not more. ...
That’s among the reasons that, five years ago, ICAO approved the creation of a “multi-crew pilot licence” for commercial airlines. It allows would-be pilots to step into the co-pilot seat of a commercial airliner with as little as 240 hours of flying time, much of which can be done in a simulator. (In contrast, Strachan says most Air Canada pilots typically have nearly a decade of flying experience before they are hired.) The theory is that the job of a modern commercial airline pilot bears little resemblance to what it was 15 or 20 years ago, and that logging thousands of hours as a bush pilot or crop-duster is no longer as critical.
Strachan concedes that today’s commercial pilots need a variety of skill sets. And as head of Air Canada’s pilots’ union, he knows the cost realities of the business as well as anyone. But he remains convinced that there is no substitute for actual experience in an airplane. “It almost never happens in real life like it happens in a simulator,” he says. “It’s almost never textbook in my experience. You practise it one way and when something finally does happen, it’s always way more nebulous and insidious.” He recalls a takeoff early in his career from the Thule airstrip in northwestern Greenland, where he suddenly caught himself in katabatic winds that had tumbled off the side of a glacier. The plane was forced violently downward toward the waves and Strachan barely managed to power his way out of a near disaster.
“There’s something that you just can’t simulate,” he says, adding that his heart still jumps just thinking about it. “It’s gained through experience. Everybody on the crew learned something that day. It becomes part of your hard drive. So the next time you’re faced with that situation, and you’re in a place where there’s wind coming off a cliff and you’re taking off, you think, ‘Hmm, I’ve seen something like this before. Let’s be careful."
STP, I do not believe that the source of experienced pilots has completely dried up....but rather, as you say, that airline management are not willing to pay the money. For example, if we were to increase our compensation for new hires to 25% above what is currently on offer, we could attract every pilot in Hong Kong that works for HKE or HKA....and that's only casting a hiring net in our town.
The sad fact remains that our hiring methods are predominantly cost based. We do not seek out the best candidate, but instead have focused on attracting the cheapest candidate.
In a similar hours/experience don't count discussion on another thread ChinaBeached wrote the following (I hope he doesn't mind me reproducing it here, but his writing skills far exceed mine):
Hours alone do not quantify aptitude. The TYPE of hours do. 1000 hrs of instructing in CAVOK in the training area are not as good 1000 hrs as single pilot night freight in winter over high terrain performing NDB & (night) circling approaches. Add a few more thousand hours to that TT / experience level as well as ME Multi-Crew Cmd time & you can't tell me that you're happy with a monkey see monkey do book-regurgitator sitting beside you instead?
As I re-wrote above: I believe that hours built in real time jeopardy & accountability in a real aircraft in real conditions are a pilot's metal, not watching others doing it, or sitting in a safe, airconditioned non life threatening simulator is anywhere near as close.
STP, I get that the industry is trying to save money, but we should be cautious and not expose ourselves to too much risk. Hiring inexperienced candidates in a small proportion to experienced pilots is one method of trying to save costs. But the exact proportion must be managed very carefully and with caution to minimize risk (think fuel hedge debacle).
Personally, I try very hard to nurture and mold our young 200 hour pilots to the absolute best of my ability. It's not their fault they are being taken advantage of; the vast majority are good guys and gals. With "time and experience" they should develop nicely. The problem lies in getting us from here to there.
Cockpit crisis - Macleans.ca