Originally Posted by
dr dre
I don't think anyone here thinks that a cadet with 0 hours on an A320 will be as proficient as a direct entry A320 FO with 4000hrs on type. I think what people are saying is that a "direct entry FO" being someone with thousands of hours flying light, non-FBW aircraft but none on the 320 wouldn't necessarily be more proficient as the cadet.
Why do I get the feeling you're a cadet.
"I think what people are saying is that a "direct entry FO" being someone with thousands of hours flying light, non-FBW aircraft but none on the 320 wouldn't necessarily be more proficient as the cadet."
Of course they are, what a ridiculous assertion. Evidence? At JQ the cadet does more than double the flying hours of a direct entry (but non type rated FO). If they're equally proficient, why?
A cadet has lower limits compared to a direct entry FO. 10 kts xwind (vs 20 for non cadet) and cannot land on runways less than 2000m. A direct entry FO can. Again, why?
Originally Posted by Dre
he ATSB in a study disagree with you. CASA and almost every other regulator in the world disagree with you. Almost every airline in the world, some of whom solely employ cadets disagree with you.
What evidence do you have to support these assertions?