Flybe Purchase EMB195 (merged)
Er82
Sorry, never intended to start an Er bashing session. The comment about bonds wasn't aimed at you and your dash 8 bond, but at anyone who says they would undertake an embraer (or anything else) course but not want to be bonded - the only reason for that is if you intend to leave in less than three years. I don't know how much the embraer bond will be, but based on the cost of sim slots, hotels, air fares, and of course the salaries of the trainers and the trainees I think the dash bond is probably a reasonable reflection of the cost to the company, so probably the embraer bond will be similarily fair (or at least as fair as any bond can be)
Sorry, never intended to start an Er bashing session. The comment about bonds wasn't aimed at you and your dash 8 bond, but at anyone who says they would undertake an embraer (or anything else) course but not want to be bonded - the only reason for that is if you intend to leave in less than three years. I don't know how much the embraer bond will be, but based on the cost of sim slots, hotels, air fares, and of course the salaries of the trainers and the trainees I think the dash bond is probably a reasonable reflection of the cost to the company, so probably the embraer bond will be similarily fair (or at least as fair as any bond can be)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 361
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't worry - I'm used to it! Something I should probably expect because I'm not afraid to stick my neck out and make comments on here! And even though everyone knows who I am now, I still continue!
I can see your point, but there aren't really any other operators who might tempt a FlyBE pilot away with an Embraer TR. Would you expect to see all the trainers bonded as well? Might be a bit of cheek if they've been with the company 10 yrs. Yes, if that's the case they probably wouldn't leave anyway so having a bond wouldn't be a problem. In that case though, wouldn't it be better to have a 'hand-shake' bond?
I'm still at a loss as to working out who you lot are. Seems I'm known far and wide now - especially after someone decided to name me over the airwaves last week!
I can see your point, but there aren't really any other operators who might tempt a FlyBE pilot away with an Embraer TR. Would you expect to see all the trainers bonded as well? Might be a bit of cheek if they've been with the company 10 yrs. Yes, if that's the case they probably wouldn't leave anyway so having a bond wouldn't be a problem. In that case though, wouldn't it be better to have a 'hand-shake' bond?
I'm still at a loss as to working out who you lot are. Seems I'm known far and wide now - especially after someone decided to name me over the airwaves last week!
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I left fybe in October. It was the best thing on offer to start my career and im very grateful to dear old George for getting me started. It was good while it lasted but I was gaining nothing by staying as I trundeled toward 1000 hours in the rhs of the mighty dash. My opinion of flybe after leaving it behind many months ago is this... if anyone is interested.
I believe the training to be poor to very poor. It was improving after the departure of our antipodian friend, but compared to the airline im with now the training and discipline on the line at flybe was poor. Local ways of doing things, poor roster stability, poor pay, nightstops, poor crew food, low hours, non communication from management, poor balpa reprisentation...
I found that Flybe is full of unprofessional characters, both on the ground and in the air. I hear MRS JS got fed up with some 200hr guys asking when there course start date was that she hoofed them out the pool. How does she have the right to do that? She wasted money interviewwing them in the first place. Whats skills and training can she bring to pilot recruitment? What exactly does DD do? I arrived at an opc, to be told by my sim trainer that it wasnt a big deal - only a company check. the session started 20 mins late and finished 15 mins early. We had a 25 min brief, the examiner was mainly talking about PC's to the skipper i was with. i revalidated my CATII into LGW without plates, cos we didnt have any. I STILL, yes STILL get sent Notacs. im hoping for a xmas bonus and a card. (got the card last year anyway)
I walked onto the flight deck of a Q400 in SOU. The flightdeck had a combined age of 42 years between them, and under 3000 hours TT between them - responsible for 82 beating hearts! They were opperating SOU-GCI, 120 sectors a month...the same route. That same skipper on another occasion told me to put 1200kgs down for a fuel check at ortac. It's always the same he said. Except for the day you have a fuel leak - but anyway. I flew with a skipper to bergamo. our combined total time was 3,500 hours - over the alps in winter, at night at FL250. Neither of us had flown in that sort of terrain before and the company brief was pretty inadequate. The thinking at flybe is I have 2000 hours where is my command?
I am so pleased I left when I did, becasue had I stayed longer I am sure I would have found the transition to a "proper" airline much much harder, perhaps impossible. I hope luck stays with the airline because their consideration toward safety and training really troubles me.
Good luck er82, the grass is greener.
Ps just a few thoughts, cant be bothered to back them up or respond to allegations of anti-flybeism and i know it is reasonably inarticulate. Take it or leave it. G'night.
I believe the training to be poor to very poor. It was improving after the departure of our antipodian friend, but compared to the airline im with now the training and discipline on the line at flybe was poor. Local ways of doing things, poor roster stability, poor pay, nightstops, poor crew food, low hours, non communication from management, poor balpa reprisentation...
I found that Flybe is full of unprofessional characters, both on the ground and in the air. I hear MRS JS got fed up with some 200hr guys asking when there course start date was that she hoofed them out the pool. How does she have the right to do that? She wasted money interviewwing them in the first place. Whats skills and training can she bring to pilot recruitment? What exactly does DD do? I arrived at an opc, to be told by my sim trainer that it wasnt a big deal - only a company check. the session started 20 mins late and finished 15 mins early. We had a 25 min brief, the examiner was mainly talking about PC's to the skipper i was with. i revalidated my CATII into LGW without plates, cos we didnt have any. I STILL, yes STILL get sent Notacs. im hoping for a xmas bonus and a card. (got the card last year anyway)
I walked onto the flight deck of a Q400 in SOU. The flightdeck had a combined age of 42 years between them, and under 3000 hours TT between them - responsible for 82 beating hearts! They were opperating SOU-GCI, 120 sectors a month...the same route. That same skipper on another occasion told me to put 1200kgs down for a fuel check at ortac. It's always the same he said. Except for the day you have a fuel leak - but anyway. I flew with a skipper to bergamo. our combined total time was 3,500 hours - over the alps in winter, at night at FL250. Neither of us had flown in that sort of terrain before and the company brief was pretty inadequate. The thinking at flybe is I have 2000 hours where is my command?
I am so pleased I left when I did, becasue had I stayed longer I am sure I would have found the transition to a "proper" airline much much harder, perhaps impossible. I hope luck stays with the airline because their consideration toward safety and training really troubles me.
Good luck er82, the grass is greener.
Ps just a few thoughts, cant be bothered to back them up or respond to allegations of anti-flybeism and i know it is reasonably inarticulate. Take it or leave it. G'night.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: 52N 20E
Posts: 713
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BONDS.
Right, lets get this perfectly straight.
Bonding for an intial Type rating is not illegal. You can be bonded for whatevever Cost is involved and X amount of years.
This is perfectly reasonable, as the company have to recupe some of their initial training costs.
To be continuously Re Bonded, as some I have known to have been in the past, SD-360, Dash 8-300 and then the BAE 146, because a company decides that this is the way they are going to operate is ILLEGAL. END OF STORY!
You cannot keep bonding people just because it suits the company to do so.
In employment law this is prejudicial to normal advancement and carrer progression. Which is Illegal. Everyone must have been given equally the same and or similar opportunities. So those for example who have been in the company for say less than 10 years and are bonded on subsequent types, should be afforded the same courtesy, as those who have say been in the company for 10 years or more and not been bonded.
If you found that you have been unfaily treated and then take this to court, the court would definititely stand in your favour.
Do Not Ever Sign a Second or, god forbid, a Third or Fourth bond.
Bonding for an intial Type rating is not illegal. You can be bonded for whatevever Cost is involved and X amount of years.
This is perfectly reasonable, as the company have to recupe some of their initial training costs.
To be continuously Re Bonded, as some I have known to have been in the past, SD-360, Dash 8-300 and then the BAE 146, because a company decides that this is the way they are going to operate is ILLEGAL. END OF STORY!
You cannot keep bonding people just because it suits the company to do so.
In employment law this is prejudicial to normal advancement and carrer progression. Which is Illegal. Everyone must have been given equally the same and or similar opportunities. So those for example who have been in the company for say less than 10 years and are bonded on subsequent types, should be afforded the same courtesy, as those who have say been in the company for 10 years or more and not been bonded.
If you found that you have been unfaily treated and then take this to court, the court would definititely stand in your favour.
Do Not Ever Sign a Second or, god forbid, a Third or Fourth bond.
easyswimmer
thank god , another voice of sanity .i have been making those points for a while now and was shot down in flames .
An accident waiting to happen is how i would describe it , makes me shudder to think of some of the monkeys there flying over the alps at FL250 in a Q400 , whats the single engine driftdown height for that a/c ?
You will note your "antipodean friend" (if its the same guy) got his dues when he tried to make it in the real world . He ws told in no un-certain terms that he was un-suitable for command and would not be considered for several years , he spat the dummy and is now in South Africa i believe .
Regards
NF
p.s. never mind a total experience of 3000 hours , i once flew in a flybe dash that had two RTO in row . The combined experience of the crew . . . . . . 2000 h.
p.p.s i am not implying that the experience level of the crew was anything to do with the RTO's , i believe there was some issue with props on the dash at that time .
p.p.p.s flybe are not alone , rumour heard the other day that someone is getting a Saab command at loganair with less than 2000 total.
thank god , another voice of sanity .i have been making those points for a while now and was shot down in flames .
An accident waiting to happen is how i would describe it , makes me shudder to think of some of the monkeys there flying over the alps at FL250 in a Q400 , whats the single engine driftdown height for that a/c ?
You will note your "antipodean friend" (if its the same guy) got his dues when he tried to make it in the real world . He ws told in no un-certain terms that he was un-suitable for command and would not be considered for several years , he spat the dummy and is now in South Africa i believe .
Regards
NF
p.s. never mind a total experience of 3000 hours , i once flew in a flybe dash that had two RTO in row . The combined experience of the crew . . . . . . 2000 h.
p.p.s i am not implying that the experience level of the crew was anything to do with the RTO's , i believe there was some issue with props on the dash at that time .
p.p.p.s flybe are not alone , rumour heard the other day that someone is getting a Saab command at loganair with less than 2000 total.
Last edited by Nil further; 13th Jun 2005 at 10:09.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think he is probably talking about the Kiwi chap who was head of training or something, on the turboprop fleet.
He was real old-school, felt that the best way to check a guy was to tell him before the check that he was useless and would probably fail, and then load him up during the check until the poor guy spat the dummy and became a quivering mass of jelly.
I did a check with him once and he was fine. The guy after me got chopped, for no reason that I could see - and this was on the aircraft so I saw the whole thing (we used to check two at once).
Nobody misses him.
He was real old-school, felt that the best way to check a guy was to tell him before the check that he was useless and would probably fail, and then load him up during the check until the poor guy spat the dummy and became a quivering mass of jelly.
I did a check with him once and he was fine. The guy after me got chopped, for no reason that I could see - and this was on the aircraft so I saw the whole thing (we used to check two at once).
Nobody misses him.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nil,
If you were not implying that the experience of the crew (2000h) was not part of the RTO then why mention it??
Anyhow, to answer your question about driftdown, generally and for CAA calcs, the worst case Driftdown I think, at ISA +15c conditions is 18,000ft. This has never been its issue since I have flown the Zurich- Odina run. It is more to do with the lack of drop down oxygen and the requirement to be at 14,000ft within 4 minutes. This rather puts a limit on which parts of the alps you can traverse.
If you were not implying that the experience of the crew (2000h) was not part of the RTO then why mention it??
Anyhow, to answer your question about driftdown, generally and for CAA calcs, the worst case Driftdown I think, at ISA +15c conditions is 18,000ft. This has never been its issue since I have flown the Zurich- Odina run. It is more to do with the lack of drop down oxygen and the requirement to be at 14,000ft within 4 minutes. This rather puts a limit on which parts of the alps you can traverse.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ireland
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
tilewood - reference your enquiry about Flybe starting services
from Southend.
I had heard from a senior manager at Flybe that there are plans in the pipeline and watch this space for Southend. No specific start dates were quoted except an announcement would come before Christmas.
from Southend.
I had heard from a senior manager at Flybe that there are plans in the pipeline and watch this space for Southend. No specific start dates were quoted except an announcement would come before Christmas.
Further to the reply from Capt. Airprox, the routing across the alps was looked at very carefully by the then fleet manager. As mentioned, the main problem was the requirement to reach 14000ft within 4 minutes of a decompression occuring, which thus restricts which areas of the Alps the aircraft could operate over.
Easy swimmer should be aware of this, as the information was published in a notac (14/03 to jog his memory) which was available to all crews and later included in part C of the ops manual. This included all the data relating to limiting high ground enroute between RIPUS and ODINA south bound and ABESI and ELMUR north bound. Prior to the route starting on the Q400 this information was submitted to both the UK CAA and also to the Italian Aviation Authorities, both of whom wanted to see that the route could operate safely, and both of these bodies approved the operation.
On these grounds, to suggest that the operation of the Q400 over the Alps by Flybe was unsafe is grossly misleading. If Easyswimmer wasn't happy with the situation when he operated it he should have discussed it with the Captain. If the Captain wasn't happy with it then he should have queried it when his roster came out, and should also never have signed the area competency certificate on his previous line check as that is a statement that he, not the company, considers himself competent to operate to all airfields (and along the routes to them) other than cat C airfields which are seperately trained for.
Regarding crew qualification, whilst the question at 2000 hours may well be "where is my command", just asking doesn't mean that you will get it. There are many with more hours than that who have failed command assessments, because it has to be said that to have the required skills and the correct mental attitude for command at that stage is quite rare. The company requirements for command are 2500 hours, which may be reduced to 2000 at the discretion of the Flight ops director, but the number of dispensations that may be granted is limited, I have been told, by the airlines insurers to 7% of the captains ie if you have 100 dash captains 7 of them may have less than 2500 hours. As a newly promoted captain cannot fly with an F/O with less than 100 hours on type the minimum number of hours on the flight deck should never be able to be less than about 2300 so it is hard to see how the 2000 total nil mentioned slipped through the net.
This is generally fairly standard for UK turboprop operators, as nil mentioned Loganair seem to be using slightly lower hours for command. To put this into perspective,in March one UK 737 operator (not flybe or easjet) was promoting Captains with 2700hrs TT. With generally longer sectors this could well give less exposure to the critical phases of the flight (take-off,approach and landing) than would be experienced by a 2000 hour pilot on a regional turboprop.
Finally regarding easyswimmers attack on the training department (I believe capt airprox is a fellow member), I would assume from his or her post that they joined the company in about 2001/02, at which time the dash training left something to be desired. Since then we have doubled the number of TREs and TRIs, trained many more line trainers, added extra sim slots to the initial course and as mentioned the most important one, got rid of JT. Of Easyswimmers list of why training was "poor to very poor" the only training related issue was the local ways of doing things, and that issue is currently being addressed.
Easy swimmer should be aware of this, as the information was published in a notac (14/03 to jog his memory) which was available to all crews and later included in part C of the ops manual. This included all the data relating to limiting high ground enroute between RIPUS and ODINA south bound and ABESI and ELMUR north bound. Prior to the route starting on the Q400 this information was submitted to both the UK CAA and also to the Italian Aviation Authorities, both of whom wanted to see that the route could operate safely, and both of these bodies approved the operation.
On these grounds, to suggest that the operation of the Q400 over the Alps by Flybe was unsafe is grossly misleading. If Easyswimmer wasn't happy with the situation when he operated it he should have discussed it with the Captain. If the Captain wasn't happy with it then he should have queried it when his roster came out, and should also never have signed the area competency certificate on his previous line check as that is a statement that he, not the company, considers himself competent to operate to all airfields (and along the routes to them) other than cat C airfields which are seperately trained for.
Regarding crew qualification, whilst the question at 2000 hours may well be "where is my command", just asking doesn't mean that you will get it. There are many with more hours than that who have failed command assessments, because it has to be said that to have the required skills and the correct mental attitude for command at that stage is quite rare. The company requirements for command are 2500 hours, which may be reduced to 2000 at the discretion of the Flight ops director, but the number of dispensations that may be granted is limited, I have been told, by the airlines insurers to 7% of the captains ie if you have 100 dash captains 7 of them may have less than 2500 hours. As a newly promoted captain cannot fly with an F/O with less than 100 hours on type the minimum number of hours on the flight deck should never be able to be less than about 2300 so it is hard to see how the 2000 total nil mentioned slipped through the net.
This is generally fairly standard for UK turboprop operators, as nil mentioned Loganair seem to be using slightly lower hours for command. To put this into perspective,in March one UK 737 operator (not flybe or easjet) was promoting Captains with 2700hrs TT. With generally longer sectors this could well give less exposure to the critical phases of the flight (take-off,approach and landing) than would be experienced by a 2000 hour pilot on a regional turboprop.
Finally regarding easyswimmers attack on the training department (I believe capt airprox is a fellow member), I would assume from his or her post that they joined the company in about 2001/02, at which time the dash training left something to be desired. Since then we have doubled the number of TREs and TRIs, trained many more line trainers, added extra sim slots to the initial course and as mentioned the most important one, got rid of JT. Of Easyswimmers list of why training was "poor to very poor" the only training related issue was the local ways of doing things, and that issue is currently being addressed.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Excrab - I don't like your tone old chap. I put forward a non-confrontational post and you reply sarcastiacally and aggressively. Are you like that with your training hat on?
The feeling without exception of those I flew with was that going over the alps at FL250 in a dash in winter was far from ideal. It concerns me that you have to actually say that the route was considered carefully. Of course it was legal and approved, but there was clearly a communication problem, because crews felt uncomfortable. That is not their fault; they are going on the briefing and info provided by the airline to the crews. Do bear in mind the crews were often doing the same cross channel sectors, then occasionally thrown into a longer flight in foreign airspace over the Alps. I don't recall doing any driftdowns in the sim by way of aiding my ability and competence. I recall Notac 14/03 with fond memories. We had it's contents deciphered on a post-it note and stuck it on the glare shield - along with the noise abatement departure out of bergamo which was as equally complex.
I agree, that to say that flying that route was unsafe would be misleading - but I didn't say it. I said the brief was inadequate which left crew with an uneasy feeling. (no pun intended). You typify the training ethos at flybe - listen to yourself!.. Should have read the notac, shouldn't have signed the line check form, should have told the skipper, shouldn't have accepted the duty on roster issue....blah blah... It doesn't seem to worry you that there was a problem - just a tirade of reasons why we should have no reason to be concerned.
With reference to your command selection procedure - Perhaps you could explain why at least one skipper I can remember was sent on a Pre-command course after I had flown with him in the LHS for at least 4 months? He happened to be a top operator, but still...
I am pleased to hear that the training has improved. In September 2003 it was still poor to very poor. - I didn't attack your training department - I commented on my experience of it. If I wanted to attack it, I would have said it was shi*te, but it wasn't. In 2001 as you say, there were a few good guys doing the best they could to get the lads through and there were some other pedantic bully boy trainers who took no consideration as to the new guys background, age or ability and gave them a really rough time - and what did it achieve?
My understanding was JT retired, but if you got rid of him - so be it. I quite liked the bloke myself, just not his way of doing things which was a, little dated. Something about competent but lacking initiative was his crm course in a nutshell
The other thing I forgot to mention on my original post was that in the sim you couldn't bug minima. I guess that has changed now you have speed tapes but that always gave me a chuckle. "Sorry old chap - you bust your minima"
"bugg*er me so I did... the post-it note must have fallen off again. Can I have another go?"
"Absolutely it's only an OPC".
The feeling without exception of those I flew with was that going over the alps at FL250 in a dash in winter was far from ideal. It concerns me that you have to actually say that the route was considered carefully. Of course it was legal and approved, but there was clearly a communication problem, because crews felt uncomfortable. That is not their fault; they are going on the briefing and info provided by the airline to the crews. Do bear in mind the crews were often doing the same cross channel sectors, then occasionally thrown into a longer flight in foreign airspace over the Alps. I don't recall doing any driftdowns in the sim by way of aiding my ability and competence. I recall Notac 14/03 with fond memories. We had it's contents deciphered on a post-it note and stuck it on the glare shield - along with the noise abatement departure out of bergamo which was as equally complex.
I agree, that to say that flying that route was unsafe would be misleading - but I didn't say it. I said the brief was inadequate which left crew with an uneasy feeling. (no pun intended). You typify the training ethos at flybe - listen to yourself!.. Should have read the notac, shouldn't have signed the line check form, should have told the skipper, shouldn't have accepted the duty on roster issue....blah blah... It doesn't seem to worry you that there was a problem - just a tirade of reasons why we should have no reason to be concerned.
With reference to your command selection procedure - Perhaps you could explain why at least one skipper I can remember was sent on a Pre-command course after I had flown with him in the LHS for at least 4 months? He happened to be a top operator, but still...
I am pleased to hear that the training has improved. In September 2003 it was still poor to very poor. - I didn't attack your training department - I commented on my experience of it. If I wanted to attack it, I would have said it was shi*te, but it wasn't. In 2001 as you say, there were a few good guys doing the best they could to get the lads through and there were some other pedantic bully boy trainers who took no consideration as to the new guys background, age or ability and gave them a really rough time - and what did it achieve?
My understanding was JT retired, but if you got rid of him - so be it. I quite liked the bloke myself, just not his way of doing things which was a, little dated. Something about competent but lacking initiative was his crm course in a nutshell
The other thing I forgot to mention on my original post was that in the sim you couldn't bug minima. I guess that has changed now you have speed tapes but that always gave me a chuckle. "Sorry old chap - you bust your minima"
"bugg*er me so I did... the post-it note must have fallen off again. Can I have another go?"
"Absolutely it's only an OPC".
Rebel PPRuNer
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Toronto, Canada (formerly EICK)
Age: 51
Posts: 2,834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well as for the q, flybe just went in for more of 'em:
http://www.bombardier.com/en/3_0/pre...865&sCateg=3_0
http://www.bombardier.com/en/3_0/pre...865&sCateg=3_0
Easy swimmer,
I'm afraid I'm not going to apologise for my tone, old chap. If the comment that the training "is poor to very poor" is not an attack on our training department I don't know what would be. Did you fly with all the line trainers? probably not. Were you tested by all the TREs and trained by all the TRIs, again probably not. So the most you can possibly say is that your own training and the recurrent training/testing was poor, or even very poor. It doesn't neccessarily mean that all Flybe training is the same.
I will apologise for appearing to suggest that you said the operation across the Alps was unsafe. That was nil furthers comment and I should not have included your name in the same paragraph.
Regarding the brief for ops over the Alps, I have it in front of me now and it seems reasonably understandable to me - the noise abatement bit "a type three climb(160kts) should be flown via the ORI SID (ABESI transition) until it is clear that FL210 or above can be achieved by ABESI etc etc" seems perfectly understandable. The SID was on the AERAD chart and was a turn onto a southerley track away from the hills until passing FL120 if memory serves me rightly - this was nothing to do with FLybe, it was a published procedure. It would have been improved if the diagram had been better, so as a result everyone who I personally line trained on the route was given a full brief with the route structure plotted on an ONC chart so they would know exactly what was involved.
The advice not to sign the area competency certificate for a skipper is actually very good advice if crewing refuse to cooperate. This happened to one guy whose command line trainingI was doing who was rostered for this route as his first ever command sector after training. I advised him not to sign the certificate, gave him a "very good" grading on the training report and ended up having a massive row about it with GD the next day, but at least he got some more experience on thhe aircraft before crossing the Alps - and he wasn't at minimum hours and had crossed the alps many times as a jet F/O.
The answer to your question about the pre command course is that I don't know. I was talking about the command assessment procedure as it is now - not as it was when the course was just being introduced and there was a backlog. The command course, as far as I know is primarily administration, how the company works etc and not to be confused with anything about flying the aircraft. as far as I know it is now done prior to operating in the LHS.
Regarding the busting of minimas on an OPC - where is the problem with a repeat of it under the circumstances you described? A candidate on an OPC is alllowed a repeat of any item at the examiners discretion (and if everything else on the approach had been satisfactorily and he knew why he had done it wrong then that would be classed as such). If he gets it wrong again and / or need to be rebriefed that is then a second attempt and he is allowed that as well, only if he gets that wrong does it become a fail. Those aren't flybes rules, they are straight from the CAA standards document 24, except that flybe apply them to OPCs as well as LPC/LST. However there is a serious issue with the OPC you experienced in your initial post as the sim time should be utilised for training and if there is spare time and everything is finished then It should be used for individual crew members to practise anything they were intersted in (not aerobatics or flying under tower bridge) perhaps drift downs...., and the briefing should be far longer than 25minutes. Nowdays we get 2 hours for all sim training and testing.
However, an OPC is just an OPC, with no CAA involvement and any brief that can help to put the candidate at ease will help, Which I assume the "don't worry this is only an OPC" statement was supposed to achieve. Would you prefer the examiner to say "right you 'orrible little man 1 knot to slow and your chopped..."
Finally, I liked JT as well, he was asked to leave because he wasn't doing his job properly - hence since you left we have a new training manger and deputy, plus all the extra staff and changes I mentioned in my first post. Yes, training when I joined the company was dire, a chopping mentality like something from the Royal New Zealand Airforce in the fifties, upon which it was based. That is what you, easyswimmer, and possibly nil further if he flew the F27 experienced on joining. However, since JT left a lot of people who actually care about training have worked very hard to try to change that, and seeing comments such as yours are not much reward for those efforts. So please, by all means tell people what it was like, but don't describe it so in the present tense as in your original post.
I'm afraid I'm not going to apologise for my tone, old chap. If the comment that the training "is poor to very poor" is not an attack on our training department I don't know what would be. Did you fly with all the line trainers? probably not. Were you tested by all the TREs and trained by all the TRIs, again probably not. So the most you can possibly say is that your own training and the recurrent training/testing was poor, or even very poor. It doesn't neccessarily mean that all Flybe training is the same.
I will apologise for appearing to suggest that you said the operation across the Alps was unsafe. That was nil furthers comment and I should not have included your name in the same paragraph.
Regarding the brief for ops over the Alps, I have it in front of me now and it seems reasonably understandable to me - the noise abatement bit "a type three climb(160kts) should be flown via the ORI SID (ABESI transition) until it is clear that FL210 or above can be achieved by ABESI etc etc" seems perfectly understandable. The SID was on the AERAD chart and was a turn onto a southerley track away from the hills until passing FL120 if memory serves me rightly - this was nothing to do with FLybe, it was a published procedure. It would have been improved if the diagram had been better, so as a result everyone who I personally line trained on the route was given a full brief with the route structure plotted on an ONC chart so they would know exactly what was involved.
The advice not to sign the area competency certificate for a skipper is actually very good advice if crewing refuse to cooperate. This happened to one guy whose command line trainingI was doing who was rostered for this route as his first ever command sector after training. I advised him not to sign the certificate, gave him a "very good" grading on the training report and ended up having a massive row about it with GD the next day, but at least he got some more experience on thhe aircraft before crossing the Alps - and he wasn't at minimum hours and had crossed the alps many times as a jet F/O.
The answer to your question about the pre command course is that I don't know. I was talking about the command assessment procedure as it is now - not as it was when the course was just being introduced and there was a backlog. The command course, as far as I know is primarily administration, how the company works etc and not to be confused with anything about flying the aircraft. as far as I know it is now done prior to operating in the LHS.
Regarding the busting of minimas on an OPC - where is the problem with a repeat of it under the circumstances you described? A candidate on an OPC is alllowed a repeat of any item at the examiners discretion (and if everything else on the approach had been satisfactorily and he knew why he had done it wrong then that would be classed as such). If he gets it wrong again and / or need to be rebriefed that is then a second attempt and he is allowed that as well, only if he gets that wrong does it become a fail. Those aren't flybes rules, they are straight from the CAA standards document 24, except that flybe apply them to OPCs as well as LPC/LST. However there is a serious issue with the OPC you experienced in your initial post as the sim time should be utilised for training and if there is spare time and everything is finished then It should be used for individual crew members to practise anything they were intersted in (not aerobatics or flying under tower bridge) perhaps drift downs...., and the briefing should be far longer than 25minutes. Nowdays we get 2 hours for all sim training and testing.
However, an OPC is just an OPC, with no CAA involvement and any brief that can help to put the candidate at ease will help, Which I assume the "don't worry this is only an OPC" statement was supposed to achieve. Would you prefer the examiner to say "right you 'orrible little man 1 knot to slow and your chopped..."
Finally, I liked JT as well, he was asked to leave because he wasn't doing his job properly - hence since you left we have a new training manger and deputy, plus all the extra staff and changes I mentioned in my first post. Yes, training when I joined the company was dire, a chopping mentality like something from the Royal New Zealand Airforce in the fifties, upon which it was based. That is what you, easyswimmer, and possibly nil further if he flew the F27 experienced on joining. However, since JT left a lot of people who actually care about training have worked very hard to try to change that, and seeing comments such as yours are not much reward for those efforts. So please, by all means tell people what it was like, but don't describe it so in the present tense as in your original post.
Last edited by excrab; 15th Jun 2005 at 10:41.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes of course i didn't fly with all the trainers, and I said there were some good guys - but overall my opinion is that flybe's training is poor to very poor, becasue of the resources given to it. Surely the best attitude toward training is that the airline strives to give the best, highest level of training reasonably possible - that everything was done to ensure a safe opperation. If it went wrong on the day, then nothing more could reasonably been done to avoid the outcome. Can you say you believe that is the case throughout the training department at flybe?
You may give extra helpful instruction -that is to be appluaded, but it ain't the standard for the airline. Not all the line trainers are giving the same level of training.
Not being able to bug mimima is a shambles. It is unprofessional to accept that a pilot may have another go if they cock it up becasue they didn't have the altitude in the scan that we are all trained to use. Give the bloke/glokess a fair crack and give them everything to help them not bust minima - cos for real you may only do it once. It may be legal to have another go, but it harldy makes you feel very good having to repeat things.
Are there any other flybe troops new or old with me on this?
I can see we won't agree on this, and you are naturally going to defend your position as a trainer. Sadly my opinion has been reafirmed by your comments that the airline is legal, but not professional.
You may give extra helpful instruction -that is to be appluaded, but it ain't the standard for the airline. Not all the line trainers are giving the same level of training.
Not being able to bug mimima is a shambles. It is unprofessional to accept that a pilot may have another go if they cock it up becasue they didn't have the altitude in the scan that we are all trained to use. Give the bloke/glokess a fair crack and give them everything to help them not bust minima - cos for real you may only do it once. It may be legal to have another go, but it harldy makes you feel very good having to repeat things.
Are there any other flybe troops new or old with me on this?
I can see we won't agree on this, and you are naturally going to defend your position as a trainer. Sadly my opinion has been reafirmed by your comments that the airline is legal, but not professional.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is no doubt that when the Dash was first introduced, there were two complete clowns in the training department, whose adversarial approach to training was well known. It was no surprise when they were both removed from those training positions (by promotion to the 146 in one case, not sure about the other). At the time, it was the most unprofessional training environment I have ever seen. maybe it is better now, it couldn't have been much worse. A few of us were offered Q400 positions, I for one turned it down as I refused to fly with those turkeys.
I well remember the discussions in the crew room about the Alps drift-down problem. To me, the real issue was that nobody had even considered it until a few of the crews started to wonder out loud "what would happen if..." Why the Fleet Management and Performance department never thought about it is beyond me.
And BTW, doing drift-downs in the sim has to be the biggest waste of time there is. At least flying under Tower Bridge would have some training value, practising a driftdown has none.
Mind you, the jet fleet wasn't much better. After our first season into Innsbruck, it became obvious that we needed a re-write of the brief as it didn't contain nearly enough information, and had some serious errors. Sure enough, next season rolls around and where is the brief? Not ready, of course. Just as well the weather was nice for the first few weeks. That one was down to the FM... thank god he's gone now.
As far as training is concerned, it was always pretty good on the jet fleet. Most of the trainers are top-notch people, there is no artificial stress, and the job gets done with the minimum of fuss. The Chief trainer on the jet is superb.
On the turboprop it has always been different. With JT in charge, and the midget from Leeds later, chopping was the order of the day. All trainees were subject to completely unnecessary stress. We used to get them for line training, so wound up they could barely fly. It took the first two or three line flights to calm them down enough to teach them anything.
And line training... when I became a line trainer on the F27, my "training" consisted of a phone call - "hey, ya wanna be a line trainer...??" followed by a two-hour session in the crew room with a TRE. That was it! You're a line trainer now son, off you go...
Still a great company though!
I well remember the discussions in the crew room about the Alps drift-down problem. To me, the real issue was that nobody had even considered it until a few of the crews started to wonder out loud "what would happen if..." Why the Fleet Management and Performance department never thought about it is beyond me.
And BTW, doing drift-downs in the sim has to be the biggest waste of time there is. At least flying under Tower Bridge would have some training value, practising a driftdown has none.
Mind you, the jet fleet wasn't much better. After our first season into Innsbruck, it became obvious that we needed a re-write of the brief as it didn't contain nearly enough information, and had some serious errors. Sure enough, next season rolls around and where is the brief? Not ready, of course. Just as well the weather was nice for the first few weeks. That one was down to the FM... thank god he's gone now.
As far as training is concerned, it was always pretty good on the jet fleet. Most of the trainers are top-notch people, there is no artificial stress, and the job gets done with the minimum of fuss. The Chief trainer on the jet is superb.
On the turboprop it has always been different. With JT in charge, and the midget from Leeds later, chopping was the order of the day. All trainees were subject to completely unnecessary stress. We used to get them for line training, so wound up they could barely fly. It took the first two or three line flights to calm them down enough to teach them anything.
And line training... when I became a line trainer on the F27, my "training" consisted of a phone call - "hey, ya wanna be a line trainer...??" followed by a two-hour session in the crew room with a TRE. That was it! You're a line trainer now son, off you go...
Still a great company though!
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 361
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I'm bound to get a few kick-backs from this, because I've already done this one to death on the staff website, but I'll throw in my opinion for chuckles.....
Training when I joined was a bit messy. Took forever to get anything done. We were shipped to Toronto for the initial TR, where we didn't get any of the SOP's, flows etc - which were hammered to death by JT back in EXT. All passed the initial though, but from then, we had various single days here and there covering performance etc in EXT. Base training was about 3 weeks later, and line training a couple of days after that. All a bit spaced out, but not too bad.
Since then, I've flown with various line trainers and have found them all to be fair and consistent. There are still various niggles that they don't all agree on - mainly because no set procedure has been set in stone, so there are different interpretations as to how something should be done. Can be confusing at times.
As far as the 1200 fuek check at Ortac - happened as recently as the end of last year to me I'm afraid!
The most recent thing that's really 'annoyed' me, is a bit of a shambles about training for the speed tapes. First of all you have to do ground training (covered on the ART course which most people sleep through with terrific hangovers impeding any chance of taking anything in!!), and training in the sim. Then you don't have to do sim training, but you have to cover VFR and IFR manouevres on the a/c. Then you can cover the ground school bit in a brief with a Line Trainer, and carry out the in-flight training on revenue flights.
Some trainers insist on training being done in the sim, others don't. The groundschool is bare minimum, and learning on-the-go with pax down the back is, as far as I'm concerned, a joke....
Picture this.... groundschool covered 10months ago.... no sim training..... pre-flight brief of about 10mins (which to be fair covered most of it)..........out to a/c and have approx 5 mins to have a look and play with the new buttons..... RVR 175m.... classed as sufficient training so off we went.
Funny that the day before, another F/O with the same lack of training had got off the a/c when he found it had speed tapes, and they got someone else in to cover.
The day I'm there.... no-one on standby anywhere, so it's deemed legal. Had I chosen not to fly because I didn't think I'd had sufficient training, it was, and I quote from the training manager, "a problem that would be dealt with"..... i.e. come for tea and biscuits because you refused to fly....
I'll sit back now and wait for the insults!
Training when I joined was a bit messy. Took forever to get anything done. We were shipped to Toronto for the initial TR, where we didn't get any of the SOP's, flows etc - which were hammered to death by JT back in EXT. All passed the initial though, but from then, we had various single days here and there covering performance etc in EXT. Base training was about 3 weeks later, and line training a couple of days after that. All a bit spaced out, but not too bad.
Since then, I've flown with various line trainers and have found them all to be fair and consistent. There are still various niggles that they don't all agree on - mainly because no set procedure has been set in stone, so there are different interpretations as to how something should be done. Can be confusing at times.
As far as the 1200 fuek check at Ortac - happened as recently as the end of last year to me I'm afraid!
The most recent thing that's really 'annoyed' me, is a bit of a shambles about training for the speed tapes. First of all you have to do ground training (covered on the ART course which most people sleep through with terrific hangovers impeding any chance of taking anything in!!), and training in the sim. Then you don't have to do sim training, but you have to cover VFR and IFR manouevres on the a/c. Then you can cover the ground school bit in a brief with a Line Trainer, and carry out the in-flight training on revenue flights.
Some trainers insist on training being done in the sim, others don't. The groundschool is bare minimum, and learning on-the-go with pax down the back is, as far as I'm concerned, a joke....
Picture this.... groundschool covered 10months ago.... no sim training..... pre-flight brief of about 10mins (which to be fair covered most of it)..........out to a/c and have approx 5 mins to have a look and play with the new buttons..... RVR 175m.... classed as sufficient training so off we went.
Funny that the day before, another F/O with the same lack of training had got off the a/c when he found it had speed tapes, and they got someone else in to cover.
The day I'm there.... no-one on standby anywhere, so it's deemed legal. Had I chosen not to fly because I didn't think I'd had sufficient training, it was, and I quote from the training manager, "a problem that would be dealt with"..... i.e. come for tea and biscuits because you refused to fly....
I'll sit back now and wait for the insults!
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Northern Wastes
Age: 45
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree about the speed tapes mess up, we all new the speed tapes were coming so presumeably the folks down in exeter must have aswell. At our base we had two A/C with new symbology, they arrived on the day before a load of new pilots started line training, I believe that some captains refused to train on the affected A/C but I also heard that some captains continued line training and incorporated the difference training into the first day of line training which sounds less than ideal.
I however have played with the new symbology twice in the sim and this was included in my training report's to say I have been "TRAINED".
I noticed that my duties were being changed more than normal so I called ops to check and they had been altering my roster as they were unaware I could operate.
A bit of a com's breakdown between Admin and ops it seems.
I however have played with the new symbology twice in the sim and this was included in my training report's to say I have been "TRAINED".
I noticed that my duties were being changed more than normal so I called ops to check and they had been altering my roster as they were unaware I could operate.
A bit of a com's breakdown between Admin and ops it seems.
Er82,
You may get insults, but certainly not from me.
The speed tapes introduction has been handled somewhat shambolically and caused some problems. These have quickly been addressed and as all initial courses now have 5 of the 8 days using the tapes, plus all OPCs and LPCs to be done using them those problems should shortly be solved, unfortunately not before you leave. This also resolves the issue of not being able to bug minimas in the simulator.
As for the veiled threat of tea and biscuits that could just be an interpretation (I don't say it is as I wasn't there), but having spent a not inconsiderable time working with the dash 8 training manager in the past I would be very surprised as that isn't the way he normally operates. Certainly, other F/Os who aren't qualified on the tapes have been rostered specifically with line trainers since your incident, possibly as a result of it. And before anyone else says it training shouldn't have been given on the a/c, however the shortage of sim availability in ARN at the moment meant this was the only practical solution.
Obviously this in the long run is not acceptable, and as easyswimmer says the airline should strive to give the best possible training it can. Again the lack of resources issue is slowly being solved and it is fairly common knowledge within the company that the directors have approved the procurement of our own Q400 simulators in the UK which should solve many of these issues. I hesitate to draw comparison, but no doubt in it's growth from two 737s on Air Foyles AOC to what it is today there must have been times when easyjets training department suffered hickups, and I fail to comprehend why easyswimmer is unable to recognise the fact that with Flybe currently undergoing massive change and expansion there may also be ongoing changes in the training department since he left, thus making some of his information a little out of date.
You may get insults, but certainly not from me.
The speed tapes introduction has been handled somewhat shambolically and caused some problems. These have quickly been addressed and as all initial courses now have 5 of the 8 days using the tapes, plus all OPCs and LPCs to be done using them those problems should shortly be solved, unfortunately not before you leave. This also resolves the issue of not being able to bug minimas in the simulator.
As for the veiled threat of tea and biscuits that could just be an interpretation (I don't say it is as I wasn't there), but having spent a not inconsiderable time working with the dash 8 training manager in the past I would be very surprised as that isn't the way he normally operates. Certainly, other F/Os who aren't qualified on the tapes have been rostered specifically with line trainers since your incident, possibly as a result of it. And before anyone else says it training shouldn't have been given on the a/c, however the shortage of sim availability in ARN at the moment meant this was the only practical solution.
Obviously this in the long run is not acceptable, and as easyswimmer says the airline should strive to give the best possible training it can. Again the lack of resources issue is slowly being solved and it is fairly common knowledge within the company that the directors have approved the procurement of our own Q400 simulators in the UK which should solve many of these issues. I hesitate to draw comparison, but no doubt in it's growth from two 737s on Air Foyles AOC to what it is today there must have been times when easyjets training department suffered hickups, and I fail to comprehend why easyswimmer is unable to recognise the fact that with Flybe currently undergoing massive change and expansion there may also be ongoing changes in the training department since he left, thus making some of his information a little out of date.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 361
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Heard this the other day.....
With the delivery of the new Dash's taking place over the next however many years, if NO-ONE leaves the company, we need to take on 10 pilots per month.....
I'm afraid to say that the training manager did say that to me. I'd found out the day before that I was on an a/c with speed tapes. Phoned crewing to tell them I wouldn't be happy because I hadn't had sufficient training. They seemed happy enough and said they'd get it covered. 5 mins later I get a call from the TM who seemed pi**ed off with me and blarbed a load of 'it's legal' at me.
OPS were actually phoning all crew a while back to try and update their records as to who had done the training and who hadn't. So much for our 'amazing' AIMS system!!
With the delivery of the new Dash's taking place over the next however many years, if NO-ONE leaves the company, we need to take on 10 pilots per month.....
I'm afraid to say that the training manager did say that to me. I'd found out the day before that I was on an a/c with speed tapes. Phoned crewing to tell them I wouldn't be happy because I hadn't had sufficient training. They seemed happy enough and said they'd get it covered. 5 mins later I get a call from the TM who seemed pi**ed off with me and blarbed a load of 'it's legal' at me.
OPS were actually phoning all crew a while back to try and update their records as to who had done the training and who hadn't. So much for our 'amazing' AIMS system!!