Swissair Pilots cheated exams for years

[ettore]

The Neue Zuercher Zeitung reported on Sunday that Swissair pilots used to cheat at their APTL exams for years, until JAR came in force in 2000.

At least three Swissair pilots and one instructor confirmed that through the 90's the candidates received before the exam the list of questions together with the answers!

The Swiss Federal Bureau for civil aviation (BAZL/OFAC) knew of the pratice but never inquired and therefore never got a precise clue on the cheating. No action was ever taken.

To make things worth, when a Swissair pilot got under scrutiny for failing a simulatore tests, the company would look into the exams results to make up its mind!

As JAR came into force in 2000, with a random generated list of questions, 10% more candidates failed at the exam. This was obviously not enough to trigger an inquiry.

Many of the pilots who cheated at their exams are still flying for Swiss. The Chief Operating Officer of this company, Manfred Brennwald, confirmed the report of the Neue Zuercher Zeitung. He headed the SLS Pilots School between 92 and 95 and the Swissair Aviation School from 1998 to 2000.

[Timothy]

Do any of us believe that a solid knowledge of the ATPL syllabus makes much difference to one's capabilities and safety as pilot or Captain?

When I did the exams (mid 80s, CAA) the amount of stuff that was utterly irrelevant to the world of flying jets along the airways was simply unbelievable. The thought that I am qualified to swing a compass or work out Local Mean Time from astronomical tables is utterly laughable.

Everything that is really needed comes up in Type Ratings, line training and learning the Ops Manual. The rest, it seems to me, is useless mumbo jumbo designed to ensure that only grammar and public schoolboys are allowed onto the flight deck, lest a regional accent might scare the passengers into thinking that the captain is a plumber or milkman.

Sorry. Rant over. Just one of my hobby horses :O

Timothy

[maxalt]

Oooohhh, not entirely in agreement (well, almost!).

My old Met teacher in OATS was a star and whatever about the syllabus Mr.Wickson was brilliant at putting the subject over.

I still scratch me bollix and look out the window first thing every morning just as he recommended.:p

[Kaptin M]

Regardless of whether we believe the examinations are impractical (or not), the fact is pilots are expected to be able to study, sit and pass - or fail, and move to another occupation.
It's one of the "cull factors".

If, on the other hand, the story refers to the practice of using past examination questions for practice, after having studied the syllabus, then I see no difference to the techniques used the world over. Even recognising a certain question, was no guarantee that the numerical values from past exams would be used to give the same answers provided in the test runs - what was necessary was having the know-how to work through to the correct answer.
However, if pilots were provided with the EXACT Q&A's and told that "these are what you WILL be getting", then that IS cheating.

[QAR ASR]

Thought it would be more obvious that the Swissair accountants cheated and dismally failed their exams.

[Loose rivets]

Grammar grubs and who? I know it's getting off the point, but those of us who left a post war secondary school with nothing but a thick ear, later sat beside ex RAF pilots and (for example) physics graduates, with little difference in exam results, and at least in some "independents", much the same career progress. It would be a shame if too much store is set by exam results. Having said this, I find it somewhat galling to think that some folk were given a free lunch, when we slogged for six days for the CPL then later, another five working days - in sundry town-halls - to do the senior licence...though I have to confess, drawing nifty pictures of pendulous vanes, never gave me much help. It was somewhat at variance with the ATP which I did c1985. That took one hour total.

Of course the exams should be a useful pre-curser to modern aviation, and I think, a huge improvement in the teaching techniques of electrics is vital. The basic systems are fairly straight forward to the average pilot, allbeit a lot of work. However, some of the clues to serious problems are very subtle but could be taught if some of the other c**p were swept out of the way..

[Cris L]

Thought it would be more obvious that the Swissair accountants cheated and dismally failed their exams.

I think truer than we know.

[cold canuck]

KAPTIAN M:

"However, if pilots were provided with the EXACT Q&A's and told that "these are what you WILL be getting", then that IS cheating."

AS in the way the Current FAA ATPL is written!!! Take the $200 course , memorize answers over 8 hrs and write the exam with the EXACT same questions on it. I had to convert my Canadian recently I found this process extraordinary!

[skypointer]

The Chief Operating Officer of this company, Manfred Brennwald, confirmed the report of the Neue Zuercher Zeitung

Well not quite. Here is the letter that Manfred Brennwald sent to the author of the article:

Hello Mrs. Voigt,
I refer to your article in the today's edition of "NZZ am Sonntag" with the title you have chosen to say " Prüfungsbetrug von Swissair-Piloten". At the same time I need to recall our yesterday's telephone call where I tried to explain the real circumstances at length to you.

What you finally made out of your article is a form of journalism, which I am not used by the usual quality of an "NZZ". The motives behind will most probably remain to be your secret.

By expressing statements like " Instruktoren und Schulleitung schauten weg", "Der theoretische Prüfungsteil wurde als Alibiübung für die Behörden aufgefasst." you clearly imply that the former SLS did not take academic test for serious or even acted unlawful.

This, as well as your statement " Den lockeren Umgang mit den theoretischen Prüfungen streitet auch Manfred Brennwald nicht ab" are presumptions, which in no way whatsoever have been indicated by me implicitly nor explicitly and therefore I cannot let them stay unanswered.

In contrary, at the SLS we drove a very strict regime when we took academic tests. All tests were supervised by an expert in front of the class during the whole time and in addition there were periodic inspections by the Federal Office of Civil Aviation. Cheating was in no way tolerated and when our supervisor every once in a while did catch someone using a "spick", this person - of course - had to repeat the test.

My explanations to you in our telephone call yesterday were meant to explain that it is for obvious reasons common to all schools that their students ask predecessors, which already completed the respective tests about possible questions in order to enhance their preparation. It is also self-explaining that students talk amongst each other about the tests they are facing, the amount of difficult questions and their best answers. If you have ever made an academic test for your personal drivers license, I am quite sure that you consulted the even public valuable questionnaires with all questions and answers in order to prepare yourself for the test.

I regret that with your article you drove one more cotter between the two pilot's corps ex Crossair and Swissair. Over and above you contribute to a damaging image effect for SWISS' reputation and last not least I am still puzzled about the journalistic stile. I remain to hope that this is not the new standard which stands for the NZZ.

Kind regards,
Manfred Brennwald

It is quite obvious that we are talking here about a very bad piece of journalism and while Mr. Brennwald doesn't want to speculate about the motives of this journalistic piece of crap, I get the feeling that somebody wants to divert from the ongoing discussion about Crossairs safety culture triggered by the recently published Bassersdorf accident report. The motto seems to be: "If I cannot make myself any better, I can try to make all the others worse and the I will be better in relation to them." Sadly this harms our whole profession. Furthermore I can only strongly agree with what Kaptin M wrote.

[ettore]

Kaptain M wrote:

However, if pilots were provided with the EXACT Q&A's and told that "these are what you WILL be getting", then that IS cheating.

Correct. That's the way it happened during years. Manfred Brennwald changed the Q&A only once in the course of years, as reported by the NZZ.

An interesting point I forgot to mention before, is that, according to the Swiss Federal Bureau of Civil Aviation (BAZL/OFAC), the licences obtained under such conditions may well be cancelled. Knowing the close links and shared personal between the BAZL/OFAC and Swissair, no one should wonder why it never actively investigated this wrongdoing.

Pointing at the Bassedorf crash as an explanation for the NZZ report seems to me irrelevant. The Bassedorf crash report pointed at a number of management short-comings (see the related thread on pprune) under the era of Moritz Suter that have little, if anything, to do with a general assement of former Crossair Pilot's qualifications.

The fact is that the Bassedorf report has been exploited by a fringe of former Swissair pilots, now flying for Swiss, in an attempt to oust the Swiss CEO André Dosé, who, by the time the crash happened, was Crossair Chief Pilot. This attemps went as far as leaking to a yellow paper, the SonntagsBlick (let's say a sister publication of The Mirror while the NZZ stands closer to The Times) a collection of incidents and rumors gathered more than two years ago by the Swiss Lawyer Francois Bernath and presented a couple of week ago to the readers as a "secret report"! Bernath had no means of investigation and no authority for his undertaking but the support of the Aeropers, the Swissair Pilots Association...

Interestingly, Manfred Brennwald is now obviously trying to cover his axx - sorry, I mean "bottom" - in releasing on pprune a letter intended to the NZZ. I'm wondering what the Swiss management will think of this kind of "communication" to the public...

Manfred Brennwald, Swiss COO, wrote:

My explanations to you in our telephone call yesterday were meant to explain that it is for obvious reasons common to all schools that their students ask predecessors, which already completed the respective tests about possible questions in order to enhance their preparation. It is also self-explaining that students talk amongst each other about the tests they are facing, the amount of difficult questions and their best answers.

The fact is that the students were provided with the Q&A (and the answers) ahead of the examination. Talking about "crap", I would rather refer to the above quote as to the NZZ report.

Another fact is that Swissair pilots who came under scrutiny for security infringments in course of their duty could and did use their exams results to soften the stand of security officials. In other words, they did not only cheated at the exam, but on repeated occasions.

[Few Cloudy]

I wish I'd known there was a blooming crib - swotted like mad for those tests!

Seriously though, I am glad I had the real knowledge there, rather than an alibi result - stood me in good stead on more than one occasion later in the air.

[ATC Watcher]

All licences passed under those conditions cancelled ?

Well, I know of at least another one quite large European country where this was the norm until JAA came ( the Q&A were all avail in print and widely distributed ) But all the Q&A for that exam, not the ones you will get on the exam itself. Nobody called that cheating at the time... Cheating for me is when you get the exact Q for the test in advance, and I do not think that happenned.

Anyway as it is no longer done it is another storm in the lake , as they say in Geneva.....

[ettore]

ATC Watcher wrote :
Cheating for me is when you get the exact Q for the test in advance, and I do not think that happenned.

They did get not only "the exact Q" ahead of the test but also the answers! For a very simple reason: over more than ten years, the questions remained exactly the same! Same-same-same...

They were only changed once in course of the past decade, according to former SLS-Boss and now Swiss-COO Manfred Brennwald. I'm sorry, this are the kind of things no one could ever imagine as possible but that really took place in Switzerland.

As to licences obtained under those conditions to be cancelled, don't worry: Switzerland remains Switzerland, the old good habits, clubs, associations and "friendships" are still strong, and nobody will disturb anyone, as long as everybody gets paid.

For the quality and fairness of the exams, Brussel took care of it: Since Switzerland adopted the JAR in 2000, the Q are computer generated and renewed for each examination! :ok:

[skypointer]

Hey ettore

I havn't read anything you wrote in Mr. Brennwalds statment and you keep insisting that he agrees with you (and the NZZ article). Did you actually read the letter???

When my children get cought with their hands in the cookie jar they tend to point to their brother and say that he did even worse things. Of course it won't help them much and only makes them unpopular, but they give it a try anyway... I just get the feeling that we have a similar case here after the bad press Crossair and its pilot corps got in the last few weeks.

I'd recommend instaed of nurising your obvious anti-swissair feelings you start to put your energy into something more rewarding.

[694c]

I can't comment on the Swiss Aviation School exam routine as I sat my CPL and ATPL tests in the UK.

I can however reveal just what the new entrant pilot faced when he graduated to join Swissair:

1/ Type rating conversion to the MD80/F100/A320. 3weeks computer based/simulator training with progress questions to check system understanding. At the end of each system module a progress test, consisting of the same questions but randomly generated.

2/ 12-15 3:30 simulator sessions with 1:30 briefing and 0:30 debriefings. The last three with a Training Captain. NOWHERE TO HIDE OR CHEAT.

3/ 3-5 days base training with the same Captain as above. Several briefings, NOWHERE TO HIDE OR CHEAT.

4/ 10-12 5 day line trips (called 'rotations' in Swissair). The first with a Training Captain, 2nd-5th with instuctors, 1st to 4th also with an instructor F/O. 5th alone as a check to be released as copilot in a 2 man crew. 6th-9th alone with a normal line Captain. 10th final check with instructor. Each rotation typically consisted of 15 legs and 3 nightstops, so plenty of time for extended briefings with NOWHERE TO HIDE OR CHEAT.

[Spuds McKenzie]

694c's overview of Swissair's training schedule puts things into perspective. The whole "affair" is a storm in a tea cup, typical journo food (they don't have a clue, but make a big issue about it nevertheless, remember, anything to do with aviation sells).
Ettore's suggestion that everything remains the same anyway is loads of bollocks. I'm in the industry in this country myself and let me tell you that right now especially the FOCA is very eager to set a few things straight, since they have been in the spotlight for a while themselves.

[ettore]

Dear «Skypointer»,
As a good and rare example for unbiaised, non-partial, non-partisan, objective and sound comments on Swissair Pilot's records of honesty, fairness and correctness, you should explain us how you managed to get hold of a letter of SWISS-COO Mannfred Brennwald to the Neue Zuercher Zeitung within less than a day of the publication of the article it is supposed to answer to, translate it into english and post it on pprune?
Thanks for the big laugh! And, please, do keep your energy for more fun...:E


Beside this, Spuds McKenzie wrote: Ettore's suggestion that everything remains the same anyway is loads of bollocks. I'm in the industry in this country myself and let me tell you that right now especially the FOCA is very eager to set a few things straight, since they have been in the spotlight for a while themselves

You're absolutely right and I mentionned that this malpractice ended in 2000 thanks to the JAR. What I suggested and still believe is that the FOCA will not dig in the archives and cancel the ATPL the Swissair Pilots cheated on. The fact that things are to be set straight in the future is certainly needed, especially in such a small country where everybody knows, holds and can lever everybody...:uhoh:

[Ananas]

Nothing new under the sun!

Before JAA was implemented, all exams (in JAA countries) were made by people teaching that particular subject.
When you spend so many hours in a classroom with the teacher/examinor he is bound to give you clues away. Even without the intention to do so, he will stress some parts of the course.

If the you pretend not to understood the stuff, and ask more lessons (against a nice payment) you will get the questions.

That happened to me on 2 subjects from my ATPL (before JAA) and got 100% on one and 95% on the other. (I wonder where the 5% went)

Is it called cheating; not to me, because I had the benefit of it. If someone else does it, then it is cheatin.:confused:

Anyway, what amount of the stuff learned in the ATPL theory, is used by an airline pilote every day? I guess around 5%.
All the rest is picked up during you flight training (IR, ME, MCC and type rating) and you cannot get Q&A on a sim.

[skypointer]

Well ettore

It seems I am just better informed then you are. :E
But to answer your question: Mr. Brennwald sent his letter personally into my company mail, as he did to all other SWISS Pilots. I decided that after sending it to so many persons, he obviously wouln't mind if I distributed it a little further...

And I didn't translate it either! The mail was in german and english. So I just used the copy/past trick. The wonders of modern technology...

BTW: If you have any further questions feel free to ask me and I will answer them as unbiaised, non-partial, non-partisan, objective and sound as I am able to. :ok:

[ettore]

Well done, SkyPointer. I like your openess. For the time being, no further question:8

[Slim20]

My explanations to you in our telephone call yesterday were meant to explain that it is for obvious reasons common to all schools that their students ask predecessors, which already completed the respective tests about possible questions in order to enhance their preparation. It is also self-explaining that students talk amongst each other about the tests they are facing, the amount of difficult questions and their best answers.
From Capt Brennwald's reply, it's difficult to see how it is any different to what they do at Oxford - previous students memorise their exam questions, then report back to the groundschool with the memorised questions and answers. The GS then builds up a large database of questions and answers which are then deciphered into a "best guess" answer and circulated round the other students.

I would say that I had probably already seen about 80% of all the JAR ATPL exam questions I faced on Oxford home-produced "past papers" (complete with answers) when I sat the exams.

That isn't cheating. That is positively utilising resources to their best effect. Which is what I presume Swissair did - the 10% increase in fail rates after the introduction of JAR probably reflected the inclusion of more questions from the central question bank. Nothing new there.......

[ettore]

Things did not work that way. Candidates were given copies of the questions together with the answers and took them with them during the examination, with the full knowledge of the examinators, who just did as if they had seen nothing...

Some of the candidates used them, some didn't had to, others used the copy to cross-check the answers they had given. This practice went on for more than ten years and stopped in 2000.

Call it the way you like. To me, it's cheating, nothing else.

[what_goes_up]

ettore
Are you an SLS graduate? I don't think so. Cause if you were you would know what bull you are writing.

I attended SLS and I can assure to everybody that exactly what slim20 explained happend. I NEVER had Q&A's before a test.

On the other hand if you were at SLS and cheated your licence that way, it's up to you to return your licence to the authority. But then you would know better.

So please do not state your not very educated guesses as facts. Just because we are ex SWR does not mean we are all bad guys. Skip your frustration and save your energy for doing a good job yourself!
(edited for spelling [fingertroubles:= ])

[DouglasFlyer]

Hello ettore

...might it be possible that you belong to the 50% of the pilots of the transition course of the ex-crossair pilots that failed the transition to the A-320...?

Do you have any problems with the standard of Swiss that is set to a higher level than that of the former Crossair...?

Keep on flying instead of talking bulls..t

cu

[Send Clowns]

I am assured by a Spaniard who took the JAA exams in the UK that this is still standard practice in Spain.

[ettore]

DouglasFlyer wrote: ...might it be possible that you belong to the 50% of the pilots of the transition course of the ex-crossair pilots that failed the transition to the A-320...?

I'm not and I'm feeling very confortable with relying upon testimonies of Swissair pilots who aknowledge that, yes, indeed, they received both the questions and the answers and could use them during their ATPL examination and that it has been a widespread and for more than 10 years ongoing pratice.

By the way: I never worked for Crossair, nor for Swissair, and I'm certainly not willing to work for Swiss. It just happens that I know quite a bunch of people there :p

[what_goes_up]

ettore
So you don't know first hand. So please state that and do not sell so called facts you can't proof.
I tell you first hand that this is bull what you wrote.

[Downhill Runner]

I knew three Lufthansa pilots who also confirmed the same thing .....

Paper used to be handed out prior to ATPL exams.

[ettore]

what goes up wrote:
ettore
So you don't know first hand. So please state that and do not sell so called facts you can't proof.
I tell you first hand that this is bull what you wrote.

Why are you so eager to deny reports made and confirmed by three Swissair pilots and one Swissair instructor who were themselves involved in the sheme ? Did you cheat yourself ? :E

[TvB]

Well if it helps to put some fuel into this:

I did research that point already back in 2000 and due to the usual Swiss media self imposed censorship the story was never published. Former Swissair did everything to avoid this question to be discussed during court proceedings with one of their former captains, who got fired.

The real delicate point is that it has been common practize within their (SR's) training academy to cheat on these tests. :cool:

And is this the same Cpt Manfred Brennwald who once took off out from KMIA when the cabin was not secure and was never challengend for this despite several reports? :oh:

Nevertheless it is important that someone, if it ends up to be the more respected media, so let it be, bring such things to light.

Swiss FOCA has dreamed its beautysleep for more than a decade and by simply shifting all responsibility to the Swiss carriers without any level of control things have gone down the drain in Heidiland. First wake up call for FOCA was SR 111 and subsequently other mishaps followed. Unfortunately the Swiss mentalty can not handle critism pretty well (maybe because of that a major operator asked a few years back upon first implemantation of new JAR-Ops to be released from providing required CRM training for its crews?!!) and as the country is so small, things tend to get resolved internally, without any big publicity. A good example is the firing of a high FOCA representative, who publicly declared he felt "pressured" by Swissair to acknowledge the certification and installation of their later becoming infamous IFEN (Inflight Entertainment System) back in 1998. :\

Switzerland has become a very strange country, when it comes to aviation. It is to my knowledge the only country were people who already have been found responsible for causing serious and fatal accidents may continue to run THE major airline with the help of govenment support and (tax-payers) money - . Because on the other hand these individuals have proven to be unable to amicably resolve problems within their "merged" pilot community, such "dirty laundry" will continue to surface, and unfortunately there is even more...

:*

[Robert Vesco]

Couldn't agree more TvB!

INBREED: To breed by the continued mating of closely related individuals, especially to preserve desirable traits in a stock. ;) :D