320/737 25-year-old commander and 19-year-old first officer

[Brian Abraham]

From http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Conquering_the_skies_at_25/articleshow/2292829.cms

Conquering the skies at 25
20 Aug 2007, 0001 hrs IST,Manju V,TNN

MUMBAI: It's getting quicker to travel from the right-hand seat of a commercial aircraft's cockpit to the left-hand one. Until about a year ago, pilots in India had to wait till their late 30s to wear the four-striped epaulet of a commander. These days though, they get it all in their mid-20s.

Don't raise an eyebrow if you find a 25-year-old commander and 19-year-old first officer (co-pilot) at the controls of your next flight - it's just part of the latest trend that reflects the changing scape of the Indian aviation industry.

With airlines in the booming industry increasing their fleet, there are more vacancies at the helm. While 20-somethings are commanding single-aisle jets like A-320s and Boeing 737s, pilots are beginning to command 747s in their early 40s, something unheard of in the 1980s.

"Globally, the average age of a jetliner commander is about 45-plus, as a majority of pilots get to fly jets only after going through a long transition process, from single-engine aircraft to multi-engine turbines and finally jets," said Capt R Otaal, general secretary of the Indian Commercial Pilot's Association.

In India, as general aviation flying - on piston and turbine aircraft - hardly exists, pilots start their careers on airline jets. Though this has been the case all these decades, becoming the commander of a jet was still a long process that took five to nine years.

"I flew seven to eight years as a co-pilot before I was promoted to commander. That was how it was with all the pilots in our time. Vacancies were few as airlines did not purchase aircraft and you got a promotion to commander only when someone retired," said Otaal, adding that he was 38 years old and had about 7,000 hours of flying time as a co-pilot when he become an A-320 commander three years ago.

In the last two years though, co-pilots have been turning into commanders within just two years. The reason? "It has to do with the rapid fleet expansion by airlines, which has brought in plenty of vacancies for the top post. In the 1990s, there were about 600 unemployed pilots in the country and the ones employed did not move up the ladder due to a shortage of vacancies at the top," said Captain Ayodh Kapur, retired Air India commander and former director of the Federation of Indian Pilots.

The country's aircraft fleet grew from about 220 in 2005 to 380 in 2007, creating a huge demand for commanders. "Going by a conservative estimate, currently in India about 5% of commanders on single-aisle jet aircraft, like A-320s or Boeing 737s, are under 30 years of age. This trend will only grow," said Otaal.

So what are the rules for becoming a commander in India? According to Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) guidelines, a first officer (co-pilot) can graduate to command a particular aircraft after flying 1,500 hours as a first officer on it.

Although some airlines stick to this rule, others - like Jet Airways, Indian and so on - have raised the bar. But this, too, is being brought down.

"In 1972, an Indian Airlines co-pilot had to fly 4,800 hours to be eligible to become a commander. That was brought down to 2,750 hours in 1996. Now the airline is trying to bring it down to the DGCA minimum of 1,500 hours," said Otaal.

Other contributing factors include the fact that students are taking to flight training early and the process itself is quicker.

"In the 1940s and '50s, it took at least two years to become a pilot and so the youngest pilot was about 22 years of age," said Kapur. These days the training is faster and starts earlier.

Capt Yashraj Tongia of Yash Air, a flying training institute, said, "We launched a special programme for 12th standard students this year under which youngsters begin their paperwork to get a Commercial Pilot Licence much before clearing their HSC exams. The paperwork takes about six months. This way the student can gift himself a CPL on his 18th birthday."

In fact, some students complete their flight training much before they are 18 and then wait for their birthday to apply for the licence.

"At this juncture, when jobs are readily available, every month's delay is an opportunity lost, which the youngsters of today are careful to avoid," said Tongia.

Aviation safety experts are looking at the trend with caution. "If one becomes a commander after flying as a co-pilot for only two monsoons, there is a level of risk involved due to lack of experience."

"One must remember that a 19-year-old co-pilot may be sharing the cockpit with a 25-year-old commander - there are hardly any years of experience between them," said an aviation observer.

"The positive side is that younger pilots have sharper reflexes. In the 1960s, when the world was making a transition from piston aircraft to jets and Air India got its first Boeing 707, many older and much-experienced pilots could not make the transition. It was the younger pilots who did it," said Kapur.

[Visual Calls]

Now the airline is trying to bring it down to the DGCA minimum of 1,500 hours," said Otaal.

:eek: Be afraid, very afraid. No amount of talent will convince me that this remotely enough experience for command of a jet. India's gonna have some smoking holes I'm afraid.

[Contacttower]

Be afraid, very afraid. No amount of talent will convince me that this remotely enough experience for command of a jet. India's gonna have some smoking holes I'm afraid.


I could not agree more, not only that but having spent time flying in Florida and California where a lot of these people are being trained I'm not convinced they are being trained to a good standard either- a lot seem to have started training without understanding what it means to be a commercial pilot and also are being taught by instructors who themselves just want to build hours and then run off to the US regional airlines.

[BANANASBANANAS]

It's the training thats important - not the age. Different times, different circumstances, I know but I am ex military and we had 22 year old 4 jet transport captains. And they were pretty good too.

I think your prognosis is, unfortunately, correct in this instance.

[airborne_artist]

I had a QFI who much earlier in his career was checked out and flying Phantoms off carriers just before his 20th birthday.

OK, both he and the back-seater (navigator/observer in RN speak) had the bang seat, but still.

[PositiveRate876]

Considering that the ATC system in India is operating way over capacity already, and the airport infrastructure is too late catching up with traffic the 1500hr miminum requirement is very low for the operating comditions in that country.

[potkettleblack]

If he started at 18 then that is 7 years to command. Lot of seat time you can get in 7 years. More so if you are doing 900 hours a year.

[P.Pilcher]

In the war of course it was different. I seem to remember tht the RAF were happy to offer the priveleges of command to a late relative of mine who completed 32 missions over enemy territory as a Whitley commander (a tour) - before his 19th. birthday. Although I admit there were a few irregularities which enbled him to genuinely be in this position, he did earn a mention in dispatches and the DFC for his efforts!

P.P.

[Avman]

I agree that training and a good professional attitude is more important than age. Although it was perhaps a little more unusual then, I remember flying with a young 26 year old Captain on DH Comets back in 1970. He'd been flying since he'd started crawling (:)) and he knew his stuff.

[Riverboat]

Dessas, I see you don't accept emails. But PM me and I'll take your bet! Don't chicken out, now!

Riverboat

[FCS Explorer]

i've flown with 29-year old commanders or guys who got their command with around 29 and had only few years in the left seat (not in india, in germany!:ooh:).
if you have flown the plane and the routes for some years you know the job, fly-wise. BUT decision-making, leadership and social competence: sometimes :ouch: ... not always that brilliant. YET it's a character-thing and i really thing that FO-time smoothens your style.

[freightdog]

I am not sure what to say or mean. Experience can´t be bought, it has to be aquired over time - no matter how well the training is. Age is another element. I believe a combination of age and experience is the best recipe....maybe I should add adequate experience. I have seen airlines full of "fresh out of ab-initio training 200 hours guys", and heard their commanders claim they were acting flight instructors in addition to their actual job for the first couple of years......

On the other hand, I did during the mid 1990s fly for an Indian airline. Great people, and a wonderful experience, but I detected a culture I did not like, quite different from the US and Europe. While the youngsters were booksmart I was not convinced with the actual hands on stuff. Position was also a big thing, the respect for their commanders, or should I say the respect demanded by the commanders, did not improve CRM to put it mildly. It was Captain this and Captain that, and much more tense cockpit environment that I had ever seen, before or since.

I would love to take a LOA and return to India on a contract, but until the DGCA lets go of the 500 hours in command thing, it is out of the question. I have 12000 hours plus on adequate equipment, a few thousand of those hurs flown in India, but I still act as copilot for a major European airline due to seniority. However, I dare claim that I would make a better and safer alternative than many of the guys they are forced to upgrade these days.......heck I even have a Indian ALTP somewhere. I once did all the exams in Dehli, and at that time I was one of VERY few non-Indians to ever have flown for a Indian airline.

[AltFlaps]

I agree, BE VERY AFRAID ! :ooh:

I see lots of new young hot shot FOs coming through these days, and in my experience, it takes a couple of years just for them to settle down ...

[False Capture]

Aged 24, Wing Commander Guy Gibson led 19 Lancasters with 133 crewmen during their raids on the Ruhr dams.

[scanscanscan]

Yea..of course he did...he was only up against flak and not serious stuff like Bombay atc and HF...God bless them I wish them all the best doing 1000hrs a year to age 65.

[Always Moving]

So there is a 25 year old kid with another one in the left flying a plane.....hmm

This is a new treand all over.

Airlines have to pay less and they usually get away with them paying the TR.
The planes fly themselves and if there is a problem.... well probably the guy who design the problem is the only one who knows...

There are fix routes, remember we are talking about bus drivers, with dispatch and everything. No need to make decisions and if they are younger BETTER they will never say NO and in if Indian never ever!

As long as there is a good Chief making procedures and staying on top of the game. The kids will fly ok, now, if the chief is not good.. you could have in very few years the "fly by magic effect" ( somebody told me that that is how is done, but the book said.... forget the book so and so knows best and everyone is doing that way)

[L1011]

If you accept the assumption that an airline Captain should be an expert in his/her job then the game changes.
It is accepted in academic circles that becoming an expert requires around ten years of disciplined practice at the task. Before I'm flamed please read articles here (http://www.leggmason.com/funds/knowledge/mauboussin/Are_you_an_expert.pdf)
and here (https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/books-and-monographs/analytic-culture-in-the-u-s-intelligence-community/chapter_5_methodologists.htm)
In our terms this equates to around 5000-8000 hours - depending on the type of flying one does.
Knowing the severity of the Monsoon, the lack of infrastructure, poor ATC, high terrain and economic climate in India, taking the train might be a better option than flying with a 1500Hr skipper at the controls!

[Always Moving]

I have not flown with 100h pilot that knows what is doing. In the other hand I evaluate quite a few people with hundreds and thousands of hours and I have seen a bit of everything like people with 300h could not situate him/herself on the approach plate etc.

I do not believe what you are saying ALIEN:=. (personal opinion, I am entitle to it) as I do not believe on this crew license business, I personally think is an invention of the airlines pushed thru by $$$$ that they are gonna save

[Ignition Override]

Will a young (28 year-old etc) Captain accept this airplane, if it is allowed by the MEL restrictions?

Two guys fly the twin-turbofan, non-automated :uhoh: jet to your layover city. Enroute a generator failed and after the 1 required reset, it had abnormal indications (volts, freqs, loadmeter and annunc. lights), even though the AC cross-tie and DC switches worked just fine. Maintenance tells the local airport Engineer ('mechanic' for Yanks) to 'MEL' it. If you accept the plane, the old APU must run during the entire flight, in order to be a substitute for the MEL'd generator (which accepted the load when you started the left engine at the gate, so that the highly-skilled Engineer can observe).

Your departure city and the enroute skies have no wx radar returns. But your destination has a mixed warm/cold front, low ceilings and the destination airport might only have approaches to one runway available. Suitable alternate airports are at least 30 minutes away. In case you are down to 1 generator and it fails, your emergency power batteries are guaranteed to provide you with power for 45 minutes.

This is the last (fourth) day of your trip and many passengers have fairly tight connections. The other pilot has two young children at home.
What will the young First Officer say to the Captain when he/she notices MEL in progress, if anything? What will the young Captain say to, or ask the FO, if anything?

Most, if not all heavy maintenance on your fleets is 'outsourced'.

Should not the highly-trained, proficient Captain accept the plane?
What should the young Indian or 'European' Captain do?

This was our situation two days ago.

[Always Moving]

I believe you just closed the thread!

Is there anything else to be said.

(great timely post)

[stator vane]

what did you do??

or NOT do--

[Bigmouth]

And in my neck of the woods we have 60+ captains flying with 49 year old FO's…

Nice of you guys to remind us of all the award- and medal winning very young skippers of yore. But what's your point? Those were the cream of the crop. Which hardly can be said of the youngsters we're talking about here, who after all are being picked for command because nobody else is available.

Thank God the engineers at Airbus and Boeing are as brilliant and experienced as they are, and keep designing and building hyper safe aircraft that even dunces are hard pressed to drill into the ground.

[Ashling]

Guy Gibson led the Dams raid at @25, may have been even younger.

As others have said age is not the key thing here. One of the best Captains I flew with in my airline when I was an FO was 25. What really matters is selection, experience, training and supervision. Whether or not these things are sufficiently present in India is a different question. By pointing a gun at someones age your aiming for the wrong target.

[Dani]

25 year young captains is nothing new, it happened in regional aviation all the time. But rather as an exception. They used to be chosen because of their superior knowledge and abilities over others. Of course they had to have the necessary experience.

If you start with 20 years you built up a few thousand hours and a few seasons, so it just worked out.

In the India case I also have some serious doubt, if they really want to do it. 1500 hrs is definetly not enough. I'm pretty sure that after a few incident and accident, they will revert to the classical system. They do this of course only because they are so desperate.

I also have great concerns if this works within the traditional Asian culture.

Military pilots are mostly very succesful in younger ages, this is no surprise. They also fit to a complete different personal and professional profile (which you can often see when they change side). Most of their missions they have flown are training missions, while we on the line do "boring stuff" and train twice a year.

Dani

[ciderman]

i used to tell my students that I could teach them anything but experience. http://www.pprune.org/forums/images/icons/mpangel.gif

[soddim]

Lots of posts here about training and experience but few mention ability.

Flying hours monitoring the autopilot do not equate to experience nor does time-served promotion equate to selection.

It has been my priviledge to train many youngsters with ability and I would feel safer flying with them rather than many time-served senior captains I have met.

[Cactus99]

25 year old Captain with 800 hours Commercial experience, it happens in my company!! (UK regional)

Why?
Because there is no one else to fill the left seat!! :eek:
Nothing to do with ability, just that you've met the minimum requirements.......

[scanscanscan]

L1011 gets my vote....been there and seen the results of inexperiance fast tracked into the left seat with no high experiance right seat or F/e to keep
it all together....someone has to guard the guards....young raw low experianced low hours Captains need excellent back up...and they do not get it...and nature does not give a damn.

[DHC6to8]

or so it goes! I think that the attitude in with some people is that: "I put in my 12 years as Co, and so do you".... atleast that was how it was for me.... I heard that all the time after I got started as a copilot....I just kept my mouth shut, worked hard and stayed out of trouble.... I was made Captain at 1600 Hrs total time and 24 years old... I had just received my ATPL and flew 100 sectors after that under supervision.... some of the blokes I was friends with earlier made many comments referring to "how long they had to wait" blah, blah ... blah... several of my friends who recently just entered aviation are now Captains after three years on small to medium jets.... and good for them. If somebody gets the chance to become a Captain earlier, and they properly qualify... then good for them. It seems that there is a 'wave' of sorts.. that comes every 25 years or so... and if you catch the wave... ride it for as long as you can.... and forget about the ancient thinking of the others....
6to8

[320capt.]

TO all of you making postings taking everything written in a vague report by a reletively junior reporter who dose not know all the facts, please give enough room for error in reporting.

Now the ground reality
1. Almost every airline is keeping a minimum experience of atleast 2500 hrs TT to command a turbo prop and 3500 hrs for a narrow body. This is for non military pilots

2. Now for the age, there are very small numbers of people who are actually getting upgrades in the age bracket of 25-30. this is because for many years there were few jobs. I would not put the number beyond 50-75 captians in all of the roughly estimated 1500 -2000 Indian commanders in the country.

3.Most of these small numbers have been flying in the airline enviroment for 5-7 years. They got jobs at the ages of 19-21 yrs and so are bound to have 4-5000 hrs by the time they get command.

4. Now coming to the age v/s experience. There are two sides to the coin. There are lots of military aviators including those who flew only fighter jets(mostly of the russian kind) who are taken as direct entry captains on the same airplanes. The cockpits and type of flying done by them over the 15-20 years of their carrers is not remotely close to the airline enviroment.
All you nay sayers tell me are these prople adequately equipped. These folks have a 300 hr training program which means they are released to fly in command with about 300 hrs on TYPE without any other commercial airliner experience.
(to be fair there are lots of them who are good yet there are as many who don't know CRM and are still on a mission oriented trip)

5. This is not the first time that market demands have got people upgraded early. It has happen in the very same country in the mid 90's too. i know of no mishaps due to the age.

6. To all those predicting doom i hope you are saying things like this only because of ignorance and silght misguidance by the article.

7. If what is being said in the article were true how could there be almost 500 expat captains flying on a total fleet strength of about 350 commercial aircraft all airlines in india included. (This is not withstanding my stand on the age issue and is just to give some facts).

Trining is the ket issue and as long as they don't compromise on that we will be just fine. rarely are times good for the pilot job market and this is one time lets make the most of it and let a few get lucky. now don't go getting jealous cause you had a difficult time moving up the ladder.

[tupelov154]

It has nothing to do with age. I don't want to generalise as I do know a 2 good pilots from the subcontinent. But I wouldn't be happy with a 55 and a 45 year old indian crew. I trained about 20 of them pre 1991, 'Top gun boomers' Rich parents, thought it would be better than being a doctor or a chemist. But nearly all without exception could not grasp the fundamentals of flight. Meacham field was full of em. and they all werre 2 and 3 time exam takers, 300 hours plus, eventually given tickets on the condition that they never fly in the US.

They can't ride bicycles in a straight line, and don't know how they work, so should not be allowed anywhere near a jet. Their whole peer system also makes the co-pilot nothing more than a radio operator, unable to question the captain. Add the incompetence of the traffic controlers, a nation that is conditioned to following instructions and not thinking out of the box, and you will have for me an amusing string of accidents that I will relish reading about in years to come.

Life is cheap in India. 1000 people died last week because they are living on a flood plain. Whats a few hundred a year in aviation accidents matter? Good for aviation sales though. Go Airbus!

[rai]

As im reading this thread ive just been trying to sort out my paperwork to unfreeze my ATPL.

So here i am with just over 1500 hrs. Ive had top quality training at a well respected school and passed with flying colours (excuse the pun). Ive been lucky enough to work for two airlines in the uk and recieved high quality training from both, one on a boeing and one on an airbus. Without sounding too cocky i like to think ive worked hard and achieved a high standard thoughout my short career so far. Sim checks are going from strength to strength and i get a lot of positive feeback from the skippers i fly with. Am i ready for a command??... hell no!

Just when i start to think "ive got the hang of this", something happens that ive never seen before and blows away all that cocky confidence and my capacity along with it! Its then that the captain im with (who i was starting to think was incompetent because he couldnt bothered to make SOP altimeter calls) suddenly steps in and makes a calm and measured command decision based on his/her vast experience on this type (or at this airfield or with this type of weather etc) and sorts the situation leading to a safe outcome. No amount of training, top marks or natural ability can substitute that in my humble opinion.

[phantomcruiser07]

you really want 2 see if they have the ability? let them train under the jaa sylabus, god knows how many 19 y/o wannabe pilots would score remotely an average round EU region

[bia botal]

Age has little to do with it, experience and maturity has every thing to do with it. So if we consider the 25 year old captain who has say for the last 5 years flown ILS airfield to ILS airfield just what experience does he or she have to pass on to the new young FO. Sweet F.A. so it really does come down to training. Perhaps someone who operates in India could enlighten us all to the standard of training there. Companies like ryr, easy, etc rely on strict, intensive and seemly every changing sop's to try and keep out of trouble, do Indian airlines copy this practice or is the industry just to young there to have managed to get this level yet. I do understand that there has been a huge influx of experienced western pilots into the area over the last few years, perhaps the experience they bring will be enough to ensure that a safe operation can be achieved.

[rmac]

I have 800hrs TT and fly single pilot IFR in a light twin. I am 44 years old and have (non aviation) "command and judgement" experience coming out of my ears. This works in the air while the only ass(es) on the line are mine, and a few well informed passengers. I have flown IFR in some testing conditions, time and again I have had to learn new lessons the hard way, with no voice of experience in the other seat.

Do I think that if I changed my career and racked up 1000 hours on a 737 (less than a year I understand), that I would be ready to take a 100+ members of someone elses family on an aircraft that I was Captaining, without a significant amount of doubt in my mind. No I do not, it is not my place to learn at the expense of risking other innocent lives. In this stage I would be chronologically old, but "technically young".

Of course age is not every thing, really its the passage of time which is important. If at this stage of my life I flew as FO to a 5000hour 35 year old Captain, I would consider him/her to be "technically older" than myself as far as operating the aircraft is concerned, balanced with a good level of maturity and life skills. I would not be able to consider a 5000hr 25 year old captain in the same way, and would need to take a closer look at his/her maturity levels, before reaching a rounded conclusion as to "technical age".

In my professional life, which has had its own hairy moments, I have learned that age and maturity teach you to question your own judgement in a more timely and appropriate fashion. Some people get old and still never learn, but those who are still young have not had the chance to learn that they are not invincible, and therefore are a risk in an industry which, in a perfect world, wants to have a perfect no accident record.

Yes the military have younger pilots, but they also (excluding transportation) have a higher casualty rate due to the mission profiles.

Some one mentioned Guy Gibson and the dams raid. To be honest you would have to lack either judgement, doubt or both (but certainly not courage), to think that you could pull it off, and indeed more than half of 617 sqn failed to return from the raid, and they were not all shot down!
Gibson was taken off flying duties after two tours and was so restless he was always in trouble (mainly shagging other peoples wifes if Max Hastings is to be believed) that they put him in the air again in a Mosquito as a master bomber, where he eventually died, not during a raid, but because as his tolerance to danger grew, the raids were not enough and on the trip back he would drop down to low level to strafe enemy installations, and eventually got caught out.

There is a very good reason that the military needs young leaders, and it is almost diametrically opposite to the needs of a 100% safe air transport operation, experience and maturity has a very large part to play in the process IMHO

[RogerIrrelevant69]

"Some people seem to be getting mightily confused between age and experience. "

Yes they certainly are. Flew with some youngsters (18/19/20) in baesystems in Jerez who went straight into GB Airways (with 200+ hours) who were known by everyone there to be excellent. One ended up flying with another ex-student of Jerez who made LHS at 25. So you don't have to look as far as India.

[Doctor Cruces]

I worked for an airline who had an F/O in his early fifties. Thousands of hours in his logbook and several type ratings. He was so keen he even paid for type ratings on different aircraft out of his own money.

Top bloke. Commander? Not as long as he has a hole in the front of his face to stuff food in. Age and experience are not the only criterea here.

Same airline made a Commander a Training Captain as soon as he had the requisite number of hours to be so. He was young, keen, extremely good company and above all a very good airman and operator.

Training and culture also have their part to play and I think I may be happier with very young crew in some countries than in others.


Doc C

[Ashling]

I'd also observe that in several instances older experienced F/Os and Capts have failed to cut it when transferring from a low density operation to a high density loco one. The 19 yr old ex cadet who is now 25 knocks spots off them. Many of the cadets I fly with are as bright and capable as the people I flew with in the RAF. A few will upgrade on min time the others will take longer but when they are ready why deny them the opportunity ?

If you are using age as an arbiter you are predjudiced, pure and simple.

What we should really be addressing are the reports that certain carriers are putting people with an inappropriate level of experience/ability in the LHS.

[SAS-A321]

I have worked with many young indian guys on a ship and I must tell you I am not very impressed.

[AIEXPATS]

As several of us who use this I.D. are in the Training Deptartment for Air India or Air India Express, I can only share the following;

First Officer - type rated only (so right from the sim), 8 sectors on the Jumpseat, then 2 Assessment Sectors as PNF, then 3 Route Checks (of which one could be a PF) - and he / she is relased!
That's min. 5 (five) sectors as CM2 and away you go.

PICUS - 15 sectors. Then 2 route Check sectors and maybe 10 more sectors folowed by 2 Route Checks and released as P1/CM1 together with above.

Alot of pressure to move people through the system.
So min. experience = maximum reliance on the aircraft and its systems.

[alienpilot]

Syllabus is definitely not what you have listed. How about LOFT? The syllabus may not be exhaustive and may be they are trying to take refuge into min requirements fulfilled. Things were no different for years. There are low calibre expats floating around as well, you would agree. There are many who were no good anywhere but landed up in india. That is not to say some are not good. Easy to pass judgement by lot of people sitting thousands of miles away. If you would recall most incidents including mumbai airport closure last year involved experienced expats..... they dont outnumber indians by the way.

[alienpilot]

tupolov154, you may be wishing and hoping for accidents to happen in india for your reading which you are eagely waiting for, i wish you do that in your grave.
Its amazing instead of voicing informed and mature opinion or gather information some people write as if sun shines through their a*^se.

[Gooneyone]

Tupolev 154 said (Post #35) "Meacham field was full of em. and they all were 2 and 3 time exam takers, 300 hours plus, eventually given tickets on the condition that they never fly in the US."

Am I the only one to find this the most frightening thing in the entire thread??

[Seagul1]

well said alienpilot. Age is a number as they say. No replacement for experience but in terms of hours or monsoons not in years. If good training and standards are maintained age will not matter. Ive seen some very good very young guys and some very experienced old guys, dum asses who dont know their front side from thier back side. For all those wishing and betting on an accident in india hope it happens closer to your home so u can c it rather than read about it. its a shame.......:ugh:

[mini]

Guys, this is an old chestnut. The key word is judgement.

Years of experience, training etc are worthless if the attitude and aptitude of the recipient doesn't assimilate all this into sound judgement of a situation.

Some achieve this early in their careers, some later and some never. It needs individual assessment to determine.

Assuming it can come automatically is deeply flawed IMHO.

This applies to all leadership roles.

[Ignition Override]

Stator Vane:
We are the same age. My decision might be fairly obvious.
The point is simply to describe one of a large number of situations which are not always easy to evaluate by simply having young pilots memorize loads of data, 'flow patterns' etc and blindly follow book/SOPprocedures, especially on the last day of the trip.

Some gate agents only want to know "Are you ready to board?"
How many First Officers would quickly state-when already running late-that they are not comfortable with a given situation?

How many (very young) pilots would offload about 6,000 lbs of fuel (already on board-tankered for cost) before departing for an airport with only short runways?

[misd-agin]

Ignition Override (http://www.pprune.org/forums/member.php?u=18559)
Over 1000 posts and I obviously don't want a Personal Title which I could get just by clicking here (http://www.pprune.org/ptorder/ptorder.htm).

Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Down south, USA.
Posts: 1,475


http://www.pprune.org/forums/images/infopop/icons/icon2.gif
Stator Vane:
We are the same age. My decision might be fairly obvious.
The point is simply to describe one of a large number of situations which are not always easy to evaluate by simply having young pilots memorize loads of data, 'flow patterns' etc and blindly follow procedures, especially on the last day of the trip.

Some gate agents only want to know "Are you ready to board?"
How many First Officers would quickly state-when already running late-that they are not comfortable with a given situation?

How many (very young) pilots would offload about 6,000 lbs of fuel (tankered for cost) before departing for an airport with only short runways?


How about telling us your command decision instead of trying to guess at it? Your decision might be obvious to you but it's not obvious to all the lurkers. :ugh:

Did you go with only 2 generators (one engine, 1 APU) or decide that was too dangerous?

Is that configuration more dangerous than the two generator operation I dealt with today? My flight had 2 engine generators and no APU.

Which is more dangerous? Why?

Would you ever except two generator operations?

[Ignition Override]

Misd-again:
After twice asking the FO in private, for any concerns he might have (once I had to close the c0ckp1t door, so that our 'colorful' Lead FA 'fellow' from south Texas would leave us alone and not interject every 10 seconds...:rolleyes:), we both agreed to cancel the flight.

We had asked the two inbound pilots if they would accept it. They had said "No" just before they went to the hotel. My FO felt that the APU might be less reliable than an engine generator. Even with an inop APU generator, I would always cancel the flight with similar destination weather which was forecast to remain around the airport. Our contract allows us to cancel for inop autopilot, APU, or an engine generator, even manual pressur. with no special explanations.

With the huge level of outsourced maintenance, many of us are not so confident in less-than-normal system redundancies. And two line mechanics told us that they were ordered to do fewer line checks than necessary. Something wrong might be found. One was called by one of his company VPs.

[stagn8]

If an airline chooses to hire and fly young inexperienced crews then it doesn't take long for the pax who travel a lot to figure out what is going on. (They are the bored looking ones who know more than the cabin crew about what is really going on).

Pax select airlines often on the basis of being more likely to walk or drive home. I know I do. A good airline has well trained crews, with reliable captians and decently maintained aircraft. You pay more for this, and willingly, after all it is your life. So crew ability (and good maintenance) should be a competitive differentiator. Bring forth the airline that publishes the experience of its commanders along with the age of its aircraft !!

I also agree with the poster who pointed out military pilots have different objectives than civil ones !!

[GlueBall]

"...Did you go with only 2 generators (one engine, 1 APU) or decide that was too dangerous?
"Is that configuration more dangerous than the two generator operation I dealt with today? My flight had 2 engine generators and no APU.
"Which is more dangerous? Why?
"Would you ever accept two generator operations?. . ."
As a 74 captain at my company these matters would be governed by what's known as a "MEL" or "CDL" [minimum equipment list/configuration deviation list] . . . approved operating protocol that would not be according to the whims of crewmembers' individual or collective feelings. MEL, CDL, SOPs would not be effective if crews were allowed to individualize procedures. :ooh:

[320capt.]

I would agree with that.. the MEL.. CDL..SOP are the governing documents.. if there is a problem with going while you have 2 out of 3 generators then why go with say
one pack inop.. or one bleed inop.. Then we could all do things as we felt..

My copmany too has the the same procedures.. very rarely in some very exceptional circumstances would one consider over riding them. please do not bring up age..

In any case if the maintainence is shoddy why are you in this company anyway. Specially if the company is telling its maintainence personel to do infrequent checks. I would fear for my own life.. Is this what age teaches you?

[Bigmouth]

Sounds like a lot of young, low time captains weighing in with their opinions here and being mighty defensive about the issue.
But if we all agree that age and ability are unrelated, then let's get rid of the seniority system in a hurry and compete amongst ourselves for the jobs and salaries that are out there. Just like everybody else.
I'm all for a level playing field and being judged by my performance.

[GlueBall]

". . .But if we all agree that age and ability are unrelated, then let's get rid of the seniority system in a hurry and compete amongst ourselves for the jobs and salaries that are out there."
Seniority [date of hire] is based on length of service and has nothing to do with age and ability. In fact, many airlines have very senior "permanent F/Os" who could not qualify for the left seat. But these F/Os are still "senior" to junior F/Os.
It's not a matter of competing for jobs, it's about a privilege of bidding for base assignments, for vacation and for rostering. :ooh:

[320capt.]

Why are you again mixing things up. Seniority has nothing to do again with age. Its when you joined a company at whatever age 19 or59.

In any case if you wanna discuss the seniority issue please go to the correct thread there is a fairly long discussion on it. This is discussing another article

[groundbum]

I think you're all pulling examples of young captains out the air, and I'm sure there are lots of examples of these kind of people, but I also bet they are the exception and not the rule.

Lets face it you don't get to, say, 500 hours, and then plateau in terms of knowledge and skill. So more is better, at least until say 50 or so when you get jaded. As a passenger I would feel *much* safer knowing that the captain and FO are both very very experienced, with as many hours as possible.

Why? Because that way they have made tiny mistakes and booboos over the past 10 years or whatever. But luckily all the odd and weird tiny gotchas that can happen once 1000 hours have been seen before, and hopefully caught by the trainee FO and his/her experienced captain before they escalate to something major.

Whereas put two junior people on the flight deck and I am sure tiny things that don't happen very often will overwhelm the two inexperienced people and things will sprial nastily. Far Far better to make the mistakes as an FO, let the captain watch you dig yourself into an ever deeper hole, and then rescuse you when he's convinced you've scared yourself silly. That's sometimes the only way to learn. And it does take time and repetition.

(and no, I'm not a pilot, but have mentored and managed enough people to enjoy watching new people stuff it up totally, and then explain nicely a few things they could try differently next time).

[Helen49]

Groundbum.......what eminent sense. I totally agree. No doubt subsequent posts will endeavour to refute your experience!
H49

[8846]

Yes..that's a good point, basing, holidays e.t.c. should be based on date of joining - it's the only fair way really.

But command positions.... well we have a few things to consider here...

Commanding an Airbus/Boeing - whatever, is a learned skill.

People learn at different rates. A bright young thing who has been through RAF/BA selection will have demonstrated the ability to learn quickly - that's all. That's what the tests are about.

What several people are eluding to is wisdom:

'..experience and knowledge together with the power of applying them.'

Oxford English Dictionary

Now.. That's the quality that we're after.

How are you going to measure that?

Is age nothing more than a good starting point?

Has it got very little to do with it?

Any ideas? :confused:

[Ashling]

Every reputable airline will have a minimum experience level to be met prior to being considered for command. Hours, time on the line. A-lot of airlines overlay this with a seniority system which, in general, means that by the time your number comes up you have the minimum experience and often a great deal more. These seniority systems have therefore often prevented some very capable young operators gaining a command as early as they otherwise would of. With the advent of LOCO's all that is changing as in general they do not have a seniority system. So suddenly we are getting younger commanders. I'm not having a go at seniority systems, its just a fairly obvious observation.

The key here is minimum experience to be considered for command. You still have to pass a command selection and then training. That ought to look after the various variables mentioned here if the training department are doing their jobs properly. Unless, of course, you do not trust the training departments. Maybe in certain countries there is an issue but in the UK I feel the airlines get it right.

Surly the correct response is to applaud someones success whether they are 25 or 55 and to encourage those with the ability to push on and succeed. That success has been hard earned. Some of you sound like grumpy old men.

I do however totaly agree that we need to select and train the right people and if that is not happening in India or elsewhere it is a cause for great concern but it is not age that is the key factor.

As an aside you can train non tech skills effectively.

[Visual Calls]

Everyone's getting hung up on the age issue. The frightening thing is surely 1500hrs TT to get a command, as the Indians have apparently mooted. That rather more serious issue seems to be ignored.
If you're good enough, with good experience, who cares what age?
However, 1500hrs TT is just ridiculous.

[8846]

Ashling/Visual Calls

Perfectly put both.

A far more eloquent couple of posts than I was able to manage....

As another aside - Ashling - what do you mean by what you said about non-technical skills being taught effectively?

[Double Zero]

Re. Guy Gibson, there was a suggestion recently that he wasn't familiar with fuel selecting on his Mosquito which may well have led to his demise - anyway he was not over popular, though nowhere near to the degree of the hugely over-rated Bader.

More to the point, I was astonished to hear from someone I know that he's just gained airliner command - I've flown with him in light aircraft & he was exemplary, but in mid 20's seems far too young to me...

[Right Way Up]

Double Zero,
The fact is during WW2 there were many very young commanders who did jobs way beyond their years. The "picture boys" may not have been all they were cracked up to be but there were a lot that were. Nowadays a couple of seasons in UK charter for talented pilots are all that are needed to be competent Captains. Unfortunately young guys who become decent Captains tend to be subject to jealousy from the older guys who struggled to make it. I can remember "idiotic" comments about a 28 yr old Capt at Virgin who became a TRE at 31 who was excellent at what he did. I do remember having to drink alone with him in a bar after all the cabin crew had gone to a "happening place", but because he had no passport he was chucked out. :O
p.s. does anyone else remember the stunning goal that Michael Owen scored against the Argies. He was 18! Maybe if you are good enough you are old enough!

[Ignition Override]

TopSlide6:

My comments were only made in order to provoke a discussion, not provoke or insult anybody. It is my sincere belief that very little of one's delicate ego should be allowed into a c0ckpit or into a Pprune discussion. Read much further down to discover what I left out of the previous post.

Just two/three general questions come to mind. You stated that "Age and experience are not linked", or something like that. But I'm a slow learner.
If a pilot has flown more or less full-time since age 22, how are increases in age an experience not directly linked? But I'm certainly not the smartest type "of guy. It was my mistaken impression that more experience usually benefits "situational awareness. Maybe theory is, to some extent, an adequate substitute-for just some of the IOE hours. We Yanks often don't have nearly as much theoretical grounding as those east of the Atlantic. Some study guides here are a bit of a joke, regarding the 727 "FE written exam" etc.

Where in my previous have I said that older pilots are better, because of their age? Most of my learning has gone from 'my' First Officers-they run the show on the ground and I pace calling of checklists based upon their many duties and better memories of many things (and we have no computers to fly the old airplanes).

At the end of a Pink Floyd song (The Dark Side O.T.M.), the guy says "Good manners don't cost nothing...".
Well, no matter which Trans-atlantic misunderstandings pop up, you English guys have always produced the best rock and roll bands of all time (Mott. Deep P., Led Z...), and many excellent aircraft-and our guys were not required to pilot 2- or 4-engine bombers and transports solo!

[virga67]

As far as I know most countries in the world have a minimum experience requirement for the ATPL, in most if not all cases a TT of 1500 hours. With an ATPL and a type rating you meet the minimum requirements for captain. What is the big deal??? It's no rocket science, you know. Being in charge of the whole show is not that big a deal, just use common sense. I had my first command on a turbo prop at 23, first command on the 737 at 31. Guys in my company had their command on the 737 at 25 or 26. NO PROBLEM!!!!!!

[Visual Calls]

Virga
You're missing the point, the age is not the issue, it's the experience.
Yes, you can get an ATPL with 1500hrs, so yes, theoretically you can have a command, on anything from a Seneca to a 747. However, it is patently absurd to suggest that while 1500hrs is good enough experience to command a light aircraft it is also good enough to command a commercial jet.
Hence companies impose their own limits in the Ops Manual (which must, don't forget, be approved by the authorities, and can only be changed with the approval of same).
If you think you were good enough for a jet command at 1500hrs, you're either lying or mad.

[RAT 5]

Market tester. Include on the internet booking form.

Captain 1500 hours: 2 years experience, 1 month as captain:new F/O Price X

Captain 5000hours: 10 years expeience, 2 years as captain: new F/O Price 3X

Weather expectation, marginal. Rwy short, no ILS.

To continue booking select............

[Alpine Flyer]

I became a captain on a Dash 8 at age 25 after flying airline turboprops for 2200hours and GA airplanes for another couple of hundred. I am doubtless a better captain now after 10+ years on the left seat but I am convinced that I was a good captain even then.

I have flown with many 200hr copilots ever since and found that a lot more depends on training and proper selection than overall experience. I have flown with very few copilots with more than 3000hrs as ours usually get upgraded by then. Those I met were mostly very good though that doesn't mean those with fewer hours didn't cut the mustard.

More experience is good but I don't think that 10 years of experience can reasonably be mandated for captains.

[JustAnothrWindScreen]

There are many factors that effect who should or should not fly as a captain. Age is one of them. However, I believe a severe selection process and then excellent training is right up there near the top also.

I was leading combat missions at age 23 as a lieutenant with captains and majors on my wing. I have also flown flight engineer and copilot at several different airlines before flying captain. The time flown with the older captains was invaluable. Simply watching how they handled things and what they did in a multitude of different instances was pure gold and could not be gotten out of a book.

I am now retired, but when still flying, as I got older I became more cautious. I became more cautious in certain situations not because of my age but because I had learned over time of the pitfalls and gotchas that waited for the more aggressive.

The actual flying of the aircraft has little to do with being a captain. Whether you are vfr or in the weather or one aircraft has a higher workload than the other. Who cares. It is just assumed that you can do it and do it well, except for the newest of pilots.

As far as the airlines are concerned, if there is somewhat a shortage of pilots then there will be young captains and quick upgrades. Nothing more than supply and demand. The seat will be filled. With experienced personnel or inexperienced, but the seat will be filled.

[virga67]

Visual Calls,
The law says 1500 hrr TT is enough for an ATP. Companies then decide what the minimum requirements are to upgrade. All I'm saying is that you don't have to be Ace McCool himself to be a captain on anything. And I think the guys on the smaller equipment have it more difficult than the guys on the fancy jets, jets go above most of the weather and the turbo props stay in the clouds and ice all day. As captain on the turbo prop I had to work harder than on the 737, much more difficult conditions and smaller margins.
To everyone out there, it's no big deal to become capatain on a jet at the age of 25! As long as you have plenty experience, that's all that really matters.

[Rananim]

25 year old Captain and 19 year old First Officer?thats funny...dont tell the poor passengers.
Sign of the times I suppose...the aircraft fly themselves.Pilot sits there and tries not to touch anything in case he screws it up(Airbus)..
Modern airline pilot=flies by rote,flowscans by acronyms,memorizes briefings so each one is the same,engages AP at 500'/disengages at 300',values SOP over airmanship,thinks 3000 hours is experienced;)...you know the type,you can actually see their brain working 10min to TOD as they try and run through the approach set-up acronyms..all by rote and procedural memory..items actioned at specific points,signs off at 10000 on again at TOD and they'll squirm in their seat if you go outside this little set pattern..their idea of a visual is follow the magenta with VNAV..its all monkey see monkey do..7 years of that doesnt a Captain make.
What was this "kid" doing in the right seat of a jetliner at 18 to begin with?
Experience and age are inextricably linked..no two ways about that and please no comparisons to Guy Gibson..that was wartime and they were carrying bombs not passengers.

[Stall Inducer]

"Experience and age are inextricably linked..no two ways about that" -
I have to disagree, a 25 year old Capt who has been flying since the age of 18 is infinitely more experienced than a late start who has been flying for 1 year in the RHS having started at the age of 35. Passenger perception is that the 35 year old is the more experienced but the reality is it's hours and time flying the aircraft not age. Not only this but a pilot who started training at a younger age tends to be quicker to learn then a late start. I agree with what many other have said on this page - its not the age that counts but experience AND ability. Experience doesn't always = ability just as age doesn't always = experience. With my employer you can have all the experience in the world, and on paper be ready for command but it's the command selection that decides if you also have the ability. The disturbing factor is the lack of hours quoted as 1500hrs for a jet Capt where experience is just not in the equation.

[7Q Off]

If you have an experience of 1500 hs no matter what your age is. If your age is 25 years old or 50, 1500 hs means yo have 1500 hs. Period.
You should upgrade if you are qualified and experienced enough. :ok:

[JustAnothrWindScreen]

1500 hours in the big scheme of things is nothing. If you want to tell yourself that you are fully qualified and ready at 1500 hours, go ahead.

[7Q Off]

JustAnothrWindScreen: Of course. I never said you should upgrade at 1500 hs. I said that Hs are Hs no mater your age. If you haver 4000 hs at 25 is the same if you have them at 40.
Experience is measure in Hs, not in Age.

[JustAnothrWindScreen]

7Q, I basically agree with you. I do believe that age brings a more mature outlook on things and on how you deal with situations and people. I believe that dealing with people, ie the crew, passengers, and dispatch etc etc etc, improves with age. Maybe not for everyone but for most. Everyone is an individual and there are superb young captains and incompetent older captains.

In my opinion you need enough hours to know the job and to have matured. But hours to me have never meant experience. Where and how those hours were accumulated mean all the difference in the world. A military fighter pilot that flys 250 hours in a year vs a young commuter pilot that flys 1000 hours in the same year are not equal. It simply is not the same thing. Please, this is not to start a military/civilian slug fest.

[320capt.]

As i have already said in my first post i say again .. (for those who missed it)
Please do not take everything written in that report on its face value.
There are NO airlines upgrading pilots with 1500 hrs to command jets in INDIA. However prople are moving up quicker compared to the 10 yr in the right seat drill for a very long time.

The report is just misguided..However my opinion remains the same on the age not really being linked to experience bit.

[Firm Touchdown]

I know a chap that was a B737 TRI at 26 and TRE at 27. He is now 36 and in charge of Airbus Training at a large airline.

Age is not relevant. Experience, aptitude and attitude is!!!

[kontrolor]

just a food for thoughts - those who are applying war time heroes to commercial flying - one note - they had to fly max 50 sorties and then the war was over for most bomber crews. If they were not dead in the process. Flying A320 20 days per month twice each time in ever-chaning environment at 25...hmmm
When I was flying in the military, first lieutenent was aged 23-24 and he was already flying mig-21. But he was still under silent training from others. Here you have 25 years old cpt and 19 years young copilot... with all due respect, but commanding a commercial jet is not just about flying skills.

[KaptinZZ]

The role of airline Captain is more a state of mind than age. That state of mind comes with training and a readiness to accept the responsibility.
I've flown with much younger pilots and much older pilots, and some of the older should never have been promoted. It's not their ability, or lack of, but a readiness to confront a situation when it occurs, and that's in a person's makeup to a large degree. Technical knowledge is necessary and important but its the approach made by the individual that saves the day.

I recall reading in the accident report that the Captain on the JAL 747 that ploughed into a mountain 21 years ago just abrogated his responsibility completely (something the Japanese are wont to do when the $hit hits the fan), looking out the window when the FO and FE were desperate for some guidance.

Of course, technical knowledge and manipulative skill play a part.
I've flown with Japanese FO's and Captains, and Indian FO's, and I can assure you the worst Indian FO was better than the best Japanese Captain, and the Indian FO's were less than half the Japanese Captains' ages, some late teens/early 20's.

The Indian pilots with whom I've flown have all been very capable. Indians seems to apply themselves to the task, any task, very diligently. They strive to be best when many others rate 'good enough' as adequate.

Yes sir, it's training and attitude more than age, and I think 1500 hours in the RHS is enough provided the FO's been diligent about his tasks and is rated as suitable for upgrade.

You can have a 55 yo Captain with 20,000+ hours but it doesn't follow that he's better than a 25 yo with 5,000 hours even though he probably should be.

The Indian maintenance would be more cause for concern than the ages of the crew up front.

Airline pilots have ever made a big deal of instructors having 10 hours experience 1000 times over, and so it is with airline pilots, but perhaps 1,000 hours 10 times over.

You'll never experience it all even if you're 100 yo and have 50,000 hours experience because you're operating a machine in a dynamic environment.

[Mister Geezer]

Well during the other week the combined age on my flight deck was 46. I am 25 and my F/O was 21.

I am in my second airline job and I got my command after a year on line when I was 24 with my second airline and I had no previous command experience. That might perhaps raise an eyebrow (especially when I fly a steam driven jet which is nearly as old as I am!) but I have never felt out of my depth and I have had a few things thrown at me in my time in the left seat! I have found it fascinating looking at the personalities and the abilities of the F/Os that I now fly with.

The difference in flying ability between 1500hrs and 2000hrs will taper off significantly when compared to 500hrs and 1000hrs. The difference between 2500hrs and 2000hrs will taper off even more. In other words, if you can't fly the type you are trained on after 1500 hours then will another 1500 make a significant difference? Note the word significant - some change will of course be apparent.

What is key though are the personality and the attitude towards the job. I love flying with F/Os who are assertive and proactive and not reactive to the job! In my limited experience these are the main traits that I believe that make an effective commander. After all an effective commander is an effective manager! Tale tale signs of a 'switched on' F/O are for example having the paperwork (manual load sheets/voyage report) prepped before the first sector or perhaps having the VNAV profile in the FMS before the TOD instead of it being a after thought as is sometimes the case!!! In other words it is the difference between a F/O who gets the job done without prompting and the opposite. Experience to a small extent will make a difference but the personality and attitude are key aspects and these traits are established long before we climb into an aircraft for the first time.

[Ignition Override]

Topslide 6:

Your clarifications made more sense to me.

When people deduce their own conclusions about sweeping statements which simply try to contrast various levels of pilot experience, hundreds (thousands?) of misunderstandings have emerged over the years on Pprune and other websites, "Flying" and "Aviation Week & ST" magazines. Maybe even in the old "MAC (now AMC) Flyer" and the Navy's "Approach" magazine. Your accurate comments, along with those of Alpine Flyer etc explained your thoughts and put them in better context.
Some pilots' comments regard views from the (our own) past, looking forwards. Older guys are sometimes misunderstood because readers therefore turn the perspective "clock" backwards-but this is often not the intent, or the thinking.

An average (or less..) pilot can become average, maybe much better after various types of experience (more aircraft and city-pairs with weather).
The more natural younger pilots who are really aggressive learners and much more astute (FE and/or First Officer) observers than I ever was, naturally become quite excellent pilots after many years.

Many of us simply feel that almost everyone gets much better with age etc-but-this does Not imply that many young pilots are not quite good, whether as GA Instructor, airline FO, Captain, whatever. Therein lies at least one common misunderstanding.
I appreciate your diplomatic effort to explain the perspective of a younger, highly capable pilot.

We had a guy who made CV-580 Captain at the end of his (first) year on probation! Extremely rare here for a large airline in the mid-80s.
He was considered a very natural pilot(still is), always in tune with common sense and procedures. He always sees the big picture from various angles.

[bravic2007]

Agree with u ...add another 500 from my side it will be an expat captain in command making a hole in the ground....In the last few years with the boom in india got loads of expats in india... and guess what most incidents/accidents had an expat captain... also with experience in europe/usa... Maybe getting bottom of the barrel to come hear .. also indian f/o transition from a Cessna 152 to B-737 directly ..we dont have much of general aviation... but recently getting expat f/os they are not too hot too..

[Just another student]

Interesting subject.

In my humble point of view, 1500hrs although on paper may meet the requirements, is simply not enough to warrant a command position. Whether you are 25 or 55 does not matter, 1500 is the key figure. Of course with age you get life experience which is more than useful, however if you have the right outlook in life from the start and recieve the correct training, what is wrong with a youthful Captain?

In my last job we had a 23 year old chap as Capt on the ATR, he had been flying since his parents had first decided to ´have an early night´ and by word of mouth and experience was / is a very good pilot. Sure, for me at the start it was strange to see a younger guy than myself (me being 24 at the time) Captaining such a plane, but I soon realised why he was in that position.

For me as a recently qualified FO, at 1500hrs I will be nowhere near ready for a shot at Command, I know this and have never thought other wise nor would I want it. I am learning my trade, I make small mistakes, but over all I am pleased with the way things are going and have no illusions of grandeur.

I would like to think that I am doing a good job as an FO, but for me aged 25, Captaincy is a long way off, with much experience to be gained and things to learn on the way.

Its wrong to generalise, some people aged 25 are ready, some like myself are far from that, some will never be ready. Take each individual case on its own merits and if someone has acheived Captaincy at a young age on the basis of his / her ability and experience then credit to them :)

[Ashling]

8846

Sorry its taken me a couple of days to get back to you, been busy working, just for a change ...

Non Techs. A vast area covering all the management and airmanship aspects (eg SA, Capacity, Prioritisation) of flying an aircraft and like any other skill they can be taught and developed. Otherwise why have CRM courses or task management tools such as ANC, DODAR, GRADE, CCCCC etc and why have the assessment process score these skills if they cannot be taught. Obviously, as with any skill, the more you practise the better you get especially if you are guided as you develop. I believe that proper guidance and instruction can accelerate the development process. You see that all the time in sports. What sometimes worries me is that once you qualify in the RHS or the LHS you are pretty much left to your own devices by the training system save for recurrent sim and SEPs which tend to be dominated by regulatery requirements.

FOs would develop more rapidly if given more in the way of development flights and sims and the same goes for Captains. Snag is that all costs money. Much more could also be made of video analysis of how you managed a scenario in the sim. I'd also feel a-lot more discussion and education could take place around incidents and the lessons to learn from them especially ones that happen on your own fleet and operation. Perhaps an extra day on SEPs purely on flight safety, crm and management as well as appropriate publications.

In the RAF I did sims every 2 months and benefitted greatly from them and as a crew we spent many hours together discussing and rehearsing our response to various situations. Without these things I would not have developed as quickly.

All that said you can't spoon feed people, if they aren't motivated and don't work hard then no amount of effort on the part of the instructor will change a-lot.

Hope that makes some sort of sense, I'm a touch bleary eyed at the mo.

Oh and kontroler flying a military aircraft is not just about flying skills either. I do realise Guy Gibson and Bader were not popular with all by a long shot. Point was that they were young men in positions of huge responsibility who discharged their duties very effectively. I was not suggested a commercial pilot should seek to emulate their management styles.