Florida's pilot factory

[st7860]

Florida’s ‘pilot factory’ – amFIX - CNN.com Blogs (http://amfix.blogs.cnn.com/2009/05/28/floridas-pilot-factory/)

A recent plane crash in Buffalo New York that killed some 50 people led to questions about the training of those in the cockpit. Those questions led CNN to The Gulfstream Training Academy in Fort Lauderdale, Florida.
The Academy promises to train amateur pilots who aspire to fly for a commercial airline in just three months. Students pay $30,000 in tuition and in return, the Academy provides cheap, co-pilots-in-training for Gulfstream International Airlines as they work to increase their hours of flying time.
Gulfstream’s website promotes this part of their training on its website saying, “Gulfstream Training Academy’s First Officer Program offers airline-bound aviation professionals training and experience at an actual airline flying real flights for Gulfstream International Airlines.”
After 12 weeks of training, students serve as First Officers, also known as co-pilots, on Continental Connection flights in Florida and the Bahamas that are operated by Gulfstream International. They get 250 hours of paid on-the-job-training, in addition to the 300 hours they need to qualify for the program.
That’s a red flag for veteran pilots like Pat Moore who find the training tactic questionable. “I don’t know how they can market that as training for these co-pilots while at the same time providing revenue service for paying passengers.”
Most major airlines require co-pilots to have a minimum of 1,500 hours of flight time. That’s three to five times the amount of some students entering Gulfstream’s First Officer program.
“I really don’t want somebody in the right seat that’s just learning, that’s gaining experience, said Moore. “I want an experienced crew. When I buy an airplane ticket, that’s what I’m paying for.” He compares it to going to a medical student for healthcare instead of a doctor.
Continental Airlines told CNN, “We expect our partners to adhere to the highest safety standards.”

But, there have been other recent plane crashes involving pilots from Gulfstream Academy, including a Colgan Air crash that killed 50 people as their plane neared Buffalo, New York. In 2004, two pilots, both graduates of Gulfstream Academy, died near Jefferson City, Missouri after taking a Pinnacle Air plane on a joy ride up to 41,000 feet. They crashed after losing control of the plane. The National Transportation Safety Board blamed “the pilots’ unprofessional behavior” and “poor airmanship.” And in 2003, a pilot of a private airplane, who was still training at Gulfstream, crashed into another plane off the coast of Deerfield Beach, Florida, killing all five people aboard both airplanes.
“The one thing that ties them all together is poor airmanship,” said Captain Jack Casey, Chief Operating Officer of Safety Operating System, an aviation consulting firm. “You cannot build sophisticated airline pilot skills on top of a soft foundation.”
This “pilot factory” as some veteran pilots call the academy, is a quick ticket into the cockpit, which can be very attractive to perspective pilots who want to fly but don’t want to spend years building up enough hours flying private planes.
One pilot, who did not want to be named, finds the process alarming. “The captain has to work as a captain and an instructor. It’s troubling that they don’t disclose it to the public.”
Gulfstream Academy defends its program, telling CNN, “Gulfstream does an outstanding job training commercial pilots, and it has done so for nearly two decades and thousands of pilots in an FAA-approved program. Every U.S. commercial carrier has pilots who’ve received their training here.” Indeed, the Academy says over 1700 pilots trained at Gulfstream found work with commercial airlines.
And, graduates of the program speak highly of it.
Still, long-time pilots warn their career path should not be rushed because they believe that could ultimately compromise safety.
“We’re talking about lives here,” says Pat Moore.” “This is not, ‘Gee, I like flying airplanes, I think it’s cool.’ This is – if I make a mistake and I’m not trained properly or my crew is not trained properly people can be injured or die. And I don’t know if we’re taking this seriously enough in this country anymore.”

[GrandPrix]

Gulfstream makes every Captain be an instructor. Whether they want to or not.
This scab owned and run outfit needs to be exposed for their borderline illegal shoddy operation. They just got fined more than $1 million for neglecting FAR duty legalities. I feel for their captains who are left to be single pilot IFR baby sitters.
The real culprit is the Miami FAA FSDO that has jurisdiction over this fly by night passenger carrying travesty. But it is well known in the business that if you want to run an airline operation in the USA with little to no oversight, base it in Miami. If they kick you out of Miami, transfer to the San Juan FSDO.
The banana republic mentality at its finest.

[Bealzebub]

The right hand seat has been allowed to become a profit centre for an increasing number of carriers around the world. It is outrageous that this is being allowed to happen with such poor oversight and regulation by those authorities. Either they, or the insurance companies will ultimately put an end to this increasingly widespread practice. These type of occurances will probably cause the insurance companies to throw the first spanner in the works. The regulator will respond when the media heat starts to get too uncomfortable.

The right hand seat of an airliner was always intended to be a place for an appropriately experienced and adequately trained or supervised professional pilot to occupy. It was not intended to be a theme park experience for those who could cough up the cash. Fare paying passengers are right in their expectations of a complete professional crew. A First Officer who is themselves paying the carrier for the experience does not properly fulfill that criteria in the minds of a great many people.

That aside, it is the airline company who accepts this risk in return for a reduction in its costs and an increase in its income. The passenger who pays for the ticket is none the wiser unless (as in this example) the practice is highlighted on the nightly news.

[411A]

That’s a red flag for veteran pilots like Pat Moore who find the training tactic questionable. “I don’t know how they can market that as training for these co-pilots while at the same time providing revenue service for paying passengers.”


I wonder if he knows about many European airlines that have 250 hour 'wonders' in the RHS, with revenue passengers?

The right hand seat of an airliner was always intended to be a place for an appropriately experienced and adequately trained or supervised professional pilot to occupy. It was not intended to be a theme park experience for those who could cough up the cash. Fare paying passengers are right in their expectations of a complete professional crew.



Yup.

Perhaps a few of our European/UK management types in the airline industry there might like to reconsider the modus operande regarding very low time First Officers, and their use on passenger carrying revenue flights.:rolleyes:

[st7860]

there's a few of those factories in Canada too

[bereboot]

About being a babysitter for low time f/o 's in europe.
It doesn't happen so much anymore in my company ( maybe because of the economics :eek:) , my co-pilot collegues are now usually over 1000 hrs , many with military backgrounds.
As a non line training captain I sure felt sometimes being one , not to say being a babysitter , and a few young co-pilots really tried to kill me as to speak !
Especially in busy summer months , getting a bit tired after day 3 or 4 , I really paid attention to whom I was flying with !

[act700]

411A, you took the words out of my mouth.

If in the US there is Gulfstream, and maybe a couple of others, then Europe is at it as a whole.

Here I go again: In +/- 10 years I'll be taking the train, and steamship for longer voyages!

Experience levels are going downhill.
Although the BUF crash, may not be experience related. Like a buddy of mine said, that has nothing to do with experience (stall recovery)-you learn that at the beginning of your flight training.

[CAT III C]

whereas the training system may be flawed, the first thing to check is the proficiency check system..

if he wasnt capable (god rest his soul) who cleared him?.. and assuming everbody did their job and that the check pilot made an accurate assessment, its only if u see a recurring pattern of non-professionalism can u start blaming the "system"

its rather unfortunate to see captains calling these fo's killers just because their traning system(i.e these captains) was so redundant u cud have a monkey fly planes..

i believe if there are a system of checks . and i mean practical checks, companies will be forced to change their training systems eventually.

y do ppl forget their first 1000 hrs?

[BigGrecian]

To me this summarises FAA primary training perfectly.

A complete lack of standardisation and the fact that becoming a pilot is now becoming an attendance course.

[ion_berkley]

I don't for a moment disagree with assertions above that 1000+hours should be a minimum to take the RHS of a commercial passenger flight. But I'm curious what peoples opinions are as to the appropriate way to gain those hours and the breadth of experience that should go along with them. It obviously isn't just chugging around the sky in a 152 for 5 or 6 years, so whats the ideal path(non military)? And is it vaguely practical for someone with realistic financial constraints?

[Uncle_Jay]

- Fly freight in winter until you get 2000 hours.
- Actually I think lots more time in a basic trainer would be helpful for basic airmanship skills, which were clearly lacking in the Colgan and Turkish crashes.

[CargoOne]

Flying privatly Cessna/whatever piston for a prolonged period (over 5 years let's say) often makes pilot no longer suitable for airline environment, because along with raw flying skills (good) he also getting adopted to single pilot, light aircraft, VFR etc. Very recently we had to say goodbye to FO with as much as 4000 hrs SEP (and very good background references), after struggling for 300 hours on the right seat of airliner it become clear he cannot adopt and follow CRM, SOP, performance calculations, situation awareness in congested terminal areas etc, while most of our 300 hrs TOTAL time young FOs have absolutely no problem with it.

[act700]

BigGrecian, before you get all worked up about the FAA's training standards, hold your horses. Caus what I've seen here in Euroland is plain scary! I mean I'm scared $hitless about "what" (and I mean pilots) has been certified or allowed into the sky by JAA. And I've had plenty of sphinxter tightening experiences flying freight all over the place, N.America and Europe.

Having had the (mis) fortune to experience both systems, I can only say the the Yanks approach is a practical one, one that will save your a$$ one day, one that will come in usefull.
The JAA way is, that you can explain, draw, graph out, and formul-ate everything in the previous sentence! Doing it, however, well...
FAA flight training is a lot tougher than here. That's a fact.

FAA oversight, that's another thing, caus the "money talks, bs walks" principle applies (a lot).

Bottom line is, Airmanship is dying, everywhere, faster here in Europe than in the US.
Why do you think airplane manufacturers are building these idiot proof/computerized airplanes? (I'm not trying to start an Airbus is crap debate)


Uncle_Jay/ion_berkley: I agree with the basic trainer theory, as in flight instructing. That's where you "confirm" your basic skills.
I don't know if it would be appropriate to put a hard number on this prerequisite experience, before moving on to an airliner. Remember, quality over quantity.
Flying freight would just be bonus.

As far as financial constraints; thousands of pilots have climbed the ladder in the US system and been fine. It's called paying your dues. In fact, that way, you appreciate what you have achieved. I don't regret it at all.

What is really annoying is listening to these Euro-wonder pilots whine about how bad they have it.
How freaking bad can it be when you get into an airliner with that whopping 250 hours? Oh, right, you had to go throught that rigorous MCC training.

[G-SPOTs Lost]

BigGrecian
To me this summarises FAA primary training perfectly.

A complete lack of standardisation and the fact that becoming a pilot is now becoming an attendance course


Errrr thats total BS, Im British and I have done 15 or so FAA/JAA combined LST's / LPCs its the FAA bit that I worry about cos if you make a mess of it its red button pressed and the sound of the ramp lowering. None of this JAA "Show me that again" I have UK & FAA ATP's.

The groundschool exams are laughable on the FAA but backed up with an Oral which on occasion can last 120 mins which is tough.

Never worry about JAA checking, but FAA checking makes me really concentrate

[flash8]

FAA flight training is a lot tougher than here. That's a fact.

A fact that most people who have experience of both will generally disagree with, yes.

[E.Z. Flyer]

One point is that the minimum standards are enough to get started, but not ever enough to be as accomplished as one might like to be. Instead, it appears more common for flight schools to use "student pilots" as their flight jockeys to learn on the job, accumulating hours, but not necessarily conforming to a discipline that teaches and entrenches principles and aspects of actually learning to fly. The student is trapped for having paid for the schooling only to learn instead it was not really the lesson they paid for? For that, the FAA imposed a fine of how a flight school recorded/logged their student pilots’ hours as actual flight experience when in fact they were merely going through the motions without gaining the experience required. One might expect a law suit by those students that felt duped by the school as they certainly paid the price for the lesson... Or, at $20/hr wages, unlimited flight training should also be instilled as an airline requirement for F/O qualification until fulfilling enough hours to be considered genuinely qualified to fly in all flight conditions. The fight for the two person crew and demoting the flight engineer is proving to be a fatal flaw to attaining the best possible career path most every student pilot seeks as they begin to follow their own ambitions and certainly that which the FAA intends to enforce.

[411A]

The groundschool exams are laughable on the FAA but backed up with an Oral which on occasion can last 120 mins which is tough.

Yup.
I found it astounding that some Captains with UK/Europen ATPL's utterly failed the FAA oral exam for an FAA type rating.

Gotta positively know your stuff with the FAA inspector, otherwise...no sale.
Flying...as well, on a heavy jet.

[ZFT]

Not agreeing or disagreeing with previous posts, but can someone explain why a typical FAA approved type rating course is approx half the duration of a JAA approved course?

[kwachon]

I have been an FAA ATP and Type Rating Examiner for more years than I like to remember and have a couple of points to make concerning check rides etc.

I Hold both JAA and FAA tickets and am currently an Examiner here in India, I say that because a lot of new Indian CPl holders have just come through the American system and are looking for their first F/O position.

When I give a check, I make full use of all the time for the oral, I have been known to go for 4 hours on more than one occasion mainly because I do not want to rush the process and to fully satisfy myself that the candidate knows what is what. On the other hand I have had orals that lasted less than 5 minutes but that is for another day.

Regarding the sim or aircraft check, it becomes very apparent within minutes whether the candidate knows what he/she is doing, I always try to put them at ease and do make allowances for nerves etc, we are not all perfect. I have to say, my client pass rate was almost 90% until coming to India, here the level of technical knowledge is very poor, flight skills follow that same trait, one reason for this is most of the candidates coming through have been funded to the tune of some $60000 plus by their family and unfortunately, the schools in the US just do not seem to have any idea what these folks will be doing when they return to India, they just want the money and send them home whilst waiting for the next one to come along. The rich kids make it here through family status and contacts as well as some rather under the table transactions.

The government is trying to clean up this system but when the underhand activities are at all the levels of the DGCA, it is very difficult.

The problems that have emerged from the Gulfstream Acadamy are about to surface over here and it is only a matter of time before we all read about it.

Regarding the time frame difference for getting typed by JAA and FAA, they are quite frankly, that the Europeans are still working on 50 year old knowledge and testing. Since when do you have to do a landing performance problem based on an L1011 landing on grass which is wet and greater than 2 inches long!

At least in the states they have managed to streamline the training both in the aircraft and the classroom. The last line though is still strong, that of the Examiner, that standard thankfully in most FSDO's that I know is still very high and I hope will remain so.

KW:ok:

[act700]

kwachon,

"Regarding the time frame difference for getting typed by JAA and FAA, they are quite frankly, that the Europeans are still working on 50 year old knowledge and testing. Since when do you have to do a landing performance problem based on an L1011 landing on grass which is wet and greater than 2 inches long!"

Well said.

[Jet_A_Knight]

Flying privatly Cessna/whatever piston for a prolonged period (over 5 years let's say) often makes pilot no longer suitable for airline environment, because along with raw flying skills (good) he also getting adopted to single pilot, light aircraft, VFR etc.

That is absolute horse****.:ugh:

Where I come from, many, many airline pilots have successfully transitioned from extensive single pilot IFR operations in high performance piston and turbine twins into multicrew jet airliner operations - it is not rocket science.

It is far easier for a pilot with extensive single pilot experience to transition to jet multicrew ops, than it is for a magenta wunderkind to revert back to raw data/ basic instrument flying sans automation when things go off the rails.

Experience, eh! Who needs it?:hmm:

[Will Fraser]

Jet A Knight- adamantly agree and you frame the basic issue for me.

Transition from 5k hours in singles, light twin is a type change.

One could argue that a sim child is making a transition into aviation itself, from a separate world without sufficient handling/weather experience.

If that's accurate, the argument becomes "what is more important", CRM, rosters, and fuel burn, or flying the a/c.

[Re-Heat]

Perhaps a few of our European/UK management types in the airline industry there might like to reconsider the modus operande regarding very low time First Officers, and their use on passenger carrying revenue flights.
Well, he would be shocked to find quality airlines such as BA, BOAC, Air France, Lufthansa, KLM and Iberia have all trained cadet pilots safely for many years.

He might also be more shocked to find that junior fast jet pilots carrying live weapons may frequently have fewer than 500 hours total flying experience.

Quality, not quantity is the name of the game.

Problem with today's environment is that every single operator thinks they are quality and treats regulation limits as an operational goals rather than limits that should be well-avoided - ranging from flight time limitations to minimum training time.

Of course, the real carriers who use cadet pilots allow their training teams discretion to fly more circuits on base training / more sim sessions etc. When you pay to fly, you don't have that luxury...

It is far easier for a pilot with extensive single pilot experience to transition to jet multicrew ops, than it is for a magenta wunderkind to revert back to raw data/ basic instrument flying sans automation when things go off the rails.
There are many exceptions to that broad statement...

[Rednex]

Very different in Europe than America. Have trained several 200 hour cadets fresh from there type rating and they are excellent, much easier to train and almost always do much better compared to someone who has flown turbo props, high hour instructor etc. Maybe the FAA should make it difficult for people to gain comm licences, or start a type of qualification for pilots who are aimming to be airline pilots ( Commercial licence on steroids). Also why don't airlines make new joins do a full typerating? Not a SIC rating.
Just out of intrest, why do US airlines allow crew to live all over the place?? Long haul would be an issue but if your a shorthaul pilot why not make crew live within 60 minutes of there base?
It seems that maybe the FAA should look at other countries procedures with regards to low hour FOs.

[Colla]

And have you maby thought about there are maby 5 times more pilot training going on in just the state of Florida than any part in Europe.. Only that makes the odds of an accident even bigger in FL

FAA concentrates on flying and orals and maby not so much on the written parts.

JAA requires alot more theoretical studying, but the checkrides is a piece of cake.

And yes I have licenses from both authorities.

[MoodyBlue]

Re-Heat, very well said, and well done to counter some of the oversimplified views on the matter.

I was a 250-hour wonder myself 27 years ago (actually, 235 hours and 17 minutes), have flown with many hundreds of them since on medium and heavy jets, trained scores of them. As you say, it's about quality (of both selection and training!), and about providing the amount of training that is needed i.s.o. the amount that the individual or the company is willing to pay for.

I want to tread carefully here, but the one's I've seen getting in trouble in training were often not the 250-hour wonders.

[Stop Stop Stop]

I wonder if he knows about many European airlines that have 250 hour 'wonders' in the RHS, with revenue passengers?



I think this is often the norm these days in Europe. However, some certain European airlines have jet captains operating with only just over six times this amount and possibly less real experience if you don't count hours built and logged as a cruise relief pilot. Some of these captains only have six months' experience as a first officer before being given 'the ship!'

Would 411A be horrified by that?

[Carnage Matey!]

Regarding the time frame difference for getting typed by JAA and FAA, they are quite frankly, that the Europeans are still working on 50 year old knowledge and testing. Since when do you have to do a landing performance problem based on an L1011 landing on grass which is wet and greater than 2 inches long!

All that 'Performance A' BS occurs during the ATPL ground school, long before anybody gets a type rating, so it doesn't answer the question of why does a FAA type rating take half the time of a JAA one. The FAA may be working on more modern testing for their ATPLs but given that the questions are all available to buy in advance under freedom of information rules it's not really much of a test.

[DA50driver]

Please keep in mind that most pilots in the US have university degrees as well as the flying experience(not all, but a good chunk). It makes for a better rounded individual in the long run, and I don't know of anyone in my circle of friends that studied the answers only to pass the written tests.

I think a big part of the problem is the quickie schools. I spent a good chunk of my life at the airport learning to fly over a span of approximately 5 years. I learned more listening to the old timers than any textbook or King video could ever teach. I spent a year flying freight in icy conditions single pilot. Without the old guys advice I would be dead.

I also spent some time at one of the big Aviation Universities in the northern US. It was the blind leading the blind, 300 hour pilots imparting their wisdom to other students and instructors.

I would suggest that we set a higher standard for our profession. Require a 4 year university degree in something besides basket-weaving. In addition there should be a minimum time spent in training that will allow people to actually absorb the knowledge required, as opposed to rote memorization.

Finally I think we should do away with the uniforms. That would eliminate all the attention seekers that enter our business just because they like the glory walk through the terminal. (They haven't realized that most people snicker at them behind their backs. The public has figured out that teenagers at McDonalds makes more than you. Not much glory left).

[MarkerInbound]

Most of the type rating programs I've seen run 80-100 class room hours with 6-7 sims and some fixed base training time thown in. For a long time, type rating courses had you "build" the airplane. The FAA has come to realize that if you can't do anything about it, there's no reason to worry about it. For example, there are 3 temp sensors that will cause a pack trip in a 727. You can read two of those temperatures on the F/E's panel. Do you really need to know what temperature sets off the third sensor? I spent 15 minutes one day with a FAA inspector discussing which bus powered a warning light, even the other two Feds in the room were shaking their heads. Light comes on, it's telling you X, the checklist will have you do Y, next question.

[MarkerInbound]

Rednex,

The ground school training for a SIC is the same as a PIC at US airlines. The checkride is about the same, SIC don't have to do steep turns, no flap landings and if it is a 3 or 4 engine, they don't have to perform a landing with 2 engines inop. They don't have to schedule a FAA/ADE person for the checkride if it's just at the SIC level which makes it simplier for the airline.

As to living within 60 minutes of your base, I've known pilots who've had their base change 5 times in a years.

[stilton]

In case your college education did not allow you to understand DA50 there are some very good reasons for uniforms. It needs to be clear who are crewmembers and who are not, especially in an emergency when passengers are looking for guidance in an evacuation for example (never understood how SWA get's away with out a clearly recognisable one for their FA'S)




Don't know about snickering, I would be interested to meet a teenage Mcdonalds employee making more than any Airline Pilot.



You seem to have a small chip on your shoulder old chap, turned down by the Airlines were you ?

[GlueBall]

I have found most new pilots to have an aversion for manual flying, afraid to disconnect A/T and A/P in a timely manner.

The classic upset occurs when the automatics has an anomaly and when the new pilot then attempts to correct it by introducing more automatics. Often I have to tell the new pilot: "If the airplane is not doing what you want it to do, go manual momentarily and stabilize the flight path, put the airplane where you want it, then reengage the automatics. Don't wait until you're 300 feet over, or 20 knots slow, or 1 mile off your SID/STAR track, grab the wheel now and correct." :eek:

[radial090]

glueball

its unfair to blame the new pilots, it depends on the training they have recieved, two completely different schools. One stresses the manual flying and raw data skills are necessary in case everything goes wrong on a dark a stormy night in a bad place, the other one thinks that the the autopilot is more accurate and allows for a less stressful "management", of the flight deck and the chances of you having a failure in modern aircraft that you are without a autopilot are virtually non existent.

So blame the instructors

[Tee Emm]

I make full use of all the time for the oral, I have been known to go for 4 hours on more than one occasion mainly because I do not want to rush the process

Four hours for an oral!!! You must get paid by the hour? If you cannot tell how good a candidate is in under an hour of intelligent and reasonable questions then time you went into retirement. No candidate should ever have to put up with that sort of bulls...

[Tee Emm]

Require a 4 year university degree in something besides basket-weaving.

We would never had time to win the Second World War if a degree in aviation was a pre-requisite to be a pilot. A Degree means exactly nothing apart from getting a job ahead of the great unwashed. It certainly does not guarantee you will make a good pilot.
One of my colleagues graduated from the military in 15 months and first flew the P51 Mustang when he was 20 years old with 210 flying hours. He was a captain on four engine heavy bombers at age 22 and a check and training captain at age 24.

[DA50driver]

I was offered a job with the airlines after going through the selection process. I was then offered a job on a privately owned airplane prior to the start of training at the airline. I realized I could make a better living on this side of the fence and have never looked back. I fly an airplane with all the latest bells and whistles and have 6500nm range.

The copilot at Colgan Air was making 16k US a year. Mickey D's will pay you more than that. As to uniformed crew members your cabin attendants will pretty much take care of that, how come they don't wear stripes and such? What you think of as a uniform is just an outfit if they are by themselves. Maybe you should wear High Visibility vests?

Regarding the unwashed comment I used to drive a truck for my dad's little trucking company. Still have a commercial drivers license and love to drive when I can.

[Dan Winterland]

I think the problem first mentioned here relates to the schools who try to guarentee a qualification at a minimum price. This often means a minimum standard as well. My airline employs 200 hour cadets and puts them on widebodies. But these cadets are employed by the company from the onset, they go to one of the best schools in the world, their progress is monitored by the airline throughout the course and when they arrive back in the home country to start flying, they get extra sim training and are not out on line unless everyone is satisfied they are up to the required standard. And several do fall by the wayside if they aren't.

Contrast this to an individual who gets their ATPL at he cheapest school, scrapes through their ratings, pays for their own type rating and gets employed by an operator who wants pilots at the lowest cost, pays poorly and doesn't expect their pilots to hang around after they have accumulated enough experience to on to a better job.

The industry is it's own worse enemy in this respect. The lower airlines cut ticket prices to be competative and the net result is they have to employ the lowest common denominator, the pilot who just makes the minimum standards. The regulators have a part to play in this. They set standards which are a minimum requirement, but as in Flight Time Limitations, these become the target and little is done about it.

The manifestation of this problem is the airlines who allow pay for ratings and line training pilots fly their aircraft on revenue flights. Recently, one British registered A320 was very badly damaged by one of these pilots - with fare paying passengers on board. This guy wasn't the sharpest tool in the box, but the airline still allowed him to fly thier aircraft even though they probably wouldn't have employed him based on his experience and prior performance.

[Two's in]

As my first Military flight instructor put it, "I could teach your Granny to fly this airplane given the time, but you've got exactly 90 minutes to demonstrate you have assimilated every lesson I teach you - competently and safely".

That approach is pretty standard for non-paying students, the problems start when people can just throw more money at the problem. Starting a training program with aptitude and flying grading tests certainly weeds out those who simply don't have the aptitude, then manage to get lucky (or unlucky) on exams and check rides until it's dark, icy, and everything has gone wrong.

Before castigating these training orgainizations though, you might want to ask yourself what kind of regulatory and test authority is allowing this level of inexperience and skill loose in a commercial airplane in the first place. These training organizations simply train students to pass the test, it's the FAA/JAA rules that set the test standards in the first place.

[Will Fraser]

All involved know exactly what is going on, any one doubt that? It is not mysterious, and hence there are no real surprises, right?

What kind of predictable 'accident' will foment the change, and by whom?

[chimbu warrior]

Some good posts here, particularly by Kwachon, Glueball and Dan Winterland.

We should be training to a standard proficiency, not a standard price.

Another thing that bothers me is that I see new CPL's who believe they are already airline Captains, and consider the path between their fresh licence (250 hours or so) and the left seat of a jet to be just a time-wasting nuisance. Take pride and demonstrate skill and professionalism in whatever you are flying, whether it is a C172, a tatty old Navajo, a Shorts or a 747.

A further good point was made by someone much earlier in this thread; be prepared to listen and learn from people who have been there. I learned a great deal from people that I have never even sat in an aircraft with - but they were willing to impart wisdom and experience that I could later use to advantage.

The learning never stops.......

[Bingaling]

99.9% of 250 hour co pilots as you term them are absolutely professional and willing to learn every step of the way. They have to start somewhere. Don't begrudge them their luck in getting a job so early into their flying careers.

Quit the slagging and derogative remarks. You too had only 250 hours. Of course there will be tossers out there with 250 hours who believe they have nothing to learn. Don't worry, that will be either be beaten out of them, or some day they will scare themselves into realising they have a world of learning to do. In the same vane there are plenty of people with 5000 hours who have those same attitude defects!

[A-3TWENTY]

By the book , JAA allow one with 1500hs to ship an airliner.Once you have your ATPL , theoreticaly you are already allowed to be Captain of an airliner.

I`ve seen some guys on the left that I wouldn`t release for the right seat.

In Europe ,instructors are "forced" to cause no problems releasing pilots for both left and right seats in order not to cause problems to the company and this way keep their function as instructors.

Nowadays most instructors must be nice guys if they want to take some extra $$ home.

[CANPA]

"I have to say, my client pass rate was almost 90% until coming to India":=:=

Kw if you are so concerned about the way these so called rich kids are coming out of flight schools in the US and getting F/O positions in India what are you doing about it.

I was a flight instructor at a flight school in the US before coming back to india and picking up a position on a PC-12 as a first officer. Couple of years of flying the Pilatus as a captain, i was hired as a F/O on a 737 by Sahara and now fly for as captain for a leading low cost airline.

I am not sure who you fly for but at my company the training programme has been re worked several times keeping in mind the level of the F/O coming in. You cant really blame someone for having 250 hrs unless you were born with a several thousand. As far as the quality of pilots....I have seen enough in the US, even guys coming out of schools with degrees in Aviaiton who still think life is a big frat party.

Franky i am kind of hurt by most of what you have said in your post. If you have been hired here in some training capacity I think you probably have never tried to contribute to training other than maybe making smart comments about yourself. Also it seems the time is right for you to go back to wherever you came from so we might not read about you in the papers.....cheers

[INNflight]

Quote:
I make full use of all the time for the oral, I have been known to go for 4 hours on more than one occasion mainly because I do not want to rush the process
Four hours for an oral!!! You must get paid by the hour? If you cannot tell how good a candidate is in under an hour of intelligent and reasonable questions then time you went into retirement. No candidate should ever have to put up with that sort of bulls...


I agree four hours is a bit over the top, but my oral for my commercial took 2,5 hrs too, and we basically talked non-stop.

The thing I like about the FAA system is that they use common sense to a good extent. Fly the airplane, get to know it, and don't think about calling V1 and VR in a fricking C-150 on a 8,000ft runway (I've had students here tell me they had to calculate their rotation speed before a lesson)....... I mean, are you shi****g me??

[68+iou1]

I have leant allot from my FO’s! Obviously more from a 5000hr FO and less from a 250 FO.
But, I’m always learning!

[jetopa]

When you are becoming a doctor, you have to practise certain treatments like intubations, setting up an intravenous infusion or even basic surgical skills on a living person at some time. How else are you supposed to learn how to do it? That's the truth and it has been like that for ages that you have an experienced 'teacher' guiding you through it and assisting you.

The same applies to our beloved profession: how are you supposed to learn how to operate your aircraft in all kinds of phases, WX etc. if not under realtime conditions under the supervision of an experienced person next to you?

The art is to truthfully realize and acknowledge when a situation becomes critical, demandig the person in charge to take over and to accept that now the instruction time is over.

The LH-guy in Hamburg would have been better off to fly the approach under extreme crosswind conditions himself.
Capt. Sullenberger on the other hand quite naturally claimed his right to assume control in a potentially desastrous situation (I do not want to imply that his F/O wouldn't have been able to the same!). We all know the outcome.

[kwachon]

CANPA

Firstly, I would suggest you go back and re-read what I wrote and you will see I was complaining about the pilot factories in the US and the total lack of knowledge they have for the enviroment the new pilots are coming back too. All they want is the money and the next student through the door. Do you really think they care what happens to them when they leave?

Secondly, You are living in a bubble if you are not aware of the corruption within the DGCA and the number of new "250 hour" pilots that have used the system to get on board.

I am not attacking the Indian pilot as you say, merely the system that is putting them in that situation.

Engage brain before writing an opinion!.

Cheers

KW:ok:

[Dan Winterland]

Quote: "Capt. Sullenberger on the other hand quite naturally claimed his right to assume control in a potentially desastrous situation (I do not want to imply that his F/O wouldn't have been able to the same!). We all know the outcome."

Yes, but he had no choice. Once the second engine failed, the A320 they were flying was in the Emergency Electrical Configuration and only the left hand screens were powered. Not really a right, just Airbus design philosophy..

[org]

QUOTE<Flying privatly Cessna/whatever piston for a prolonged period (over 5 years let's say) often makes pilot no longer suitable for airline environment, because along with raw flying skills (good) he also getting adopted to single pilot, light aircraft, VFR etc. Very recently we had to say goodbye to FO with as much as 4000 hrs SEP (and very good background references), after struggling for 300 hours on the right seat of airliner it become clear he cannot adopt and follow CRM, SOP, performance calculations, situation awareness in congested terminal areas etc, while most of our 300 hrs TOTAL time young FOs have absolutely no problem with it.>QUOTE

I'd take exception with the term "often". I've found in a fairly long career that "often" it's just the opposite: some of the best pilots came from a single pilot background...but I must say that most of them had extensive single pilot IFR experience flying light twins and singles in night freight. A GOOD pilot can adapt to crew ops easier than a BAD pilot regardless of his experience level. Perhaps some of those that were washed out were simply not good pilots, never mind their flight hours. The guys flying single pilot night freight (yes, it's IFR) without autopilots or glass cockpits have unmatched situational awareness and flight skills and have proven it by surviving. I'm not sure what performance calculations have to do with low time.

I wouldn't say low timers are inherently bad pilots, but chances are they won't display the SA or skills of a more experienced flyer.

[411A]

I wouldn't say low timers are inherently bad pilots, but chances are they won't display the SA or skills of a more experienced flyer.

Quite correct, in my view.
And yes, I've trained very low time pilots into the RHS of heavy jet airplanes for a very long time.
Some can adapt, some cannot.
It's the type of dedicated specific airline training that counts, make no mistake.
The ex-military fast jet guys can be a pain at times....a few of 'em just don't like to be told what to do.
Too bad for them....it's either co-operate or....out the door.
Ain't going to change anytime soon, either.:}

[nbairlines]

Good day all,

IMHO a pilot is the product of an airline´s training. CPL , fATPL, MCC etc etc are essential qualifications, but the real shaping is done by the airlines.

Some EU airlines hire 170h guys, after first putting them through a rigorous selection process, rigorous TQ training (at airline´s expense) and paying decent wages and offering decent working conditions. Works fine in my experience.

maybe a cliché, but 200 or 2000hrs, the most important thing is the willingness to learn, and one´s own responsibility to keep on doing so. Know your stuff inside out, learn from the experienced guys, ask questions, “building” your own experience and reference.

Interesting thread BTW

:ok:
Regards,
NB

[Smilin_Ed]

Is the typical 250 hour FO from one of the "puppy mill flight schools" able to safely land the airplane should the captain become suddenly incapacitated?

[rottenray]

I'm not a pilot, I've never been to flight school, but I have served (USAF) and I have been employed all my life in various careers which require discipline and constant learning.

Some comments:

I make full use of all the time for the oral, I have been known to go for 4 hours on more than one occasion mainly because I do not want to rush the process
That's a very comforting thing to hear - you must have realized at some point that ANY final exam is only the first part of the next level of training, not the end of training. I'll bet that a student learns quite a bit during one of your "slow cooker" exams - and certainly comes away with the idea of how important the whole gig really is.


Next, there have been a few comments about low-hour military pilots, and I truly don't believe there is a parallel; shorter training times and performance at lower experience hours are possible because of the whole military culture. Discipline, must not fail, et cetera. Not so much that all the skills have been developed - but the attitude is different.


I think the whole of the problem is that so many folks have begun to think of flying as so every-day, so mundane, that we are seeing more people getting into the right and left seats as a "job" rather than out of a true love and respect for aviation.

Hence, the underachievers, the folks who can throw money at the problem, the glory seekers (as one post mentioned) are not as diluted by exemplary pilots as they once were.

Couple that with the huge economic squeeze, and lower skill levels can find the way in, unfortunately.

...

[Longtimer]

"28th May 2009, 09:27 #5 (permalink)
st7860


Join Date: May 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 45 there's a few of those factories in Canada too "And they are?????

[Gillegan]

I think this thread is veering off target. The question isn't whether low time pilots with GOOD training can adapt to airline operations but whether these so-called "pilot factories" really provide that "good training". The airline that trains the ab-initio pilot has a vested interest in seeing that their pilot is well trained. Even in the era of the bean-counters, I suspect that most of those carriers endeavor to do a good job training.

On the other hand, outfits like Gulfstream might have other motivations. Once someone who has paid for their training's checks have cleared and they are through training, Gulfstream really doesn't have that much of an interest anymore. To me the pertinent questions are:

What happens and who pays when someone cannot perform to the "required standard" within the programmed amount of training?
Does the answer to #1 influence the outcome of any checks?
What extra training do the captains receive who will be flying with these "students"?
What are the future implications for our profession (which I would still like to believe relies on skill and competence) when someone with "deep pockets" can advance beyond someone who has that skill and competence but doesn't have the money?

There have been some startling accidents with some Gulfstream "graduates" at the controls which really make me question whether outfits like them should be shut down for the public safety.

[D O Guerrero]

I think this thread really must rate as the greatest load of self-righteous crap I have ever read on PPRUNE.... And that really is saying something.

[jetopa]

Is the typical 250 hour FO from one of the "puppy mill flight schools" able to safely land the airplane should the captain become suddenly incapacitated?

Dear Smilin Ed,

you can bet on it they can! Otherwise no company which is right in their mind would ever dare doing it.
Yes, LH has to earn money, too - but a ruined reputation due to deficient training is much more costly and the beancounters know that for sure!

[dc10fr8k9]

First of all, Gulfstream has never crashed a plane. Not bad for all those little planes puttering around nine or more legs a day in thunder-storm-a-rama day in and day out, year in year out, decade after decade now, with minimum avionics and sometimes so many MEL red dots pasted all over it looks like the cockpit has measles! And yes, with Captains who babysit the FO's just like they do anywhere in the world when the FO doesn't have the necessary experience yet. And where is one to get experience? I'd rather pilots get experience sitting to the right of competent Captains than from school of hard knocks teaching themselves, flying checks solo in some Navajo at night in the winter as, someone suggested in this thread. That way, a pilot is just as likely to land on my house! At least the Beech 1900 is a plane which can be flown by one person safely, so that if the FO is indeed totally incompetent, the flight is not immediately in danger. And no Captain will long suffer a fool in the right seat, even at Gulfstream.

These people crashed planes at other separate carriers. Not all correlations can indicate reliable and valid conclusions. I wonder, how many former American Flyers or Comair graduates (also large pilot mills for example) have met their end in an airplane? Is the assumption therefore that those schools are also bad training grounds for pilots because three or four of their graduates ended upside down in the ground in the wreck of an airplane somewhere? The wholesale tarnishing of Gulfstream pilots is merely yellow journalism by some media hounds who know little about the industry, and are more interested in sensationalism and winning Pulitzers than fair reporting or doing the industry or the flying public any service.

It is a separate issue that Gulfstream was charged with doctoring schedules, and the practice is probably rampant in the industry worldwide. It is the antiquated FAA regulations that make the problem as bad as it is. The JAA gets my thumbs up on that subject, because at least in Europe there is more common sense in the duty and flight time regulations. In the USA, the duty and rest times rules are absurd. That is what the news hounds should sink their teeth into, but somehow no reporter does.

Gulfstream has just like all airlines, mostly excellent aviators, and a few weaklings. They are everywhere, and if you read the accident reports of many other mishaps, you will see that some poor performers do get through the system everywhere, and that is a shame. I have flown heavies where the FO had no business being in an airplane, but that kind of pilot is the serious exception, not the rule. It's sad, but no matter how good the screening and testing, there will always be occasions where poor training, poor judgement, and inadequate oversight conspires with fatigue, weather, and all the other usual suspects in the chain of events, that lead up to accidents. Then, there are the good pilots, who are sometimes the unlucky, or the tired, who are just the same, the victims or perpetrators of accidents. And they are everywhere.

I was a Captain and instructor at Gulfstream, as well as at other airlines later on. The first thing I wrote on the board on day one of ground school is "THERE IS NO RESET BUTTON". I know first hand, that my colleagues and I were anything but lax with standards, knowing that once let loose, these pilots were largely on their own out there in the airspace, with exceptionally challenging circumstances (who wants to fly through a squall line 5 or 6 times in one day at 25,000 ft?), and none of us wanted any corpses on our consciences. Many fine aviators worked there and still surely do, and many moved on to almost every great and small airline there is. The problem is not Gulfstream, it is the unfortunate combination of poor judgement, sometimes poor skills, circumstances (such as weather), and coping with outdated regulations which cause fatigue, a serious issue that is still swept under the carpet. And this can be the outcome of any training environment.

As far as FAA vs. JAA, I speak from experience also. Having done both, I can say that the FAA for all it's faults, at least focuses on what is important rather than minutiae, and the training and examination process there is related to the practical and useful. The FAA written test is merely symbolic, and the real test is the oral and practical as some have commented. The JAA goes by the assumption that if someone can pass the absurdly pedantic JAA tests, then they have the required intelligence to be pilots. About 75% of the content of the JAA tests is absolutely useless, and having 10,000 hours and 28 years in the air, if I needed to know how three quarters of that nonsense, I think I would have already known it! Anyone who has written the JAA tests will surely agree, most of it is merely a memory and intelligence test, and much of it has little merit in the real world.

And there are pilot mills all over the world, in fact it is the norm, not the exception. I recall that most of the "contract" FO's at Gulfstream were foreign. They now fly for airlines all over the world, from Holland, to China, to Brazil, to India, in fact, everywhere. It was merely cost effective for those pilots to do their "internships" at Gulfstream. I am not advocating or condemning the system, it merely is an observation. But until airlines all over start being compelled by the regulations to run clean and tight ships with regard to training and duty, accidents will happen, but you cannot legislate accidents away, that are the result of human nature, whether it is recklessness, fatigue, fear of consequences, or whatever. Everyone shares the blame; the reckless or careless pilot, the operator that milks the aviator to the limit of human physiological limits, the government regulators who are more concerned with collusion and appeasement of industry. And finally the customer also, who has got used to buying the cheapest ticket (you get what you pay for) which in a completely unregulated environment drives everything down, and the run for the bottom cost wise, will always result in inexperienced pilots, poorly or improperly maintained equipment, marginal training, and absurd schedules, all of which are waiting for fate disguised as unusually bad weather, mechanical failure, or a reckless or poorly trained pilot to contribute to the chain of events which leads to an accident. But as we can see sadly, even today, paying to sit in first class on the newest plane at one of the great airlines of the world still won't save you from a sad fate if the cards are stacked against you that day.

We should all endeavor as aviators to make the industry as safe as possible, but uninformed rhetoric by media people who are merely trying to sell newspapers to even more uninformed masses won't help one bit.

[Will Fraser]

Well said, thank you.

[poina]

It's not the schools, it's not the FAA or the JAA. It's the individual! If you want to be excellent in the cockpit it takes WORK and DEDICATION. I've trained pilots for 30 yrs and from a c-150 to MD-11 one trait you can tell immediately is their work ethic. Some have some don't. College degree? What an idiot u r to think that makes a difference. The best students I had in little airplanes were the back hoe drivers, mechanics, hand eye coord. skill in other words. The worst, doctors and lawyers, who have been told they are the smartest on the planet by parents and teachers. They actually believe it! On your next long haul see if your fo picks up his QRH and scans thru it when he's just sittin there. If he does, marry him.

[Pugilistic Animus]

you can not lie to aircraft!!!!

PA

[mini]

"It's not the schools, it's not the FAA or the JAA. It's the individual! If you want to be excellent in the cockpit it takes WORK and DEDICATION. I've trained pilots for 30 yrs and from a c-150 to MD-11 one trait you can tell immediately is their work ethic. Some have some don't. College degree? What an idiot u r to think that makes a difference. The best students I had in little airplanes were the back hoe drivers, mechanics, hand eye coord. skill in other words. The worst, doctors and lawyers, who have been told they are the smartest on the planet by parents and teachers. They actually believe it! On your next long haul see if your fo picks up his QRH and scans thru it when he's just sittin there. If he does, marry him."

I'd second that, broadly speaking.

Over the years I've recruited many many people, one golden rule for me, in the absence of specialist HR training etc., has always been recruit for attitude & application, if these can be established then I'm happy to provide training. Never failed. (lucky?)

Was interviewed by an MBA BBeverything Academic once as to the basis of "our secret" in being successful.

Find people with common sense, if they haven't that they fail starting base.

Now bugger off, we're busy... :E

[CarltonBrowne the FO]

PA, I agree entirely with your post; you cannot lie to aircraft. Kipling put it better though...
But remember, please, the law by which we live
We are not built to comprehend a lie
We neither love, nor pity, nor forgive
Forget these rules in handling us and die.

The Secret of the Machines

(Edited for dyselx...dylsex... brain fade)

[Sotilgan]

I was in training with Gulfstream Connection but didn't stay. I just love it when they tell you "we will train you, no worries", and in the first 5 minutes of intro to the company, the "instructor" says: "we are not a flight training institution, we are revenue carrier". I quit on the 5th day of training. Three out of three instructors were not CFI-rated, they were just pilots with lot of time in charter ops. I was not impressed with the operation. But that's just me I guess, I do not know of a 135-carrier that I was impressed with.

[Interflug]

you can not lie to aircraft!!!!Of course you can. There even is a database for it :-)

Aviation Accident Database Query (http://www.ntsb.gov/NTSB/Query.asp)