Pilot (in)experience around the world

[aa73]

Hi folks, I posted something similar on the Caribbean board re: low total time in getting hired at different airlines.

I just learned that TAM Airlines, Brazil, requires only 800TT!

LAN Airlines require only 200TT!

Am I just naive, or ignorant, or both, in thinking that this is CRAZY and just asking for trouble.

When I had 800TT I was barely safe in a twin engine Cessna 310! I shudder to think of what I'd have to go through if I was F/O on a jet airliner with only 800TT and the Captain became incapacitated.

The Colgan Buffalo crash should serve as a fine example of the dangers of low TT and inexperience.

I'm sorry but I would not hesitate to keep my family off an airliner that has an F/O with only 200TT! This is insanity and will eventually result in another useless tragedy. There is a very good reason why most major US airlines require 5000TT minimum!

Flame away, I'm all ears as to the justification of this practice.

aa73, hired at AA with ONLY 3000TT and that was LOW in my group!

[DJ77]

There is a very good reason why most major US airlines require 5000TT minimum!


Yes, they don't run ab-initio FTOs.

[bfisk]

800, or even 200 hours need not be a problem when you can find the right individual. In fact many major airlines have done this from time to time - though most of them have extremely rigourous aptitude and personality testing. In addition, they have had the internal knowhow and experience (ie skippers and training organizations) to deal with these inexperienced FOs, giving them the extra required Tender Loving Care.

I think the problem really arises when the total combined experience of the FO, the skipper and the company is low, as it often is with startups, rapidly expanding carriers or carriers with a high turnover of personell (which normally equates to poor terms and conditions). Some seem to have a selection criteria of "ticks in the box only", simply to fill the right hand seat with a warm body, to keep the show on the road.

There is a major difference between the two.

[Lord Spandex Masher]

Hours aren't really an indication of ability.

I've flown with guys new to the airline business with less than 170 hours total time, about half of which was single engine VFR stuff.

They were, then, the exeption rather than the norm but each of them were sitting in the right seat of a four engined jet and performed perfectly well and had brains like sponges ie. developed into extremely capable potential captains.

Conversely I've also flown with guys new to airline flying who had a few thousand hours in GA/Air taxi/Air Ambulance who were, shall we say, less than capable, stuck in their ways and had a distinct inability to adapt.

[triplese7en]

Most airlines in Europe accept FO's straight out of school with only 200 hours total time, and the safety record of airlines in Western Europe easily matches that of airlines in the States. The Colgan Air crash is a bad example of inexperience vs safety, because that captain had over 3300 hours' experience; he was simply a poor pilot who never should have been put in command of a passenger airliner in the first place.

[Birdy767]

You are exactly right! Again this afternoon we have been talking about the chaos which is coming if the industry (really) needs hundreds of thousand of pilots before 2030!!!

I have started my career with 240TT on a wide body and I was basically ignoring the countries we were overflying. (North Atlantic, Far East, Africa) Not joking...

Some may say I have been lucky but looking back I think this is ridiculous.

[warmkiter]

it depends how you spend those 200-800 hrs...

Airline cadet programs are mostly about 250 hrs and then straight to the typerating and linetraining. Usually something like this...

130 Hrs in a single engine like Beech 33 Bonanza to get your ppl, ifr and cpl

30hrs in a twin like a Beech 58 Baron for multiengine and ifr

80Hrs in a Level D simulator simulating a turboprop like Cheyenne IV or jet like Citation for multicrew and ATP training

10 Hrs with the corresponding TP/JET for line orientated training

....ready for first typerating on A320/B737 or similar.

Thats 250 Hrs hardcore training, which you can not compare to 300hrs flying circuits in a C150 as CFI...

besides you had about 1500-2000hrs groundschool during your cadet program... that might help a bit too...

however if you got the job doing only circuits in C150 then that might be interesting when the old man goes inop...

[aa73]

Thank you for these replies. Obviously I wasn't factoring in the "Ab Initio" portion of the training which does not exist here in the U.S.

That said - there is only so much that can be taught within 800TT. For example, I never dealt with thunderstorm/icing scenarios until well into my first couple thousand hours - most of it as a flight instructor/charter/ferry pilot. What if these "cadet pilots" hit the line for the first time having never seen these situations? Yes they depend on the CA's expertise but therein lies the problem - we shouldn't have to see this stuff for the first time when at the controls of an airliner. I believe the proper seasoning of an airline pilot should occur well before they set foot in the right seat an airliner. And you can't possibly have the proper seasoning with just 800TT at some ab initio program - that is simply not enough time to gain experience and confidence that should always exist in a jetliner cockpit.

True, hours do not necessarily make a good pilot. But if I had to choose, I would always choose a pilot who's had more experience, obviously. There is a direct correlation between experience and hours.

[verticalhold]

aa73;

There CAN BE a correlation between experience and hours, but as someone pointed out earlier a lot depends on the type of experience and whether the pilot has actually learned from it or not.

I was very lucky back in the '80's and was sponsored through pilot training by a major carrier. After 200 hours of training (I already had 170 on a PPL) , 2500 hours of groundschool, and a huge amount of sweat I was sent off to do a twin jet course. My stick buddy was a 1350 hour Harrier pilot. I believe that I qualified in less time, and certainly had an easier ride through line training because I had no preconcieved ideas, he had lots more stick time, but more expectations of what should happen, he had experiences to compare it to, while I had none and just did as I was told without really analysing it.

The 200 hour tyro can be very good and the 10 000 hour captain can be a disaster, I personally believe that it comes down to the selection process, and would certainly bring a high level of aircrew selection into all the "self sponsored" training. Just because someone can afford the license it doesn't mean that they should be in the seat. Maybe it could be done with initial Class 1 medical issue, if you cant pass then you don't get a class one and therefore can't do the training.

With 200 hours I learned an enormous amount from highly experienced captains and from asking questions of other F/Os in the crew room. These days I find myself learning a lot from low time guys. The ground school has changed a lot and they come with a different type of knowledge. They can have very good input on the FD and I enjoy watching them realise that not all the theory is right, and that the learning curve is in fact nearly vertical.

[Denti]

Currently european carriers switch to the MPL scheme which means even less flying time. For example the program warmkiter explained above (i ran through it although with slightly different types and hours, G part) is now condensed to roughly 80 hours real world flying, around 15 or so of that on CJ1s. However simulator flying took over a large part and in fact provides for several hundred hours of very intense training time. The whole program (including a typerating) is then followed by a pretty long and thorough line training program that can run easily somewhere between 3 and 6 months, in some cases even longer. And of course it is preceded by an extremely thorough testing and selection phase that usually has pass rates somewhere between 0.5 to 2% of all applicants.

Of course major carriers usually do not have the problem of both sides being inexperienced with usually 12 to 15 years as an FO or senior FO before starting the command course.

[Jerry Lee]

I'm a 19 years old boy, and I'm looking to start my flight trainig. Personally, I'm against MPL. Really...

Maybe because I don't think I will never get into a MPL course due to its difficult selection process. Anyway, I'll tray to do it.