PDA

View Full Version : Air NZ discriminating against older pilots!


Ollie Onion
10th Jul 2016, 09:37
Makes for an interesting read!

Air New Zealand 'shafted' elderly pilots over Airbus training | Stuff.co.nz (http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/81195647/Air-New-Zealand-shafted-elderly-pilots-over-Airbus-training)

Dan_Brown
10th Jul 2016, 09:56
Yes it makes sense to put the youngsters on the computers, if you want them put through a course quickly, therefore on the cheap.

I've been over 40 years in this business and I know you can take a kid out of an amusement arcade and they would do a quicker job than I ever could pushing buttons. Forget about flying skills as they don't rate very highly now if at all, among management types, as it is all about money. Experience of the older pilots? Not worth a damn now. Airbuses are "un-crashable" aren't they? Except when they are blown up or otherwise interfered with.

Pilot less aircraft here we come and we had better get used to it.

"If it ain't Boeing I'm not going"

atlas12
10th Jul 2016, 10:02
The sooner we take pilots out of the flight deck the sooner we lower the fatality rate even more, since most aviation accidents are caused by human error. The technology isn't quite there yet but it isn't far off. Once driver less cars are the norm aircraft are sure to follow. I am okay with that.

4Greens
10th Jul 2016, 10:18
Human error is a function of all humans. Accidents are a function of numerous causes. Engineering maintenance, air traffic, management, cabin crew, loading and ground operations just to mention a few. Pilotless planes and driverless cars are open to cyber hacking.

Iron Hide
10th Jul 2016, 10:32
Certainly is an interesting read, but what an absolute joke! Not the fact that they are over 65, that's up to them, but the fact that a few bits of information were either missing or grossly incorrect.

They were given the same course as everyone else. Everyone else had also come off a Boeing. Everyone else passed the course. But, everyone else does not get the luxury of repeating the course when they fail it and then repeating it again as a first officer when they fail it a second time as a captain.

I personally don't have an issue with them working over 65 if they are fit and competent, but to expect special treatment when they have riden the pigs back most their careers and can no longer chin the bar that the rest of us have to chin is rediculous!

And then to try and pin it on the training department or your fellow colleagues who you are observing with? Look in the mirror, the time to bow out gracefully has passed. Stop trying to milk the cow and leave some for those who still have their careers ahead of them!

Tarq57
10th Jul 2016, 11:19
I think it's quite telling that the course referred to by John* was the first to have had its training content reduced.

Something definitely afoot, there. Sure, it may be legal, it may even be "Best practice", but it comes across as a bit underhand to me.

Iron Hide
10th Jul 2016, 11:27
The training course had not been reduced. It was the same course that had been completed by everyone else in the 2 years previous. It may have been longer once upon a time, but that was long before any conspiracy of culling any elderly pilots.

Keg
10th Jul 2016, 11:39
Once driver less cars are the norm aircraft are sure to follow. I am okay with that.

Ask Tesla how that's going!

Square Bear
10th Jul 2016, 11:43
Iron Hide,

Your post reminds me of the story of the old bull and the young bull, the one where the young bull wants to race down and cut out one cute cow, and the old one replies that perhaps it be a somewhat better idea to just wander on down and cut them all out.

Thankfully, I have had the advantage of riding on the pig's back. I have flown when aviation was a fantastic job, made a shed load of money, and have never had to be an aviation prostitute - have you?

Not only can I still do profile in my head, I can string sentences together so that they make sense, and I can spell simple words such as 'ridden' and 'ridiculous' without consulting this big ol' book they call a 'dictionary' - you might like to look that one up yourself.

Whilst I would be happy to retire and sit quietly on the riverbank, with the fly rod in one hand and a lovely merlot in the other, I continue to drag my poor sorry backside to work. This is in part to ensure that those impetuous youngins, who can neither spell nor craft a proper sentence, let alone be left in the flight deck unaccompanied, aren't promoted to the left seat before they are capable.

But I suspect you were trolling for a reply such as this and I have thus engaged in your game. With the attitude you portray, well... enjoy your career in the right seat :)

Pinky the pilot
10th Jul 2016, 11:55
Square Bear; Re the third and fourth paragraphs of your post;

Should we ever meet, the drinks are on me!:ok:

Jenna Talia
10th Jul 2016, 12:05
Square Bear :ok::ok::ok::ok::ok::ok::ok::ok::ok::ok:

ad-astra
10th Jul 2016, 19:35
Square Bear. Wonderful.

waren9
10th Jul 2016, 19:58
He was already over-age when the International Civil Aviation Organisation ruled in late 2014 that pilots 65 and over could not serve in any capacity on international flights, so had no choice but to give up his career co-piloting Boeing 777s on long haul routes.

says it all really.

see ya john*

Cloud Cutter
10th Jul 2016, 20:23
Biased, underhand reporting - nothing new there. All the details you need are in Iron Hide's post #5.

While Square Bear's retort is rather eloquent and I agree with the gist of it, I think the point is being missed here a little!

Offcut
10th Jul 2016, 20:48
You guys are trying to turn this into a "young vs old" pilot argument. The simple fact is that these guys are getting far more training offered to them than an under 65 pilot and yet they are still not able to get through. What do you suggest? Lower the standard so they can keep a command? There is nothing particularly difficult about an Airbus type rating, it just requires work. If you turn up for the course at 9am and wait to be taught, you will fail, young or old. You need to put in a lot of hours on your own time and be genuinely motivated to pass. One of the big complaints is that the manuals are too difficult to navigate! Are you kidding me? They are written by Airbus. Should an airline produce an Airbus For Dummies big print version?

And for the guy who says he is only sticking around to prevent younger pilots being promoted to save us from ourselves, where do I start? It's not like the average candidate for command is a 25 year old " child of the magenta line". I don't know of any captains under 40, and would say the average upgrade would be between 45 and 55. These are vastly experienced pilots who pass their checks and get the job done. But hey, thanks for sticking around and showing us how it's done.

Pakehaboy
10th Jul 2016, 21:23
Interesting article,We have/had the same issues where I'm at.The Boeing rollovers definitely have the issues,not sure why because we had many come from RJs,Dash,embraer,and pass the first time around.The Airbus philosophy can be difficult to grasp,but as posters have said,you need to do the hard yards.The training,we were given 18 sim sessions,and those that had difficulty were paired and extra training given,failure on the 3rd check,your out,and we did lose quite a few.

The key to the training was anytime use of CPT trainers,video,and volunteer pilots,24/7.I personally volunteered my time with the problem boys,and most got through with the additional poundings,some,just NEVER get it,bloody tough for sure.

My personal opinion ,there is no reason to wash this type of experience down the drain,irregardless of "your in my seat attitude".Programmes need to be designed to at least proffer extra training within "reason"to those having difficulty.Years of ingrained training has paid off for the airlines in question,they need to be receptive of that and cater to it.For those that don't agree,put yourselves in the same position.You may find yourself in "that" position one day.Its not "special" training,it's maximizing the return on your investment.

nike
10th Jul 2016, 21:47
Square Bear....you have got to be kidding?

Calling the Air NZ lot young??

Then saying without you there to save the day.....?

The level of arrogance in your post rivals that in the newspaper article.

Get your head out of your ass.

Standards should not be dropped for young nor old.

Do the work.

Offcut
10th Jul 2016, 21:53
Pakehaboy, I agree entirely. And anyone struggling does get additional training. I can't say how much as I'm not in the training department so it is all second hand, but it is significant. Some even pass the type rating but are failing line training. Which points to issues more around decision making and airmanship than technical manipulation. The last I know of had a full command line training programme, a failed check, extra line training, a right seat conversion, six months in right seat, much with trainers in the left, another left seat conversion, and then another failed check. Sounds pretty generous to me. Do you want that guy flying your kids around?

Everyone deserves a fair crack, and if some don't think they have had it, fair enough. You have the right to fight your corner. BUT, be honest about the training you received and the reasons for your failure. If a guy off a turboprop can get through, while having to learn all company procedures, SOPs etc on top of the type rating, surely a vastly experienced company veteran should be able to manage.

Training for the Airbus is running at absolute capacity and Captains are desperately needed on line. The last thing the company would want is to tie up the sim for weeks on end, and still not get a type rated pilot at the end of the process.

Pakehaboy
10th Jul 2016, 22:06
Offcut,ditto on your post.Do not get the impression that I'm in favour of favour,s and lowering standards,definitely not!!The issues you highlight,are the issues I see everyday,and yes,the line is where it is the biggest issue,not the type ride.You must reside in the training environment that is offered,and the hard yards must be done whether it be on the company's or your time,difficult choices and decisions must be made.No argument here on your post.

Ollie Onion
10th Jul 2016, 22:32
I just don't see it, if you can't reach the required standard within the training environment at your particular airline then obviously there are consequences. With Air NZ desperate for A320 crew I can't see them going out of their way to 'fail' anyone.

The article to me seems to highlight a person who will not take responsibility for his/her own failings, instead looking for other reasons to blame. When I joined my first 'proper' airline the A320 rating had just been shortened from 14 sim sessions including check down to 10 sessions including check. The length of each session had also been reduced from 4 hours down to 3 hours, this was done as there was a massive training load on the A320 fleet. Most of us passed with a lot of hard work, a couple of guys failed and were offered some extra training that didn't go well and they were let go, age had nothing to do with it.

On the flip side of his/her argument, should the amount of training you get be reliant on your age or experience. O.K so he flew boeings his whole career, does that mean he gets special treatment when he converts to a non-boeing type, what about long haul to short haul, turbo-prop to jet. I assume when he accepted the transfer he did so with the knowledge of the length and type of training.

slamer.
10th Jul 2016, 22:44
Square bear .. I like the "Bull" story.

Somewhat telling of your generation of greed and "screw the rest", (curiously an accusation often levelled toward the gen Y's/gen Me's by the elderly) you;d think there would be enough cows for all to share...

Unfortunately the industry will forever be scared by this sense of entitlement and this of course is part of the problem here.

Offcut ... your onto it .... But 'hey"don't let the facts get in the way of a good yarn

PS: Id be interested to know how much training should be given to "meet the standard". Or when do you say "enough"..?

donkey123
11th Jul 2016, 01:42
I love flying with guys who are counting down to retirement, and quite often say so at flight planning (some even know the number of days). You then know it's going to be an easy, cruisey trip where you all get the job done with little fuss.

Just an observation.

atlas12
11th Jul 2016, 05:36
What, one accident involving a vehicle which has self driving capabilities intended as a safety measure only? The technology is still in its infancy, give it another decade.

Some of you folk really need to pull your heads out, so to speak. Intentionally delaying retirement to block younger pilots from taking a command? If that isn't trolling, I don't know what is :ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh:

Tankengine
11th Jul 2016, 05:55
Seems like the old bull didn't get it up.
Time catches up with everyone. ;)

BORAT SAGDIYEV
11th Jul 2016, 08:50
Uber looking for experienced driver. No age limit - but you still must chin bar!

Square Bear
11th Jul 2016, 11:13
Ok, some of what I posted was tongue in cheek, ☺

….and I am the first to agree one needs to pass a check to the required standard, but my post was responding to a suggestion that old is too old, get out of my way, I am coming through (and a distress at extremely bad grammar and spelling that supported that proposition-mediocre is ok, but not extremely bad).

Don't forget that most Captains were First Officers at some time. I flew with some Captains that I could out perform in the Sim (not very many!!) and I now find some right seat guys outperform me (probably many). But the Sim or Endorsement training is just a part of it…online is the bread and butter.

Captaincy is not about being the best pilot, nor just a matter of having time in company. It is not a God given right, nor should it be achieved by kicking someone over the cliff. And as we all know, there are some that will never get there due to lack of ability, management skill or have the wrong personality.

I might not have liked some Captains I flew with, but I sure as hell respected them and the position. From that experience I learnt to give the First Officers I fly with a reason to respect me, just as I respect them.

As I say, my post was a response somewhat tongue in cheek, but I found the following comment completly disrespectable, and undeservedly directed towards older Aircraft Commanders…

…when they have riden (sic) the pigs back most of their careers….

BTW, I am not really that old, so I am not spending your inheritance ….just yet!! :)

troppo
11th Jul 2016, 12:16
Back in the day, winning was encouraged over accepting loss. Back in the day, UE was recognised as intellectual capacity. NCEA wtf is that and how do you define 'achievement' as an employer? It will be a cold day in hell before I allow my kids to be encouraged to underachieve. There is a whole culture of 'dumbing down' of qualifications and experience in nz as it's seen to be the 'pc' thing do do. I'm impartial to this argument, I'm just saying things aren't how they used to be, rather, how they should be. I could do a tertiary degree in HR in a few years, does that qualify me to decide who or who can't command a commercial airliner? I'm not taking sides on this, It will be balanced between those who flame me and support my comments but that's a reflection of today's society, business environment and employment market

Pakehaboy
11th Jul 2016, 18:38
Concerning the training,I applied with AirNz(2nd time)when the Airbus first arrived on the property,I'd already had 10+ years in the left seat on the bus,and thought that maybe this would be the edge into the programme.They were not impressed and offered me a S/O position,fair enough I said,and thanked them for the tea and ginger nuts.

I'm not sure how ANZ does their Airbus training(someone can elaborate)but Ive worked several contracts where it was strictly straight out of the Airbus manual,word for word,no deviation,except for some very minors details based on the aircrafts geographic base.I've worked for several(3)operations whereby the Airbus manual has been butchered to pieces and a programme devised for the very basic indoc.Both work!

My point,when it comes to training,programmes are developed to suit the airline and its operation.The experience depth of its pilots is where it needs to be geared too.A pilot coming out of the Boeing with a huge experience base,does not need to have the Airbus standard shoved up their rears to get through the programme,information overload is an issue here,a butchered version seems to get most through,whereas abnitio students etc generally do better at the book work,side of things.I have just on 20 years on this A/C,319-330,I'm always having to look something up,it never ends.This type of info can be garnished at a later date,not in initial training.

The phrase"what the bloody heck is it doing now"is commonly used by Airbus pilots. Obviously the longer you are on the A/C the easier it gets.Im not advocating individual programs for individual pilots,far from it,but Airbus "standard" has a history of jamming so much information down ones throat in the very beginning,I've found that to be not nessacery.In ANZs infancy with the Bus,the programme may have been as such,over the years they would have learned what was nessacery and what was not,the streamlining of a training programme makes all the difference.

No favours,no extra required training(some will never get it) no wasted sim sessions,Just a "tidy" indoc programme that deals with the basics,to fly and manage this Bus efficiently.Pixie fairies and the bottom of the garden,maybe?, there are always improvements to any programme,seems a shame to waste talent.Those that get through the programme easily and efficiently ,kudos to you,it just made it easier.

NB...I'm not defending the actions of those in the article,just merely commenting on the broader issues of training on the Bus

itsnotthatbloodyhard
11th Jul 2016, 23:34
The sooner we take pilots out of the flight deck the sooner we lower the fatality rate even more, since most aviation accidents are caused by human error.

What you don't know, though, is how many accidents are averted through human intervention.

ratpoison
11th Jul 2016, 23:57
Hey atlas12, can you explain how the automatics and pilot-less cockpit would have operated and "managed" the event before splash down into the Hudson? :ugh::ugh::ugh:

atlas12
12th Jul 2016, 00:39
Hey atlas12, can you explain how the automatics and pilot-less cockpit would have operated and "managed" the event before splash down into the Hudson? :ugh::ugh::ugh:
Did you miss the part where I said the technology wasn't quite there yet? :ugh:

sid-star
12th Jul 2016, 02:53
It's not about how wonderfully complex the Airbus technology/ philosophy is to grasp. It's about the unlearning of 30 + yrs of Boeing operational philosophies at a mature age.. The old adage that you can't teach an old dog new tricks - has an element of truth.
I have flown both Boeing and Airbus and enjoyed flying both types. However, I certainly would not relish the prospect of completing an Airbus conversion course at 65 YO. These guys however may have case, if the new Airbus course had been reduced in length - it could arguably be said that the course should have been assessed against a set of criteria and maybe reverted back to the original course length for these highly experienced Boeing Capts.However, in some cases the competency standards may not be reached within an acceptable timeframe and it's better to call it quits early rather than prolong the inevitable.

Pakehaboy
12th Jul 2016, 15:46
.........
Quote"But an Air NZ pilot in his 50s believes the A320 training is insufficient, requiring only about 20 hours of actual flying compared to around 100 hours for his initial command training.

"Boeing and Airbus are completely poles part in technology, their logic. You've got to go right back to basics and re-learn all over again.

"For a guy who has flown a Boeing for 30-plus years, there's certain habits formed and it's difficult to pick up the new logic."

The pilot believed Air NZ had used the training as a way of "weeding out" older staff.

"Some instructors are brilliant, one in particular is absolutely diabolical. All they have to do is bring out the bad cop and you're sure to have issues.

"These guys aren't being given the chance to make the grade, they're not being given the training. It's a culling for sure."..............end quote





This wouldn't be you,would it Sid???

Black belt
17th Jul 2016, 00:28
Go for it John. We need your callibur up the front and your maturity with years of experience.
You have so much more to offer than those 20 something year old pimply faced, big ego jet heads. All of those halfwits dont even have a degree in any dicipline with their piddling 100 hrs T.T. What a bloody joke aviation is today !

Atleast the great USA has decent recruitment standards. Just to get an interview a pilot must have a minimum of 1500 hrs T.T. , a full ATPL, a degree in any dicipline, M.E. CIR.

Thank God, for the FAA. lts a real shame that other Airlines around the world, dont have the same high standards.

parabellum
17th Jul 2016, 01:12
The sooner we take pilots out of the flight deck the sooner we lower the fatality rate even more, since most aviation accidents are caused by human error. The technology isn't quite there yet but it isn't far off. Once driver less cars are the norm aircraft are sure to follow. I am okay with that.


Atlas - PPRuNe already has many threads discussing the 'Pilotless Aircraft', a search will find them. There are a dozen reasons why the pilotless aircraft won't happen within the next fifty years, mainly technical, but in todays current security climate the prospect of a group of suicidal terrorists taking over any ATC unit, anywhere, doen't bear thinking about, the carnage they could cause would be in biblical proportions.


Teslar have so far had two serious accidents with their driverless cars.

moa999
17th Jul 2016, 02:01
Tesla..
Note they refer to the car control software as 'beta' and is only meant to be used on major highways with good lane markings... and the driver is meant to have hands on the steering wheel at all times (which while they detect it, they dont enforce)

I think they've also said that given the miles the cars have travelled the accident rate is well below that of a human driver.

But of course its new and different so any issues will make news.

At least we will get some driverless trains in Sydney in 2019 with the opening of the Sydney Metro Northwest

Water Wings
17th Jul 2016, 04:59
Go for it John. We need your callibur up the front and your maturity with years of experience.
You have so much more to offer than those 20 something year old pimply faced, big ego jet heads. All of those halfwits dont even have a degree in any dicipline with their piddling 100 hrs T.T. What a bloody joke aviation is today !

Atleast the great USA has decent recruitment standards. Just to get an interview a pilot must have a minimum of 1500 hrs T.T. , a full ATPL, a degree in any dicipline, M.E. CIR.

Thank God, for the FAA. lts a real shame that other Airlines around the world, dont have the same high standards.
You are aware that current entry level pilots at Air New Zealand have in the region of 3000 to 5000 hours and sometimes more than that? With the rate of progression the airline has, probably closer to 10,000 hours for a first Jet Command.


Might I suggest some research next time before shooting your mouth off.

IsDon
17th Jul 2016, 05:43
You are aware that current entry level pilots at Air New Zealand have in the region of 3000 to 5000 hours and sometimes more than that? With the rate of progression the airline has, probably closer to 10,000 hours for a first Jet Command.


Might I suggest some research next time before shooting your mouth off.

Black Belt is clearly a troll WW.

Have a look at his previous posts. It won't take long, there's not that many, but all of the same genre.

Exactly what a good ol boy, redneck septic is doing on the Australia/NZ forum is anyone's guess.

goodonyamate
17th Jul 2016, 06:46
Thank God, for the FAA. lts a real shame that other Airlines around the world, dont have the same high standards.

Agreed, if only everywhere banned over 65 pilots, then the rest of us (including those with thousands of hours, not just the so called pimply faced kids)who have no opportunities would maybe get a small glimmer of hope of moving to the left seat....you know, after those who've pretty much had progression handed to them on a platter, the benefit of the increasing retirement ages, the increase in property values etc etc are forced to bugger off. We certainly wouldn't miss you.

Such a shame you don't recognize that those you claim aren't ready are the one grabbing you by the collar and dragging you through the day....maybe they should stop. Sadly, by the time you realize it's time to go, others memories of a once great career are tainted by the bitterness of having to carry you every shift, and before you know it, your name is under every stick shaker cap in the airline.

Aeolus2000BC
17th Jul 2016, 11:35
Reading this thread confirms my decision many years ago- Thank God I flew from the Cuckoos nest!

What lovely work environment- Yeah Right !!:ok:

parabellum
17th Jul 2016, 12:17
goodonyamate - probably nothing more dangerous than an FO who likes to think he is 'carrying' the captain.


I wasn't QANTAS but major aviation was not always as you suggest.


Qualify as a cadet, say, twenty one years old?, go do 1500 PIC with a carrier that will give you that kind of experience, back to mainline for ten years as a SO, upgrade to FO, at least ten years in RHS before even considered for command, when promoted many years on a stand-by roster, retire at 55.


Always an eye opener when a young buck climbs into the LHS for the first time in the SIM. Interesting to observe when things start going wrong. Nothing out of the ordinary but just the normal SIM stuff, except this time all eyes are upon him and all decisions are his. The hardest part of a right to left seat transition is the mental transition and that is where the cracks will appear, if any.

billyt
17th Jul 2016, 21:30
It is people like goodonyamate that makes me look at staying, if only to p... him off.

Thank goodness there are not too many like him, part of the entitlement generation.

goodonyamate
17th Jul 2016, 22:20
goodonyamate - probably nothing more dangerous than an FO who likes to think he is 'carrying' the captain.


What about the danger in a Captain who thinks he knows everything? The Captain who has spent his whole life 'flying' 4 engine aircraft across the pacific, and steps into a narrow body aircraft for the first time and thinks he has it mastered? Unfortunately with some (not all!) of the over 65's, carrying is a necessity. Ask around.

It is people like goodonyamate that makes me look at staying, if only to p... him off.

Thank goodness there are not too many like him, part of the entitlement generation.
17th Jul 2016 22:17

Part of the greed generation eh? You might as well stick around, everyone else is. Will keep working on the shoulders in preparation for your arrival :p

ElZilcho
18th Jul 2016, 01:01
Thank goodness there are not too many like him, part of the entitlement generation.

We're not talking about some LCC where cadets are clawing for commands after 18 months in the seat.

But lets be honest here, there's plenty of Pilots who were hired into NAC out of the Aeroclub and got their first command with less hours in the book then your average GA pilot of today.

I would hope those same Captains aren't the ones pointing the finger at the "entitlement" of others who might not see a Command before retirement.

Tankengine
18th Jul 2016, 04:17
We're not talking about some LCC where cadets are clawing for commands after 18 months in the seat.

But lets be honest here, there's plenty of Pilots who were hired into NAC out of the Aeroclub and got their first command with less hours in the book then your average GA pilot of today.

I would hope those same Captains aren't the ones pointing the finger at the "entitlement" of others who might not see a Command before retirement.

So true, in Aus the very ones that started as cadets are complaining about these upstart youngsters who have got their 20 year badges but still are not senior enough to get an East coast command! The attitude that "the company really needs me" is weird.

atlas12
18th Jul 2016, 06:36
Parabellum, this is getting way off topic but if you had bothered to do ANY research whatsoever you would know that a.) the company is named "Tesla" not "Teslar", and b.) the number of miles driven on autopilot vs fatalities is already much lower than that of a human driver and the technology is still in its infancy. But hey, people always oppose new things especially when it could result in the loss of their own job.

Back on topic, some of you have disgusting attitudes and you probably should retire from the industry. Hell, you are making me want to retire from the industry just by reading this crap. I have news for some of you: I have flown with many fantastic 30 something skippers that had 10k hours under their belt and did a great job in the left seat. I have also flown with some mid 60s skippers who should have given the game up years ago. It goes both ways. Sitting in the left seat isn't that hard and yes I have been on both sides of the flight deck. It isn't for everyone and has its moments, but one thing I have learned in my career so far is that some people love to blow it out of proportion.

parabellum
18th Jul 2016, 12:26
If adding an 'r' where there shouldn't be one is my biggest mistake then I shall sleep peacefully tonight. I see you avoided further discussion about pilotless passenger aircraft and possible security issues. (Checked for spelling).

atlas12
18th Jul 2016, 20:56
Indeed I did, as you mentioned it has its own dedicated thread (I didn't know that before as I never went looking for it).

piratepete
21st Jul 2016, 03:06
GOODONYAMATE.
Im tempted to say your name says it all.I was 21 when I started as a lowly F/O on $60 a week.By the time I was 25 I really started to dislike most LHS guys and resented having to 'carry" them so often (in my mind) only to realise later on that it was my CRM that was lacking.Your attitude spells trouble CRM-wise in the FD.
Once I became a big-jet PIC I welcomed all the help I could get from the RHS.Now im a TRE etc im shocked at the poor attitude of many of todays pilots.

Lastly, I challenge you to a duel in the SIM and lets see how the oldies compare to the top guns (you?), this rubbish about carrying a Captain is just well, rubbish.I would love to discuss your attitude when YOU are 65 and still flying....I think you will find that 99% of people evolve their attitude over time, Peter.

goodonyamate
21st Jul 2016, 13:25
Pete,

Who's claiming to be a top gun? Perhaps your understanding of carrying is different to mine so let me clear it up. I respect any captain whether I know them or not, whatever their age, because they are the captain. No one is saying these guys don't have skills, experience, crm, management abilities etc that are lacking. As to a sim duel....the sim is not the problem. If it was , they wouldnt be here. The problem is the pace of the operation. As people get older, we slow down. No shame in it, happens to everyone. Whether it happens at 65, 62, 70 is irrelevant. The operation requires things to be done within a certain timeframe. I'm certainly not advocating rushing, but when someone can't complete the required duties within the normal timeframe, they most certainly can't keep up with the operation when things get tight. Hence, the FO has to do more than usual to keep things running. Without it, more delays etc etc. to get through a day (and it is not every day). Therefore, there is a certain amount of carrying required. Never for operational decision making etc, but for keeping the thing turning, absolutely. The point is some can't recognize when they have slowed so much that they start loading up the other person. When this happens, resentment ensues...hence the issues. Whether people will write it on here or not, you can't honestly tell me you think this is an issue with a small minority. Capt/FO/SO say the same thing. Maybe it wasn't such an issue when there was lots of expansion in all the airlines, but at a time of little or no expansion, shrinking, RINs, threatened redundancies, these issues become bigger. Not sure when you got to the LHS, for me personally, I'll be in my 50's when my number comes up, if I'm lucky. I certainly won't be flying at 65. Too much fun to be had in retirement.

atlas12
22nd Jul 2016, 01:47
Well you've got that right.... at the going rate I'll also be in my 50s when the left seat once again presents itself. The difference being I won't be flying then anymore. I don't know how some guys do it into their 60s.... I haven't been in this industry anywhere near as long as some of you folk, and already I am beginning to tire of the big C little T, increasing scrutiny over anything and everything that you do on a daily basis, dwindling pay and lifestyle etc. It all looked like so much fun from the outside :p