Basic training

[EMB145]

As we all are aware there are hundreds of pilots with the frozen ATPL/IR plus MCC looking for their first airline job. The job adverts normally state 500 hours turbine etc.
My point is that in all other professions the student at the end of training has the necessary qualifications and experience to do the job .Look at the medical, dental, legal and accountancy professions. This does not seem to be the case in civil aviation where all the basic training up to IR is solely related to single pilot operations. At the end of this training there is an add-on course lasting 8 days called MCC. I would say that most students embarking on the JAA ATPL route aspire to be airline pilots and therefore necessarily will eventually be operating multi-pilot aeroplanes. Would it not therefore be more advantageous to be teaching and operating multi-pilot operations from a much earlier phase in the flight training. I am presently an ERJ145 simulator instructor but have done considerable MCC training. My experience of the MCC training (and I am sure many of you will have experienced this) is that it is a process of unlearning previously drilled single pilot habits. It is probably true to say that the vast majority of IR examiners and instructors except perhaps for simulator instructors have never flown for the airlines and have therefore never been in the real world.
My belief is that if this fundamental problem were to be addressed the ‘Catch 22' problem of what the flight schools turn out and you pay £30,000 - £50,000 or more to obtain and is not what the airlines want could be rectified.
As is the case with any learning process the first method you learn tends to be your preferred method. When you learn long division at school the first method is the method you prefer and when a subsequent teacher tries to show you a better method you reject it.
This is the case in airline pilot training today where we are all taught to be single pilot operators and then have to learn a new method of working as a team
In the days when your first airline job would have been on a DC-3 with a similar cockpit to a Seneca then the present system may have worked, Today the modern cockpit and method of operating in a multi-pilot operation has no resemblance to a single pilot Seneca so I would argue the system has to be changed.
I would guess that a tiny percentage of professional pilots operate single crew IFR so would it not be better to make the standard initial IR a multi pilot IR and a specialist course carried out if you require a single pilot IR.
Were the airlines consulted when JAR-FCL was drafted as regards what they wanted from a newly qualified pilot?

[SMAK]

As a flying instructor who has never worked in a multi pilot environment, but is currently teaching those who are headed in that direction, I find your comment of particular interest. I recently mooted such an idea in our crew room, and got the usual "we've always done it this way" reply.
This,however,was followed up by an anecdote relating to a group of sponsored students some years ago. If I understood correctly, they were to cease solo after they had completed some ten hours PIC. From then on were to be trained as multi crew using the instructor as the other crew member. This was fine until they graduated and reached their Airline, when it was discovered they were all unable to make independant decisions.
I have for a long time held the belief that the way we train people for the modern flight deck is somwhat out of date, and at a recent meeting had the opportunity to talk with a representative of a major UK flight school. If what he says is true then they are looking at just that scenario.
Would like to discuss more but its friday and the pub beckons. Have you posted Flying Instructors with this? I would like to know if there are any strongly held veiws higher up in the establishment.
smak.

[EMB145]

Thank you SMAK for your informative reply - I hope we get many more on this subject.

[Wee Weasley Welshman]

Rubbish. Onthe dark and stormy night on one engine when Skippy's dodgy ticker has stopped you are a single pilot operation. Thats what you need to be up to.

Multi pilot ops are a piece of cake - you want something - just ask for it. How tricky can that be? It takes about 40 sectors to get completely comfortable with Who Does What When. Which is what line training is all about.

What there should be more of is raw data IF flying using particularly tricky and unfamiliar plates. At the moment it is all too easy to do all your training and your test at just 3 or 4 familiar airfields that might be quite straightforward.

I would be in favour of the authorities allowing special 'training plates' to be published whereby things are kept much busier and tighter. THATS what people need on the line - the FMC falls over and suddenly there is no magenta line, there is a turn coming up, you'll need to start that descent halfway through rolling out on the ILS and perhaps it'd be best to get the gear down now and the Go Around has a close in turn and an early level off to a stepped climb back at a beacon not already tuned in then an offset hold at that beacon - no vectors. Lots more flights encompassing that kind of thing and less endless RMI intercepts plus unsual attitude recoveries in a PROPER aerobatic aircraft would be good news.

IMHO,

WWW

[EMB145]

Dear WWW

How much multi-pilot ops have you flown?
Your reply seems particularly simplistic and ignorant as it only addresses the pilot incapacitation scenario which indeed is a very rare event and my original posting was not referring to this which is trained exhaustively in MCC and type rating courses.

[SMAK]

WWW has some valuable points I think and I would like to be able to explore this further.
I have heard it said that it is easier to multi crew train graduates of some schools than it is for those of others. no names no pack drill.
if this is true then there is certainly a case to be examined.
smak

[scroggs]

EMB145,
methinks you have an overly simplistic view of other professions! Like the achievement of an ATPL, the letters LLB, BEd, BMed, and whatever an accountant's degree is DO NOT qualify those individuals in their professions without a great deal of further training, as I'm sure any lawyer, teacher, doctor or accountant would be very happy to tell you. Flying is no different.
WWW is right in that training for the worst case should emphasise the ability to work single-handed. Even two up, with both pilots fully compos mentis, under emergency conditions one deals with the emergency while the other flies the aircraft unaided. The last thing you need in that situation is a pilot who's had his hand held all through his training.
Another issue is that each aircraft requires its own procedures and methods, and it's not easy to develop a generic multi-crew course to take account of the various differences between, say, BAe, Embraer, Fokker, Airbus and Boeing aircraft. These elements will only be sensibly covered in type training by the employer.
However, I do believe that it may be possible and profitable to include more multi-crew related training in the earlier stages of training, and I'd be interested to hear the opinions of the major schools about that. It is certainly true that an individual too steeped in single-pilot operation can be difficult to convert to commercial multi-crew operation - witness the number of ex-mil fast jet people who've struggled on conversion to airlines in spite of being some of the sharpest pilots in the business.
An interesting topic; I'd like to hear more opinions.

[RVR800]

EMB145 Good Post

Didn't one of the most senior training captains at BA say a few years ago that he would be quite happy to put a young person
onto a 737 sim from 0 hour to the line?

A lot of this relates to personal experience
i.e. WWW ex BAe came to his job through an
operation that teaches people to fly aeroplanes single crew. OK a sim may be
used later on multi-crew. Most CAA staff examiners have only ever flown light aircraft
and ME IR instructors are the same.
They regard the single crew ratings as
a prerequisite for good multicrew ops.
Its their job.

I think with the aging fleets of GA aircraft
and associated escalation of costs for spares
etc and the plummeting costs of simulators
one expect a shift of emphasis

This has already started. Most BA sponsored pilots will never use their Single crew IRs
after their initial IRT. Why get an expensive
rating that you will never use.

The JAA severed the link between multi and
single crew environments and more legislation may be in the pipeline.

Of course BA would love to save costs and cut out all the single crew initial training
but this may be a long time coming.

[Wee Weasley Welshman]

So how did everyone from the Wright brohers cope up until 2 years ago when there was no MCC?

Yeah it'd be nice to add in mutli crew work during basic training. It'd be nice to add a lot of things like solo twin time or basic aeros. But thats just going to hike the time and price.

EMB 145 - I have six months of Boeing time now and some 1,500odd single pilot ops before that.

Single pilot multi engine low performance flying is the most demanding environment for a pilot with low hours. Thats why its the best assessment of their proficiency and frankly the IRT isn't that big a hurdle these days.

People seem to be getting awful hung up these days on Multi crew issues. But these - like all skills develop with time and experience. They are very hard to teach over and above the limited aims of the current MCC course. Whereas basic flying skills like accurate flight by power and pitch, 'keeping up' with the aeroplane and a rock solid instrument scan under pressure are MUCH more important and MUCH more responsive to thorough training.

I've seen people take an IRT flying 2 approaches they'd practiced dozens of times dual, in a familiar aircraft at a quiet oblidging airfield on a CAVOK windless day and pass - what hurdle is that?!?! If you are going to hike the price of ATPL training then invest in the fundamentals and leave the finesse of the right way to call a checklist to line training - where it belongs.

Is my view.

WWW

[EMB145]

It is very clear from WWW's reply that he has no concept at all of the real world of airline flying so please (although he is the moderator) could he keep out of the discussion?
If this should be transferred to a different forum please let me know but please WWW keep out of it.

[SMAK]

I dont believe this is about the etiquette of chek list delivery, but something far more fundamental. My view is that just because we have done it this way for so long does'n't make it right, or wrong. But it does make it time to be looked at in depth to see if we can improve things. My young son could not see over the coaming, did'n't know what an altimeter or ASI was, but he was blinding good at attitude flying because he understood the picture on the instrument.
What do the aviation trick cyclists say?
smak

[SMAK]

just saw something of interest in "Aircrew Notices Misc." about pilot training and experience. Take a look.

[flite idol]

Steady on EMB, you may have started the thread but you don`t own it.! Some good points raised by both sides. I have to say I lean towards the theory of experience gained in a demanding single pilot environment can give confidence, self reliance and stand you in good stead under many multi-crew situations,(assuming one has passed the company training to satisfaction) not just emergencies.

[flite idol]

Yep that is a good thread on Aircrew notices(apart from the piontless but usual and boring Guv bashing).

[Wee Weasley Welshman]

EMB145 - slightly bemued old bean. I am an airline pilot - I spent all day today moving over 400 people between the UK, N Ireland and Spain in what felt suspiciously like multi pilot ops. Up until a few months ago I was teaching people to fly as an Approved Instrument Rating Instructor - many of my students were airline cadets.

I would have thought that I am pretty well placed to have a valid opinion on your thread. On the forum I run.

I'm sure you welcome opinions even if they are different from your own... else why start this thread?

If you've got a good argument then stand by it and persuade me.

On your substantive point about were the airlines consulted in the JAA training shake up then the answer is Yes. The fact is they ain't interested. What they want to see for their money is someone holding a CPL/IR Frzn ATPL a minimal failure rate and no accidents during the course. Oh and the cheapest price.

If it were important to the airlines for more multi crew work to be included they would already pay for it. Instead all you get is perhaps a willingness to pay for 5hrs Aeros or a 10hr Flex allowance in hours per student.

How exactly would you envisage multi pilot ops being incorporated into - say - the second half of PA28 training? I struggle to see how you could do it PRACTICALLY. Brief each other on a visual circuit join and approach? Call for flap rather than pull the lever? I'm genuinely intrigued.

Cheers,

WWW

[ 04 September 2001: Message edited by: Wee Weasley Welshman ]