New ICAO licencing standards.
Thread Starter
New ICAO licencing standards.
Chatting with my DAME yesterday. He mentioned that he had recently attended a conference in NZ where someone had presented a medical paper regarding medical standards for new proposed ICAO licencing standards. I have searched ICAO website for it, but to no avail.
The guts of a new category of licence was for (my words) a airline cockpit systems operator - basically a Claytons Pilot.
A potential "pilot" would undergo a training course from scratch in a simulator (not going through the bugsmasher/PPL/CPL/ATPL phase). S/He will never be issued with any of the above licences, but but issued with a "permit" to say fly only Airbus A330/40s etc. The person can then progress through the ranks of the cockpit as could you or me.
This proposal was ready to go some years ago, but was put on hold after 11/9 and pilots were furloughed etc. I feel it could be resurrected shortly to fullfill looming pilot shortages - particularly with the baby boomers retiring and and rapid LCC expansion in Asia.
Does anyone have any more information on this "licence" category, its proposed implementation and any other thoughts?
It spells doom and gloom for our profession! Not only are the skill levels being officially undermined, but the supply and demand curve many pilots are hoping will swing our way won't.
The guts of a new category of licence was for (my words) a airline cockpit systems operator - basically a Claytons Pilot.
A potential "pilot" would undergo a training course from scratch in a simulator (not going through the bugsmasher/PPL/CPL/ATPL phase). S/He will never be issued with any of the above licences, but but issued with a "permit" to say fly only Airbus A330/40s etc. The person can then progress through the ranks of the cockpit as could you or me.
This proposal was ready to go some years ago, but was put on hold after 11/9 and pilots were furloughed etc. I feel it could be resurrected shortly to fullfill looming pilot shortages - particularly with the baby boomers retiring and and rapid LCC expansion in Asia.
Does anyone have any more information on this "licence" category, its proposed implementation and any other thoughts?
It spells doom and gloom for our profession! Not only are the skill levels being officially undermined, but the supply and demand curve many pilots are hoping will swing our way won't.
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: NZ
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This doesn't surprise me. The boffins already see "GA experience as of little or no value in the airline environment." (this was said in exactly these words by a Massey University aviation "professor" to a group of pilots attending an airline CRM course in CHC (airline is no longer with us, neither is it's Aussie parent) We were suitably mortified and didn't take much notice of what else this woman had to say.
Now I don't want to offend any "cadets" or university trained direct entrants, but that is just garbage. A few thousand hours in GA, be it single pilot air transport ops, night freight or whatever, is of more practical value than a year or 2 sitting in a classroon or buzzing around with several other students in a light twin.
I have 20 odd (very odd!) years of aviation experience, with at least 3 quarters of that in "proper" airlines, the rest in GA and instructing, and nothing beats good old experience. I've seen some very good pilots come out of cadet style training, but I've seen some real idiots too. Whilst not everyone who rises through the GA ranks is an ace, it certainly seems to have a way of sorting out those with the aptitude and ability to succeed in the airline environment. They may not all have a great technical understanding of the ins and outs of theoretical CRM and aviation "psychology", but I know who I would prefer to be with on a really crappy night out in the middle of nowhere facing a non precision approach with half the flightdeck instruments not working!
Again, I don't want to offend those who are university or cadet trained, but those who come through GA are more likely to have had experiences that will stick with them for life.
That's what I reckon anyway!
Now I don't want to offend any "cadets" or university trained direct entrants, but that is just garbage. A few thousand hours in GA, be it single pilot air transport ops, night freight or whatever, is of more practical value than a year or 2 sitting in a classroon or buzzing around with several other students in a light twin.
I have 20 odd (very odd!) years of aviation experience, with at least 3 quarters of that in "proper" airlines, the rest in GA and instructing, and nothing beats good old experience. I've seen some very good pilots come out of cadet style training, but I've seen some real idiots too. Whilst not everyone who rises through the GA ranks is an ace, it certainly seems to have a way of sorting out those with the aptitude and ability to succeed in the airline environment. They may not all have a great technical understanding of the ins and outs of theoretical CRM and aviation "psychology", but I know who I would prefer to be with on a really crappy night out in the middle of nowhere facing a non precision approach with half the flightdeck instruments not working!
Again, I don't want to offend those who are university or cadet trained, but those who come through GA are more likely to have had experiences that will stick with them for life.
That's what I reckon anyway!
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: The Land Downunder
Posts: 765
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes it is true, I read an article in a pilot union newsletter recently saying that ICAO wants to implement this new licence sometime in the first half of 2004. It would basically allow a person who wants to fly airliners and not light singles or twins to bypass the traditional route and just train on jet simulators and systems to be given a rating purely on airliners for multicrew operations only.
It does suck a bit as most of us have spent years working our way up through the different licences, sounds as though ICAO really is concerned about a pilot shortage. It will be interesting to see how this new bread of pilots adapts to their new roles.
It does suck a bit as most of us have spent years working our way up through the different licences, sounds as though ICAO really is concerned about a pilot shortage. It will be interesting to see how this new bread of pilots adapts to their new roles.
PPRuNe Handmaiden
This was discussed a little while ago in Wanabe's. This idea is being kicked around for airline cadets being sponsored from go to whoa as does happen in Europe. It's one way of ensuring your pilot doesn't shift companies in a hurry. Will it work? No idea.
Personally, I feel sorry for them. Never to have enjoyed flying an aircraft by yourself on a nice sunny day. Strict 2 crew operations flying by numbers, autopilot on at 1000', off again at 300'.....
Personally, I feel sorry for them. Never to have enjoyed flying an aircraft by yourself on a nice sunny day. Strict 2 crew operations flying by numbers, autopilot on at 1000', off again at 300'.....
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Pittsburgh, USA
Posts: 601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah, training and certification ...again
If I may be able to digress. I have experience flying in an airline environment out of the busiest airspace environment in the world. I was the Local Safety Chairman for my pilots union. What I am about to say will not surprise anyone.
We had guys and girls that came from the pilot factories in Florida, where they turn them out like sausages, and they seem to have about the same quality at end production. We had fresh faced kids that shook at the knees when they saw it snow, and wouldn't preflight the aircraft in Summer and remained huddled around the weather machine looking for convective weather. I had one individual, who had such a poor knowledge of weather radar, used the down tilt to paint the buildings of Manhattan, then ask for vectors around "weather", without even discussing it with me first. The startled controller spent the rest of the day laughing at our airline as each of us checked in.
The real fun came at upgrade. None of these guys made it through on the first attempt and many were fired in disgust by our training department.
One of the wierdest things was to see a first officer who didn't know how to centre the OBS on an RMI when cleared direct to a VOR.
My background has been odd too, and thank goodness it was. I flew light aircraft on international deliveries, flew air-ambulance for four years and flew aborigines in the Outback for fourteen months in old beat to death Cessnas. I taught Boeings in simulators and aerobatics in tailwheel aircraft and one thing never escapes me...how lucky I've been.
A simulator will never teach you anything about your mortality, it will never develop your mechanical aptitude and it will never teach you the pride you should take in the very manipulation of flight controls to effect safe flight.
Simulators demonstrate emergency procedures well, and they are good for procedural exercise and demonstration. Simulators save money and lives, please don't believe that they don't. It's just that simulators were never designed to replace the real thing.
That would be just as stupid as to say that pornography was designed to replace making love!
We had guys and girls that came from the pilot factories in Florida, where they turn them out like sausages, and they seem to have about the same quality at end production. We had fresh faced kids that shook at the knees when they saw it snow, and wouldn't preflight the aircraft in Summer and remained huddled around the weather machine looking for convective weather. I had one individual, who had such a poor knowledge of weather radar, used the down tilt to paint the buildings of Manhattan, then ask for vectors around "weather", without even discussing it with me first. The startled controller spent the rest of the day laughing at our airline as each of us checked in.
The real fun came at upgrade. None of these guys made it through on the first attempt and many were fired in disgust by our training department.
One of the wierdest things was to see a first officer who didn't know how to centre the OBS on an RMI when cleared direct to a VOR.
My background has been odd too, and thank goodness it was. I flew light aircraft on international deliveries, flew air-ambulance for four years and flew aborigines in the Outback for fourteen months in old beat to death Cessnas. I taught Boeings in simulators and aerobatics in tailwheel aircraft and one thing never escapes me...how lucky I've been.
A simulator will never teach you anything about your mortality, it will never develop your mechanical aptitude and it will never teach you the pride you should take in the very manipulation of flight controls to effect safe flight.
Simulators demonstrate emergency procedures well, and they are good for procedural exercise and demonstration. Simulators save money and lives, please don't believe that they don't. It's just that simulators were never designed to replace the real thing.
That would be just as stupid as to say that pornography was designed to replace making love!
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: NZ
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agree with your sentiments completely CH. Point is that it's the "academics" from these pilot factories with no flying experience themselves, who are advising the rule makers. Talk about a vested interest!
It sucks.
It sucks.
It's the Same in other Professions
About 90% of graduates coming into agricultural science are not off farms - which about reflects the rural:city population anyway.
Techically skilled - yes, but they actually know little about 'agriculture' Not surprisingly, they make some incredibly dumb blunders. The learning process has to go back some time, and from a professional consulting point of view, I find them unemployable. My professional indemnity insurance wouldn't cover the sorts of basic errors that seem to be now standard for the industry.
Farmers have become inured to this, and now tend to use several sources of advice, especially for the critical decisions.
So far, I have never met an aggie who isn't off the land, because if you don't have a background in agriculture, sooner, rather than later, you'll spray the wrong crop, or worse. You don't need a degree to be an aggie - it wouldn't be a hinderance - but a sound knowledge of farming is worth sooo much more than a piece of paper.
It's interesting to note that mustering pilots are just not acceptable without some 'animal' handling experience - from ground level.
Agree with everything said previously. The only good thing about it all is that these 'robots' won't be allowed out into GA!
Whew!
About 90% of graduates coming into agricultural science are not off farms - which about reflects the rural:city population anyway.
Techically skilled - yes, but they actually know little about 'agriculture' Not surprisingly, they make some incredibly dumb blunders. The learning process has to go back some time, and from a professional consulting point of view, I find them unemployable. My professional indemnity insurance wouldn't cover the sorts of basic errors that seem to be now standard for the industry.
Farmers have become inured to this, and now tend to use several sources of advice, especially for the critical decisions.
So far, I have never met an aggie who isn't off the land, because if you don't have a background in agriculture, sooner, rather than later, you'll spray the wrong crop, or worse. You don't need a degree to be an aggie - it wouldn't be a hinderance - but a sound knowledge of farming is worth sooo much more than a piece of paper.
It's interesting to note that mustering pilots are just not acceptable without some 'animal' handling experience - from ground level.
Agree with everything said previously. The only good thing about it all is that these 'robots' won't be allowed out into GA!
Whew!
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Cambodia
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's all fun and games while the going is good.
One day, these guys will see something they have not seen in a sim, and they wil come undone - unfortunately taking many with them.
These are latent accidents, waiting for the right group of circumstances.
Thanks God Boeing and Airbus build great equipment.
But at least they passed the psyche test.
One day, these guys will see something they have not seen in a sim, and they wil come undone - unfortunately taking many with them.
These are latent accidents, waiting for the right group of circumstances.
Thanks God Boeing and Airbus build great equipment.
But at least they passed the psyche test.
Nunc est bibendum
TP. I don't put words into your mouth, don't take the same liberty with me! 
FWIW, I think the idea is crap. Manipulation skills won't be the same, IF skills won't be the same. It'd be actually interesting to back this proposal up with some serious research.
As for the experience thing TP.
I've never disputed the requirement for 'experience' in being a part of a crew, I've disputed those that say that GA is the only place to get it and that cadets CAN'T get it! 
FWIW, I think the idea is crap. Manipulation skills won't be the same, IF skills won't be the same. It'd be actually interesting to back this proposal up with some serious research.
As for the experience thing TP.
I've never disputed the requirement for 'experience' in being a part of a crew, I've disputed those that say that GA is the only place to get it and that cadets CAN'T get it!
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CH,
I second that. The FL cadets that I trained with in ground school only just made it through and the following classes were hit and miss. Not a very good way to blow 50-150k, not to mention that most of them have to apologise everytime the subject comes up.
I second that. The FL cadets that I trained with in ground school only just made it through and the following classes were hit and miss. Not a very good way to blow 50-150k, not to mention that most of them have to apologise everytime the subject comes up.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,382
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is a massive difference between the real thing and a synthetic trainer or sim. So many things cannot be replicated. All the chatter on frequency, weird navaids that each have their own mind...list goes on. You just can't recreate the real thing no matter how hard you try.
Above all the knowledge that if you stuff it in the real game its really going to hurt. In a syn trainer you are always going to be more relaxed.
Do you guys remember the first time you went into IMC in a light twin fully loaded with pax? Try and replicate that feeling!!
I suppose as long as they have passed the aptitude tests then they must be good
Above all the knowledge that if you stuff it in the real game its really going to hurt. In a syn trainer you are always going to be more relaxed.
Do you guys remember the first time you went into IMC in a light twin fully loaded with pax? Try and replicate that feeling!!
I suppose as long as they have passed the aptitude tests then they must be good
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just remember who drives the airline industry these days.
It is Accountants and Aircraft Manufacturers.
If the manufacturer can design an aircraft that is simple and safe to fly, efficient to operate, easy and cheap to train the crew the accountant that runs the airline is going to be very interested.
The accountant couldn't give a toss about pilot skill because he has learnt over the years that he has to pay for that and if he can get away from paying for skill he will.
Safety, the catchword we all talk about is unfortunately talked about tounge-in-cheek and is only important to the accountant when it costs him so he uses another phrase called risk management and allows safety to be cost effective.
Do we like it? NO!
Do we have to live with it? YES.
We are told if we dont like the heat in the kitchen then get out.
What else does one do when we have the so-called best job in the business? We stay.
It is Accountants and Aircraft Manufacturers.
If the manufacturer can design an aircraft that is simple and safe to fly, efficient to operate, easy and cheap to train the crew the accountant that runs the airline is going to be very interested.
The accountant couldn't give a toss about pilot skill because he has learnt over the years that he has to pay for that and if he can get away from paying for skill he will.
Safety, the catchword we all talk about is unfortunately talked about tounge-in-cheek and is only important to the accountant when it costs him so he uses another phrase called risk management and allows safety to be cost effective.
Do we like it? NO!
Do we have to live with it? YES.
We are told if we dont like the heat in the kitchen then get out.
What else does one do when we have the so-called best job in the business? We stay.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Oz
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, well, bl00dy well no muckin suprizes here are their?!!
Ya know I told youse all back in Septmber that this waz the way things waz gunna go, an ya hooted at me. Ava look agin.
http://pprune.org/forums/showthread....292#post989292
Reed the frickin writin on the walls ya walliies, they did the same bl00dy thing wiv the nurses decades ago.
Why?
Becuase the demand is gunna outstrip the supply. Simple as that.
Ecanomic reasons.
But youse are all too bizzy scrapppin between yaselves in the skoolyard, ta look outside and see wot's goin' on.
The hole aviation industry in Oz is bein' dummed down.
Ya got some bloke hoo sells cheap lectronic crap made in China, and Dick Paste in a bottel wiv 'is big mug painted on the jar, flying a twin Commanch around as a private pilot, tellin' the guvament that 'e's an expert on air safety an/ airspace issues.
Bit like me, hoo's been inta 'ospital a few times, tellin the guvament that I no wot's wrong with the medical system.
The loonies are takin' cvntrol of the asylum!
But mark my words, the BIG MONEY - the airlines - need ta push this thru simply becuase demand is outstrippin supply.
Like I sayed before, ya job ain't an 'ard one, I mean I flys with me mate Arfa in 'is airaplane sumtimes, and e's let me ava go, an e reckons flyin a big jet is just the same but a little bit different becuase its a little bit bigger.
Well blokes, and sheilas, thats EXAKLEY how all non pilots look at ya, ya know.
They all rekon that in an emergency, any one can take over an 'ave the tower talk /em down.
Mark my bl00dy words, its gunna happen, but the barstards hoo are introducin' it ain't gunna be around to carry the full consaquences of their actions when the prangs start ta happen in ernest.
Be seein youse round!
Ya know I told youse all back in Septmber that this waz the way things waz gunna go, an ya hooted at me. Ava look agin.
http://pprune.org/forums/showthread....292#post989292
Reed the frickin writin on the walls ya walliies, they did the same bl00dy thing wiv the nurses decades ago.
Why?
Becuase the demand is gunna outstrip the supply. Simple as that.
Ecanomic reasons.
But youse are all too bizzy scrapppin between yaselves in the skoolyard, ta look outside and see wot's goin' on.
The hole aviation industry in Oz is bein' dummed down.
Ya got some bloke hoo sells cheap lectronic crap made in China, and Dick Paste in a bottel wiv 'is big mug painted on the jar, flying a twin Commanch around as a private pilot, tellin' the guvament that 'e's an expert on air safety an/ airspace issues.
Bit like me, hoo's been inta 'ospital a few times, tellin the guvament that I no wot's wrong with the medical system.
The loonies are takin' cvntrol of the asylum!
But mark my words, the BIG MONEY - the airlines - need ta push this thru simply becuase demand is outstrippin supply.
Like I sayed before, ya job ain't an 'ard one, I mean I flys with me mate Arfa in 'is airaplane sumtimes, and e's let me ava go, an e reckons flyin a big jet is just the same but a little bit different becuase its a little bit bigger.
Well blokes, and sheilas, thats EXAKLEY how all non pilots look at ya, ya know.
They all rekon that in an emergency, any one can take over an 'ave the tower talk /em down.
Mark my bl00dy words, its gunna happen, but the barstards hoo are introducin' it ain't gunna be around to carry the full consaquences of their actions when the prangs start ta happen in ernest.
Be seein youse round!
Thread Starter
Exactly BB...
It will undermine and affect us ALL! It will take away jobs and career progression for each and every pilot flying today - cadet or non cadet.
The pilotless cockpit may soon be a reality.
What breed of dog will they use?
It will undermine and affect us ALL! It will take away jobs and career progression for each and every pilot flying today - cadet or non cadet.
The pilotless cockpit may soon be a reality.
What breed of dog will they use?
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Oz
Age: 75
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the truth about proposed licensing chnages
Before you all have conniption’s perhaps you should look at what is actually being proposed, that is provided being INFORMED is an option – although for some of you that is clearly not the case.
However, if you do the research you will find that it will make little difference to the hard shells who have done the hard yards in GA - nor will it have much effect on the Uni types. Believe it or not the training world is not yet capable of producing drivers in sufficient quantities.
FROM THE ICAO WEBSITE
Review of Flight Crew Training Standards
The licensing Standards of Annex 1 were last comprehensively reviewed in the 1980s. The present review is aimed at updating the flight crew licensing Standards in Annex 1 and training Standards in Annex 6, to take account of recent advances in aircraft operations and training methodologies and technologies. The current Annex 1 Standards are prescriptive and do not contain any explicit performance criteria. Therefore, one of the tasks in progress is examining the practicability of developing competency-based Standards for the licensing and training of flight crewmembers. Work already begun by the Flight Crew Licensing and Training Panel (FCLTP) indicates that competency-based Standards would likely, in the initial stages, be limited to an abinitio commercial pilot licence tailored specifically for multi-crew operations. Before being implemented, any new Standards proposed by the Panel will also first have to be adopted by ICAO's executive body.
A point worth noting is that the supporters of this proposal are not just the bean counters or the academics there are as many professional pilots involved as any other interest group, although there may not be many of god’s chosen few (the GA driver!!!). But that can hardly be surprising - we are talking professional pilots not whingers.
You might like to look at the Lufthansa site as well – they have been running close to the proposed model for some time!!!!
However, if you do the research you will find that it will make little difference to the hard shells who have done the hard yards in GA - nor will it have much effect on the Uni types. Believe it or not the training world is not yet capable of producing drivers in sufficient quantities.
FROM THE ICAO WEBSITE
Review of Flight Crew Training Standards
The licensing Standards of Annex 1 were last comprehensively reviewed in the 1980s. The present review is aimed at updating the flight crew licensing Standards in Annex 1 and training Standards in Annex 6, to take account of recent advances in aircraft operations and training methodologies and technologies. The current Annex 1 Standards are prescriptive and do not contain any explicit performance criteria. Therefore, one of the tasks in progress is examining the practicability of developing competency-based Standards for the licensing and training of flight crewmembers. Work already begun by the Flight Crew Licensing and Training Panel (FCLTP) indicates that competency-based Standards would likely, in the initial stages, be limited to an abinitio commercial pilot licence tailored specifically for multi-crew operations. Before being implemented, any new Standards proposed by the Panel will also first have to be adopted by ICAO's executive body.
A point worth noting is that the supporters of this proposal are not just the bean counters or the academics there are as many professional pilots involved as any other interest group, although there may not be many of god’s chosen few (the GA driver!!!). But that can hardly be surprising - we are talking professional pilots not whingers.
You might like to look at the Lufthansa site as well – they have been running close to the proposed model for some time!!!!
I personally wouldn’t get too worried about this proposal as the airlines, I can assure you, have very little slack in their simulator slots to do this and they certainly don’t have or want to get involved in flying training. This will mean they will have to outsource it to companies that will specialize in this type of thing. When the average level D sim can cost anywhere from US$300.00 per hour up, all the briefing time, accommodation and food, I can’t see any advantage in it to be honest over the traditional way albeit cadet or GA. It might be cheaper to do it like this in Europe where flying training is very expensive but not in the US, Aus or NZ where it is much cheaper. They simply will not be able to compete. Personally I think the whole idea is laughable. A bit like ICAO to come out with such a stupid and ill thought out proposal. 
Thread Starter
Tubby One
Could you please post a link to the relevant section of the website. The initial call (and intent of the post) was to get more information on the proposal and to become informed. It is the first I (and many others?) have heard of it.
CS
Could you please post a link to the relevant section of the website. The initial call (and intent of the post) was to get more information on the proposal and to become informed. It is the first I (and many others?) have heard of it.
CS