Check & trap! Are we back to the bad old days?
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: sh!# hole
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
G'day guys, wondering if someone could tell me the total time, amount of sims and line sectors from start to finish of a command course in QF.
Based on a current B767 F/O to B767 Captain.
Thanks,
Oz
Based on a current B767 F/O to B767 Captain.
Thanks,
Oz
Nunc est bibendum
Oz, nine sims. About 30(ish) sectors.
Blueloo et al. An important aspect of this is where the trainees are falling over. Is it the endorsement phase? 501-509. Is it the COM sims CM5- CM9?
CM phase? I 'fell over' in CM8 and did CM11 (or 12 or 13....don't remember). At the time it felt like a fail. One of my recommendations to the training team at the team was to advertise the CM part of the course as requiring 6 sims of which 5 were 'scheduled' but they didn't know which of the additional sims you would do until you were in the middle of it. Some wouldn't need the additional sim and get through in five whilst others may need an additional one- or two, or three. So hopefully that goes some way to the 'feeling like a failure' aspect. Whilst I felt like one after a couple of daft (and what I felt for me were uncharacteristic) stuff ups the 'system' certainly didn't treat me like one. The guys running the additional session were excellent and it gave me a lot of confidence for CM9.
However the CM phase is an eye opener. I expected to learn a lot but I was quite surprised at what some of the lessons ended up being. I thought I knew myself (and my mode of operation) pretty well but some of the outcomes from that phase were quite difficult to work through. Self doubt, self belief, coping with stress, were all things that I had dwelt with previously but the new insights were humbling and assisted in a greater insight into my operation.
There were a couple of frustrations in there too. A couple of 'lessons' required me to modify my operation and I was disappointed that 13 years of QF flying hadn't revealed those things to me previously and now I was having to modify my modus operandi. Perhaps some are lucky and don't need to, perhaps some aren't capable of doing that within the constraints of the 'system'.
Endorsement phase? I'd be surprised if there were many that didn't get through this. If not then I think that the focus really does have to go back onto the candidate. It's simply flying the aircraft to tolerances and there are enough good trainers out there to assist if the technique is lacking in the short term. Would lack of familiarity count here? Maybe but there is a fair bit of slack here and I haven't heard of many examples of people being 'chopped' in this phase without being given lots of extra training and opportunities.
Line Training? One of the comments I heard from many of the trainers was that many crew knew the books very well and could quote chapter and verse but couldn't 'manage' that on the line. An example was visual approaches where a discussion on the issue would have the candidate able to quote- in some cases verbatim- but then when cleared for one, couldn't manage the a/c systems to execute the maneuver whilst still meeting the legal requirements. Beyond that, many crew don't get through the line training for very specific and personal reasons. The constant I found was that all the trainers I had were excellent. I didn't enjoy my Pre final- mostly self induced- but had a GREAT time on my final.
Anyway, that's my take on some of the issues. Whilst I've been out of the system now for nearly five months I can't say that I saw much 'checking' during the process and felt that the training input was appropriate 90% of the time.
FWIW.
Blueloo et al. An important aspect of this is where the trainees are falling over. Is it the endorsement phase? 501-509. Is it the COM sims CM5- CM9?
CM phase? I 'fell over' in CM8 and did CM11 (or 12 or 13....don't remember). At the time it felt like a fail. One of my recommendations to the training team at the team was to advertise the CM part of the course as requiring 6 sims of which 5 were 'scheduled' but they didn't know which of the additional sims you would do until you were in the middle of it. Some wouldn't need the additional sim and get through in five whilst others may need an additional one- or two, or three. So hopefully that goes some way to the 'feeling like a failure' aspect. Whilst I felt like one after a couple of daft (and what I felt for me were uncharacteristic) stuff ups the 'system' certainly didn't treat me like one. The guys running the additional session were excellent and it gave me a lot of confidence for CM9.
However the CM phase is an eye opener. I expected to learn a lot but I was quite surprised at what some of the lessons ended up being. I thought I knew myself (and my mode of operation) pretty well but some of the outcomes from that phase were quite difficult to work through. Self doubt, self belief, coping with stress, were all things that I had dwelt with previously but the new insights were humbling and assisted in a greater insight into my operation.
There were a couple of frustrations in there too. A couple of 'lessons' required me to modify my operation and I was disappointed that 13 years of QF flying hadn't revealed those things to me previously and now I was having to modify my modus operandi. Perhaps some are lucky and don't need to, perhaps some aren't capable of doing that within the constraints of the 'system'.
Endorsement phase? I'd be surprised if there were many that didn't get through this. If not then I think that the focus really does have to go back onto the candidate. It's simply flying the aircraft to tolerances and there are enough good trainers out there to assist if the technique is lacking in the short term. Would lack of familiarity count here? Maybe but there is a fair bit of slack here and I haven't heard of many examples of people being 'chopped' in this phase without being given lots of extra training and opportunities.
Line Training? One of the comments I heard from many of the trainers was that many crew knew the books very well and could quote chapter and verse but couldn't 'manage' that on the line. An example was visual approaches where a discussion on the issue would have the candidate able to quote- in some cases verbatim- but then when cleared for one, couldn't manage the a/c systems to execute the maneuver whilst still meeting the legal requirements. Beyond that, many crew don't get through the line training for very specific and personal reasons. The constant I found was that all the trainers I had were excellent. I didn't enjoy my Pre final- mostly self induced- but had a GREAT time on my final.
Anyway, that's my take on some of the issues. Whilst I've been out of the system now for nearly five months I can't say that I saw much 'checking' during the process and felt that the training input was appropriate 90% of the time.
FWIW.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Surrounding the localizer
Posts: 2,200
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
Reading this thread as a Non-QF outsider, I'm quite frankly amazed that there seems to be an under tone of tacit acceptance of a 70% or so pass rate for a command sim course.
Surely, if the training/checking apparatus was functioning correctly I would have expected an "enlightened" organisation such as QF to embrace a methodology based on identifying and rectifying potentially weak areas long before anyone was assessed as able to progress to a command upgrade.
Mayby I've been fortunate thus far in my airline flying exposure...I thought attitudes like this went out with the dark ages
Surely, if the training/checking apparatus was functioning correctly I would have expected an "enlightened" organisation such as QF to embrace a methodology based on identifying and rectifying potentially weak areas long before anyone was assessed as able to progress to a command upgrade.
Mayby I've been fortunate thus far in my airline flying exposure...I thought attitudes like this went out with the dark ages
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: sydney
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Holic.
The dedicated instructor thing you mention is a big factor.
Its been known about since QF were handed TN in the early 90's.
But the Sydney QF push wouldn't be told anything by the likes of a domestic airline and their training system.
Hence today 737 commands (shorthaul) go through rapidly with neglible fail rate, and the 767 group are discussing this on this forum like its some sort of rocket science. No one wants to lose face.
The dedicated instructor thing you mention is a big factor.
Its been known about since QF were handed TN in the early 90's.
But the Sydney QF push wouldn't be told anything by the likes of a domestic airline and their training system.
Hence today 737 commands (shorthaul) go through rapidly with neglible fail rate, and the 767 group are discussing this on this forum like its some sort of rocket science. No one wants to lose face.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Zube, the 767 training department have expressed many times their desire for paired flying so that you have a dedicated instructor for your line training.
Unfortuantely the Longhaul EBA currently prohibits them from assigning appropriate lines to training personnel so they are unable to do it.
Unfortuantely the Longhaul EBA currently prohibits them from assigning appropriate lines to training personnel so they are unable to do it.
Unfortuantely the Longhaul EBA currently prohibits them from assigning appropriate lines to training personnel so they are unable to do it.
Long term pairing also means that you only pick up one point of view. If I recall correctly, I flew with 7 different check and trainers during my line training. It really wasn't an issue.
I would be concerned at a training system that had a negligible failure rate. Unfortunately, the system does have to have an element of checking in there somewhere. Gaining a command is not a god given gift. I've flown with many an FO who was obviously going to have trouble with the move, and many others who would obviously make good captains, and now are.
If anything I find it disturbing that you have so little idea of the role of the captain that you think the transfer should (more or less) just happen for 'solid citizens' (whom I might add are likely a lot less solid than you imagine).
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MrDeux,
That is correct, except that the Training Captains line is done using the normal bidding process. There are certain sectors that are needed to be done for training as you know (eg international sectors) and there is no guarantee that the training captains will be awarded these patterns. (A number of Training Captains are junior, or even rotate).
I'm only coming from the F/O training point of view (many years to go before having to worry about Command training
) but I feel there is a balance to be struck between not enough, and too many opinions to absorb during training. I agree that its good to have more than one opinion, but I think I'd be overloaded having too many during line training!
One thing that has come out of my experience with the training department is that I have a renewed respect for what our recent successful command trainees have had to go through. 4 bars are certainly not handed out willy nilly in this company!
That is correct, except that the Training Captains line is done using the normal bidding process. There are certain sectors that are needed to be done for training as you know (eg international sectors) and there is no guarantee that the training captains will be awarded these patterns. (A number of Training Captains are junior, or even rotate).
I'm only coming from the F/O training point of view (many years to go before having to worry about Command training
) but I feel there is a balance to be struck between not enough, and too many opinions to absorb during training. I agree that its good to have more than one opinion, but I think I'd be overloaded having too many during line training!One thing that has come out of my experience with the training department is that I have a renewed respect for what our recent successful command trainees have had to go through. 4 bars are certainly not handed out willy nilly in this company!
Reading this thread as a Non-QF outsider, I'm quite frankly amazed that there seems to be an under tone of tacit acceptance of a 70% or so pass rate for a command sim course.
And unfortunately, there is quite a large percentage, who, for whatever reason shouldn't/can't make the jump to command. 30% failure is not representative of that number; over half of them will pass on a subsequent attempt. Generally after doing a lot more work. The remainer, well, I've already said gaining a command isn't a god given right.
You can easily push the pass rate up to 100%: just lower the bar, or don't adequately check, or perhaps only allow those whom you know will pass to have a go in the first place.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: south pacific vagrant
Posts: 1,334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mrdeux
...And unfortunately, there is quite a large percentage, who, for whatever reason shouldn't/can't make the jump to command. 30% failure is not representative of that number...
And how would that number compare with the rest of the industry?
Nunc est bibendum
I'd be very surprised if the number in the last 12 months was only 70%. I don't have the hard numbers but I would think that the likely figure would be closer to 85%.
waren9, I can't speak for the current regime in QF Flight Training (not Group Flight Training) but I know that the previous regime never sat back and 'accepted' any rate. They were always striving to improve the trainers and the system. They were very, very eager in seeking feedback on the various aspects of the course. They were open about areas that they felt they needed to improve.
So back to the original claim that the methodology had changed back to check and trap rather than an overt training environment. Some candidates may come across one or two trainers like that but by and large, that wasn't my experience, it wasn't the experience of my crash buddy, it wasn't the experience of other course mates who followed a month behind me, etc. I do know of a couple of candidates who have struggled with particular instructors and that's to be expected in a big organisation with lots of personalities. Others thought those trainers were great.
Anyway, my opinion FWIW.
waren9, I can't speak for the current regime in QF Flight Training (not Group Flight Training) but I know that the previous regime never sat back and 'accepted' any rate. They were always striving to improve the trainers and the system. They were very, very eager in seeking feedback on the various aspects of the course. They were open about areas that they felt they needed to improve.
So back to the original claim that the methodology had changed back to check and trap rather than an overt training environment. Some candidates may come across one or two trainers like that but by and large, that wasn't my experience, it wasn't the experience of my crash buddy, it wasn't the experience of other course mates who followed a month behind me, etc. I do know of a couple of candidates who have struggled with particular instructors and that's to be expected in a big organisation with lots of personalities. Others thought those trainers were great.
Anyway, my opinion FWIW.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Surrounding the localizer
Posts: 2,200
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
mrdeux,
Slip of the keyboard I'm afraid..by command sim..I should have actually said command course
Keg, yeah mate 85% would be a far more representative number in airlines I've worked in..70% would indicate a failure in the system somewhere me thinks.
Anyway, goodluck to the QF 767 guys/gals...mayby one day you'll get luckly and have a play in a 757
Slip of the keyboard I'm afraid..by command sim..I should have actually said command course
Keg, yeah mate 85% would be a far more representative number in airlines I've worked in..70% would indicate a failure in the system somewhere me thinks.
Anyway, goodluck to the QF 767 guys/gals...mayby one day you'll get luckly and have a play in a 757
I've flown both BTWNunc est bibendum
I asked the question earlier today regarding recent failures. The checkie didn't know of anyone NOT getting through since mid last year....probably 30-40 candidates?!?! A spike of a half dozen or so not getting through in the six-nine months prior to mid 08. Most had a common theme.
