Problem with aviation these days is it's all about PRICE.

All parties involved will have their own price.

Passengers want cheap fares & accept risk if the price is right.

Pilots want a job straight out of training & fast promotion into the left seat of a shiny jet & accept terms & conditions less than previous industry norms to get it. This fast tracking of pilots, bypasses the previous industry practice of 10 to 12 years in the right hand seat. During that time, almost by osmosis the FO inherits professionalism & discipline from those in the left seat. It's a long mentoring process that takes time, money & patience. The company also has the opportunity to assess an individuals potential for command prior to setting them loose on a dark stormy night after a long tour of duty with a brand new FO to an overseas port with hundreds of people on board.

HR managers trim entry level experience to ensure forecasted numbers for recruitment requirements are met. Didn't Bruce Buchanan say pilots with more experience was actually a "BAD" thing. Buchanan also went to the extent of selling the cadetship as the opportunity for everyone to be able to be a pilot. Does that come from the same school of thought that anyone should be able to run an airline?

Chief Pilots will also accept reduced entry standards to keep the show on the road. Mates from Ansett have told me that MR wouldn't accept direct entry FO's with less than 3000 hours total flight time (including turbo prop time). But 250 hours in a cadet program is now acceptable? As long as there flying with the most experienced of the airlines Captains! Not that long ago, both pilots had to be proficient & experienced. Now the First Officers learning the ropes on the job at 8 miles per minute.

Hell, doesn't Ryanair even want to get rid of First Officers. What would have happened in Changi if it was a single pilot operation?

Middle managers trim training costs to ensure more shiny jets can fly more people further. The training is sent to external providers, cause they can provide it cheaper. After all these new jets fly themselves these days.

Executive Management want to increase their already excessive salaries & ensure KPI bonus all round. The "beanthiefs" will continue to drive down costs in an airline. Directing pilots to carry less fuel, work longer & more arduous tours of duty. Transfer flying to lower costs entities to save money, labelling experience as expensive. It's all about GROWTH. Unless there's more growth (at any cost) there's no shareholder increased value & no more gravy train. CEO's will go to great lengths, including shutting down their own airline to ensure objectives are met.

The vicious cycle WILL turn full circle, evidence is also on posts in the European threads. They are also watching the clock.

It's only a matter of time.

Tick Tock.

Toruk Macto,

How has this come about, is it a recommendation from Airbus, CASA or the ATSB?

Will it be industry wide?

Or is it a band aid solution by a flight operations department as a result of an inconvenient investigation & they have to be seen to be doing the right thing?

It's been such an important aspect to flight safety that it's taken two years since the incident to promulgate it & it will be happening "soon".

What next from Jetstar, a heavy landing into a setting sun & the inclusion of:

into the landing checklist.

MC has got it absolutely spot on.:D:D:D

Interesting. Nice bit of verballing there. From my understanding the Captain was trying to turn the phone off, not as you assert, trying to 'answer an SMS'. A very different thing. Did you do that deliberately to make your point? :=

Read another of many articles in the paper yesterday "Due to being fatigued the fo disconected the auto pilot earlier than normal to help him with his tiredness" Dont quote me on the exact wording but to that effect.. Not sure if this is true from the atsb report..Apparent fatigue is one thing but to disconect the a/p earlier cant help the work load.

"This fast tracking of pilots, bypasses the previous industry practice of 10 to 12 years in the right hand seat. During that time, almost by osmosis the FO inherits professionalism & discipline from those in the left seat".

Don't know who posted this, but what a load of rubbish.

So unless an F/O does his time in the right hand seat, just like the good old days, there is no way he should be promoted. That is ostensibly what is being said here.

Absolute rubbish. This is old world thinking in the extreme - no consideration of competency, only time in seat.

"During that time, almost by osmosis the FO inherits professionalism & discipline from those in the left seat"

The biggest bit of rubbish. I spent 14 years in the right seat before my initial jet command and I can tell you that I had to force myself NOT to inherit a good number of the traits I was exposed to as an F/O.

What rubbish.... and on a "professional" site for aviator's no less.

".....accept terms & conditions less than previous industry norms to get it".

Now I think we are at the root of the post..... Let's blame the new guys for the current conditions the industry now offers. More rubbish. :ugh:

TWSS - What I'm saying is yes an FO should spend time in the right seat. How much time? Enough time to experience first hand operational events that, should they occur again in the future. When that individual is then sitting in the left seat, they have the necessary skills to deal with that event. Of course all events won't be replicated on the line. That's where simulation comes in. Sim cylics & endorsement training will expose pilots to appropriate handling of non normals. However I believe that no amount of sim flying can replace experience gained on the line. They compliment each other.

I'm not saying pilots shouldn't be without sufficient time in the right seat. Of course pilots need to be competent, but they also need to be disciplined , professional & mature.

As you stated, you spent 14 years in the right seat. I'm sure you saw your fair share of bad as well as a hell of a lot of good traits demonstrated by Captains in the left seat. But it's this on line operational experience over a period of time that has allowed you to pick the best of the good traits & be cautious to look for others that demonstrate the bad.

I've spent near 30 years flying aircraft with no accidents, incidents, tea & bickies or shoulder taps from CASA. Nor have I ever failed a cyclic or promotional training. This isnt to demonstrate how big my $-ck is but to highlight if that isn't professionalism then what is?

I turn my phone off before flight planning & don't read newspapers in the flight deck. Some may view this as old school, but my near 30 years experience has taught me we are more likely to f;(k up if the crews mind is not on the job.

And no I don't blame the new guys. It goes much higher than that. I blame the boards of companies who are devoid of airline operational experience. Who by board approval agreed to reduce pilot entry level experience. I blame CEO's who have now accepted this reduction in experience as the new norm. Who have trimmed training to save a buck & defer that cost to the employee.

The new guys are simply the pawns. But hey. What would I know.

Thanks MC

Reading your words above, qualifying your intent within the post that I initially referred to, indicates we are on the same page. I can find no reason to disagree with your last.

Cheers.

Have to agree with John Citizen-sitting in the cruise far less chance of missing a radio call if reading rather than talking. Training flights a classic example of this as -in our company at least- there are far more radio calls missed during training flights than normal line ops. Try doing nothing for a 10 hr BoC 2 pilot sector, primarily over the non-English speaking world-and then tell me what that does to your SA in an already fatigued state. Same school of thought that says at night the cockpit lights should be dim-despite all fatigue research recommending brightness reduces fatigue. 30 mins required for dark adaptation-which is not really necessary when flying to an airport equipped with Approach Lights, and we don't normally worry about the night fighters homing in on the glow from the cockpit these days....

Was this incident worse than the JQ57 one? This captain was suspended.

JC

Until such time the company amends it's policy & procedures manual I'll continue to follow the manual.

Would you read a newspaper with CASA inspector on board? How about on a route check with a senior check on board? The way I operate an aircraft is the same whether or not anyone else is looking over my shoulder.

I don't make the rules. Just follow them & I don't decide which part of policy I choose to adhere by & which ones I don't. So I choose to follow them all.

Would you allow a fellow crew member to take your photo whilst reading a newspaper in the cruise. It would be harmless if that photo ended up on a social networking site.

I find time to read the paper when I'm not at work.

If you can justify breaches of policy & are happy with that so be it. But I make no apologies for following procedures outlined by my employer.

Who cares if Jetstar pilots are fatigued? They bought their ticket made their bed now they have to sleep in it. Nobody held a gun at their heads to sign up for the deal much like the Virgin guys that accepted third world conditions just to fly a jet.
I guess these blokes did what they did because otherwise they would never had made it into the airlines.
What a joke you blokes are.

Bigboeingboy you're a legend mate, love the 12 year old thought process.

Sorry to all the 12 year old's out there.

There is no fatigue at Jetstar, just ask management.

Bigboingboy has a point, what part of what he says is incorrect??

No guns at heads was there??

Or was there??

(Last sentence was unnecessary)

I am also eager to hear what was untruthful about Bigboingboy's comment?

Anybody that has an interest in the safe conduct of airline operations.

Airlines are not simply vehicles for the paycheques and egos of pilots. Regardless of the conditions agreed to by crew accepting a job, there is a duty of care to provide a safe service to the public. Fatigue is a risk factor that affects the ability to provide the required safety. This is why it should be a regulatory safeguard independent of contractual arrangements (living in a dream world there I know...)

I would hope any newish pilot reading this thread can take on board the following:

If you are genuinely fatigued & you consider the fatigue (level) enough to affect the safety of the operation. Pull the pin & report UNFIT.

It may inconvenience the airline, the passengers & the schedule, but you'll survive (health or employment wise) to fly another day.

Schedules & commercial pressure will back you into the corner, however your the last line of defence in the swiss cheese model from an accident.

click.

I've only ever called in fatigued once, about 2am, after tossing & turning in bed for hours. No questions asked, just told by Ops to call when I was up, and they'd pax me home. All very civilised I thought.

However, colleagues at the same company have told of feeling some to significant pressure to accept duty when they've made a similar call. I suspect it's a combination of how one notifies Ops and the sense of the Ops controller taking the call.

What we (industry wide) need is some standard phone call that can be made. E.g. "I am not fit for duty". End of story, no questions asked.
We should not need to explain if it is a blocked sinus or an 18 month old baby screaming all night that has prevented sleep.
As it is, when sick, there is no requirement to disclose the nature of the illness, and this should be the same for fatigue. Should be illegal to question it whatsoever.

I've had ops guys arguing on the company frequency about subsequent sectors that I said I would not be fit to fly for. Not cool when already on an extended duty, flying straight at the rising sun.

A Singaporean Airline some time ago, perhaps still, used to have on the before start checklist;

"Lap top power cords. CM1..on board..CM2.. on board"

Arghhh..

Why not put 'seat belt fastened" on that checklist and "shoulder straps fastened' for good measure.

This is right up there with "talking the instruments" on the ground in a glass cockpit.

Any change to the checklist normally has to be sanctioned by the manufacturer in the form of a no technical objection letter. Failure to due so risks liability in the event of an incident/accident.

A fairly new 744 Cargo Airline had a Chief Pilot who had only flown 737s. He decided that he would change the after takeoff checklist to "Flaps up.. no lights". When it was pointed out to him that it doesn't have 'lights' and that Boeing really likes you to talk to them before changing tha checklist he got all red faced.

Take a look at the Boeing standard before takeoff checklist for 744. "Flaps..."

Hard to fcuk that up. Have a look around the cockpit at everything that might suggest you have the correct flaps, pause meaningfully, and respond.

If you have left your mobile on, ignore it...