HKCAD move the goal posts for SOs
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: brisbane
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HKCAD move the goal posts for SOs
Anyone know more about this rumour? Apparently HKCAD have changed the licencing requirements for SOs. The rating now requires considerably more training.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: U.K.
Age: 42
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: HKCAD move the goal posts for SOs
Hey Sally,
As far as I know HKCAD has nothing to do with airliner's internal business, and besides, only Cathay or possibly Dragon has Second Officer. If it was true it would be quite hard to set a standard, don't you think? If someone know better, please correct me.
Johnny
As far as I know HKCAD has nothing to do with airliner's internal business, and besides, only Cathay or possibly Dragon has Second Officer. If it was true it would be quite hard to set a standard, don't you think? If someone know better, please correct me.
Johnny
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: brisbane
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Previously Second Officers in HK got what is called a P2X rating on their licence. This allowed them to act as cruise relief pilots but not to conduct T/Os or landings. You CX guys could confirm this?
The rumour is that this has been changed by the HKCAD and the change now requires more training (or greater experience requirements to hold a P2X??). Also, the change has come about due to pressure from a certain airline (or airlines) to make life more difficult for Oasis, the new low cost long haul airline in HK. Cynical perhaps? But it wouldn't be the first time that large dominant airlines use their powers of persuasion to get aviation regulations changed in their favour.
Anyone know more details of the changes?
The rumour is that this has been changed by the HKCAD and the change now requires more training (or greater experience requirements to hold a P2X??). Also, the change has come about due to pressure from a certain airline (or airlines) to make life more difficult for Oasis, the new low cost long haul airline in HK. Cynical perhaps? But it wouldn't be the first time that large dominant airlines use their powers of persuasion to get aviation regulations changed in their favour.
Anyone know more details of the changes?
sally
If this rumour was true, which I personally doubt, CX would be bighting off their own nose despite their face. CX employ about 36 cadet pilots per year. All with bare CPL’s and a frozen ATPL. How on earth would CX employ these individuals if they are going to make it even harder for DESO’s, who have considerably more experience, get a P2x rating? Lastly I haven’t heard of any requirement by the CAD to increase the training requirements for DESO’s or Cadet SO’s to obtain P2x ratings. By the way the training required for a P2x rating is essentially the same as a new P1 rating. The only substantial difference is that base training in the real aircraft isn't required.
If this rumour was true, which I personally doubt, CX would be bighting off their own nose despite their face. CX employ about 36 cadet pilots per year. All with bare CPL’s and a frozen ATPL. How on earth would CX employ these individuals if they are going to make it even harder for DESO’s, who have considerably more experience, get a P2x rating? Lastly I haven’t heard of any requirement by the CAD to increase the training requirements for DESO’s or Cadet SO’s to obtain P2x ratings. By the way the training required for a P2x rating is essentially the same as a new P1 rating. The only substantial difference is that base training in the real aircraft isn't required.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do not think the rumour is true either and 404 was correct in that CX would be cutting off their own nose as it would affect them, if they were the instigators. It could be the CAD but again I doubt it, they seem to do what is asked of them.
As for the P2X rating being the same as a P1 (except for base training), not for a long time, the company have been reducing the SO training over many years.
As for the P2X rating being the same as a P1 (except for base training), not for a long time, the company have been reducing the SO training over many years.
electricjetjock
I am referring to what is required to be covered in the sim training. Essentially it is the same as what is covered with JFO training when someone upgrades from a different fleet. I’m not considering the line training aspect because the P2X or P1 rating is put in your licence after your complete your 528 items and AR in the sim.
I am referring to what is required to be covered in the sim training. Essentially it is the same as what is covered with JFO training when someone upgrades from a different fleet. I’m not considering the line training aspect because the P2X or P1 rating is put in your licence after your complete your 528 items and AR in the sim.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Aus
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Titan
Actually SO sim training on the Bus has been significantly reduced this year - by around 36% according to my rough calculation. I'm not sure about -400 SO training. I believe that the plan is to pick up the difference with the new Airbus SOs during the Module sessions. Nevertheless, the syllabus is much tighter than it was previously.
Actually SO sim training on the Bus has been significantly reduced this year - by around 36% according to my rough calculation. I'm not sure about -400 SO training. I believe that the plan is to pick up the difference with the new Airbus SOs during the Module sessions. Nevertheless, the syllabus is much tighter than it was previously.
