My 'last' airline ran one simulator session every 3 months which included one regulatory ('jeopardy') item and the rest was training.

Just enough to keep us in the books at a relaxed level and to provide ongoing, realistic training to keep us current.

Probably too big a leap for this outfit.

And I suppose you still believe in the Easter Bunny too??

You do if you seriously believe CX isn't trying to cut costs wherever they can!

Do you really think that the crew control phone call after a successful PC isn't going to result in a "not normally" "roster disruption" roster change :rolleyes:

The RT forms part of the the regulatory "package" - there are a number of boxes that have to be ticked over a three year cycle and there is no way they can all be done during the PC sessions. I can't see that changing, despite CX's penchant for cost cutting.

I can roll my eyes too - see? :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

And you don't think changing the order of the PC/RT resulted in a change of the regulatory "package". :rolleyes: one will suffice.

Because at the moment half the RT is spent practicing stuff to do in the PC the following day. With the new format I doubt you will be doing anything more than once. The entire 4 hours of RT will be spent doing stuff you did not do in the PC.

Unless you fail your PC, in which case you would do the stuff you failed.

You see, in typical CX fashion, they failed to fully implement the new way of doing things. The original program, was a "no fail" program, basically "train to proficiency".

When you realize that, then it all makes sense why the PC comes before the RT. But CX could not possibly have such a program, the airline lacks the corporate culture to support it.

How many people do you think actually FAIL a PC outright? As a former STC I can tell you the answer is bugger all. Sure there are some who might have a hiccup on the day and score a 1 for a particular section of a PC. Those that do should get some remedial training from the checker during the session, before repeating that section of the PC during the same session. It is quite rare for someone to fail a second time.

Funnily enough, most people can actually do the job quite well.

A large part of the RT session is currently wasted practicing stuff that most people don't actually need to practice to pass the PC. The whole idea of putting the PC first is to get it out of the way and then use the RT to do something that might actually provide more benefit.

I don't know it will be THAT much of a big deal.

So long as one doesn't mind saying in the debrief "yep....that's what I look like after not flying for a few weeks, not practicing in the sim, and being thrown in for a check ride" and doesn't worry too much about the rough edges or being rusty for the first 20 minutes of the check.

It is silly to expect someone to be wholly proficient when off for a while and without practice--but safe and proficient are not the same thing. So long as you don't get wrapped up over something that is not your fault I think this won't matter much.

"Oh, you wanted me to be GOOD--I see....give me a couple minutes."

If you can manage to FAIL a PC, then frankly I don't want to share an aircraft with you nor would I put the lives of my family in your hands going on holiday.

PCs aren't rocket science. Sure we won't fly them to a nice polished standard but to fail one you have to be pretty bad really, or at least be having an unacceptably bad day.

Greener Pastures
 

So it begs the question - 'why the f...k did u leave?'

Everything always such a bag of ****e in CX - really?

grow up guys.

Just don't expect me to get the ECAM CX BS mouth music 100% perfect......

geh065,

people aren't afraid of failing in the traditional sense of not being able to physically operate the aircraft safely, we are afraid of being marked down because our "mouth music" is not word perfect.

For all these years, we've had a RT to brush up on our mouth music before the PC.

I would like to think they give us a bit of leeway on that, but if not, we will all be marked down and be in the same boat so I wouldn't even worry about it.

Or...... with 5 mins spent looking in the manual we could just get the mouth music right.....all by ourselves!
So am I now a brown-noser, or just a professional with 5 mins spare?

Not at all White None. I would assume that everybody will do exactly that. The point is that learning from the manual is not normally a perfect substitute for actually doing it in the aircraft/sim in real time.

Remember, we're not concerned about being safe, there should be no problem there. CX want more. They want "polish", even in the event of an engine fire.

Seriously? If you're that afraid, as White None suggests, spend a bit of time with your wife/husband/partner/friend going through the words in "real time". There's also the IPT available if you're concerned that one's inability to get the "mouth music" word perfect is going to have a significant effect on the outcome of your PC.

STP

Silberfuchs, I take your point but isn't there a -8F IPT? Also, when was the last time you flew a V1 cut at maximum crosswind on your PC? How do the memory items differ between the -400 and the -8F for things like an engine fire? I was led to believe they're pretty much the same. Finally, if the ECL is anything like the ECAM, isn't it "read-and-do"?

STP

Sorry, my banter radar was temporarily out of service. :)

STP

You should always be proficient and ready to do a PC, at any point in time - up to standard at least.
Doing the PC before the RT - gives the opportunity to "train" the naturally weaker areas that were shown during the PC, at the RT session.. If used in the right manner - it could be an efficient way of using two sim days. :ok:

Aces ?
 

Yeager

Judging by your handle I'm guessing you have never made a mistake during a sim.

As for the rest of us mortals, I've taken the course from the 400 to the ECL driven airplanes. The courses are getting shorter every year. As such you are required to do just as you suggest and train YOURSELF and partner in the IPT or cafeteria etc. That is not a replacement for actual training. While good for practice once procedures and mouth music are known, it is not good for pilots new to the machine. Nor is it good for pilots who have been off for awhile. The books just don't back it up. Add to this the CPT is done from home now and you really are training in isolation. Home study may work but the training department should encourage live feedback and pier communication to ensure the info is understood.

So what happens is SOP/Convention creep. That's where self taught pilots begin to add or delete things and gradually come up with their own slight take on SOPs and conventions. I've seen it in line guys, checkers and CPs. None of it unsafe or even worth mentioning at most airlines, but a 3 here for sure.

Is this a problem ? Well in an airline with big picture thinking and checkers with the experience to see real problems as opposed to interpretations of convention, then NO . In an airline where the minutiae and pet SOP crowd dominate and subsequently good pilots' careers and health are the casualties, then yes it is a problem.

Having had real emergencies in aircraft and talking to others who have also had serious situations and emergencies, it goes extremely well, but the mouth music etc. may not be perfect. Does the training kick in ? Absolutely !

The other problem is the SOPs themselves, while they are getting better, there are still holes big enough for interpretation to creep in. We need to write a tighter script, so that when learning a new airplane, cockpit ECL or whatever, you can reference specific written mouth music in the manual, not buried in best practice, power points or any of the many locations needed to be researched to put it all together.

If you want anal pedantic perfection then put it in the books. If it's not in the books then allow some latitude with a pleasant comment in the de-brief.

Cheers Fly Safe
FG

Well said FG.

This place is all about subjectivity and none about objectivity. Pomp and circumstance do not make up for lack of strict standards put in writing and enforced upon the checkers/trainers first and only then on the rest. The 747 CP putting in writing that ONLY what's in quotation marks is a standard callout and required to be verbalised is a breath of fresh air. This place is at least moving towards the right direction. Lots of old timers however are utterly hopeless and pull way too much crap out of their behinds and call it standard and the fact that their BS is not in writing anywhere does not seem to be a problem to them. Fantasy personal preference based on a perceived understanding of one's own mind rules the day.

Just talking to a very senior checker who was livid about the fact that when they decide to require additional training or a redo of a PC they almost never inform the guy doing the redo why this is being done or what the objective of the extra training is so it is generally a waste of time in his opinion. So what would make anyone thing there will be any coherent training done on the RT the day after the PC that would have something to do with the PC the day before? At times the reports don't even get written up for a week or even more. How often have you seen agreement between what the sim instructor says and what the pc checker says the next day? And with our poorly written extra gray manuals which are intended to not be so restrictive to tie the hands of the thinking pilot (this according to "the bubble"... 3rd. Floor)... They can't see the forrest for the trees. Which trees are important and which are not of course depends on which individual you ask on the day, never mind what the book says. Subjectivity rules over objectivity. SOPs? Please, don't make me laugh.

As far as I am aware, the -8 IPT is not available for booking. Unless this has changed recently, its only for training. :confused:

different opinions
 

I remember my first RT/PC in CX.
The RT Sim instructor referenced many times to the FCTM. He concluded, that it was a good book indeed where to gather informations.
Next day PC. Really, really senior STC: The FCTM is a worthless manual.......

:ugh:
?????

FG,

Everybody makes "mistakes" and moves on. A PC is not about failing someone, its about checking to a certain level (standard) of competency to pass.

Of course you fly for a company known to have a problem, as drawn out by yourself;

Is shouldn't be that hard to go do a PC on the simulator. Deal with what comes your way and if/when you make "mistakes" correct the best you can. I know of NO aero plane that can't be landed safely - even after self-induced "extras". Surely the CX mouth music may fail during the session - but in the world outside CX, that is almost expected - nobody cares - life goes on and the job got done (or you failed/partially failed).

Perhaps some of you would benefit from not giving a **** and just go-do the PC. To much bitching and mourning about the stupid system - just deal with it. It's CX - BUT It's just an airplane/simulator. :ok:

PS; don't forget to have fun