PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Fragrant Harbour (https://www.pprune.org/fragrant-harbour-19/)
-   -   PC/RT (https://www.pprune.org/fragrant-harbour/499925-pc-rt.html)

CYRILJGROOVE 8th Nov 2012 02:32

Next cycle start off PC first. No so fair for those who only get a sector or two a month. Who is the genius that dreamt this idiotic idea up? What is the upside to this?


SMOC 8th Nov 2012 04:13

Exactly it'll be a true reflection of how proficient we actually are without a practice session the day before.

If it changes back you'll know we all did so poorly that the cost of extra training didn't help the profit margin :}

cxorcist 8th Nov 2012 04:35


That depends on how you define proficient. I don't think many will be packing them in on V1 cuts, but if perfect mouth music equals proficiency then we might be in trouble.

moosp 8th Nov 2012 05:33

That's IOSA for you. The Training Section have no control over the facilitation of the test. IOSA say do the test before the refresher, that's what we have to do.

Crazy, but that is what happens when you let bureaucrats run Aviation...

Sqwak7700 8th Nov 2012 06:43

I think it is changing to accommodate the eventual training to proficiency that the industry is shifting to as a result of some high profile crashes, mainly the colgan dash 8 in buffalo.

If I remember correctly one of the NTSB recommendations was to tailor the training of individuals to beef up areas they are weak. Cathay being the cheapskates they are will use the PC before the training instead of adding another sim session which would be the more logical and useful alternative.

But honestly ladies, are you really sweating it that much? The PC is already so scripted that you truly need to be slightly incompetent to not pass. You know you will have an engine fail on first TO, followed by OEI ILS or RNAV, missed, another OEI approach, missed, followed by the last approach from wich you land. You might get an engine back only to loose another on a missed. The rest is all a reading excersise of the QRH / ECL.

Im no Chuk Yeager, but seriously, is it that stressful?

CYRILJGROOVE 8th Nov 2012 07:08

I agree most will pass but why are we doing this, is it because our fleet and training offices are full of YES MEN who just go along with any crazy idea some manager dreams up. Most of those guys see the sim regularly whilst line guys see it every 180 days or so.

We are not all equal here, many RQ first officers do not even sit in a control seat for TKOF or LDG even as PM for a couple of months at a time. A practice ride before a sim which is examinable and not always marked on an even playing field does get you in the groove and enhances ones chances of passing which I would think would be the over riding objective.

Dragonair have been doing it PC first for ages but one very very different aspect is that they are flying loads of sectors each month and much more current than a CX F/O in the vast majority of cases.


The Messiah 8th Nov 2012 08:22

Stop your whining and grow a pair, it's the same for everyone :{:{:{

Dan Winterland 8th Nov 2012 13:41

Day 2 is LOEs - Line Orientated Evaluations. KA have been doing them for a while - the rest of the industry for ages.

geh065 9th Nov 2012 00:46

This is apparently how most of the rest of the world does it. The "crazy" idea as some of you put it, is the way we used to do it and not the new way we will do it. Yes it isn't ideal from our point of view but from a true checking point of view then of course yes it makes sense. Getting a practice run before an unanticipated emergency in real life is not how reality works. If it exposes weaknesses amongst the ranks then hopefully things change around here with regards to getting sectors for some of us and perhaps will even change the work ethic of some of the lifestyle pilots amongst us....wait, did I say that out loud?

CokeZero 9th Nov 2012 00:52

BUt don't worry - the first of the new cycle will start 6am on the 1st Jan :)

Five Green 9th Nov 2012 04:40

It gets better and better !
Agree with Cyril

Not to mention the checkers are all marking differently and have their own pet sops.

The pedantic checkers would have to let up a little. As good as SMOC is I would bet my left nut even he/she has a few more de-brief points on the RT than on the PC.

If they really do go to a train to standard it will be an improvement. If they start to scupper careers then this place will be even less pleasant to work at .


ASH1111 9th Nov 2012 06:14

Interesting to see no internal memo highlighting the change. Not a fan. I'm still calling it an RT-PC. :ok:

sos 10th Nov 2012 08:55

Hmmmm just had a PC - asked the Checker ?

And my comment was the first that he had heard about it. :confused:

So RT / PC it is. --------- at this stage

broadband circuit 10th Nov 2012 09:49

I heard that it has been signed off, and the fleet training offices have already designed the 2 sessions.

AND, Henry is scared to publicly announce it to the line crews.

LongTimeInCX 10th Nov 2012 21:20

....and when it does get announced, what's the betting it's a Friday afternoon at 5pm?

As an aside, and in all seriousness, it's not that big a deal.
Sure most of us don't get as many sectors as a KA guy, I wouldn't want his type of sectors anyway, but checking idiosyncrasies aside, all will be checked to ostensibly the same standard.
If this highlights that crew who are only doing a sector every month or two in the jet stuff up their V1 cut, then a) it's better found out in the sim, and b) if enough stuff ups come to light, it may/should change the emphasis on recency and training.

Misguided optimist perhaps, and I'm sure someone famous would have said - there will be no progress without change, so on balance I think it's a good idea.

GTC58 10th Nov 2012 22:56

I agree no big deal. If you can't do a V1 cut without previous training on your PC you shouldn't fly an airplane. On your PC you know you will get a V1 cut, in real life you don't. Never understood why we have pilots who are so nervous going in the sim and memorizing the VOL8 for the RT/PC 4 weeks before they have it. The RT/PC's are now so straight forward, don't even know why someone would go through the trouble to write up a VOL8.

CYRILJGROOVE 12th Nov 2012 01:24

The purpose of flight simulation
The main concern I have is that we are accepting the dribble which originates from authorities and so called professionals, many who have failed pilot courses and wound up in the psychobabble world enforcing their views.

The point is, after a RT/PC over 2 days you go back to the line tuned up and practiced on emergencies that you rarely experience in the real world. The net result of doing it PC/RT would in the vast majority of cases be almost identical. So why change it, what is the advantage of switching it around?

We all should appreciate that our scan rate slows down if we are not current. As per some of our ULR RQ colleagues. Some years ago a handling sim was introduced to give more practise to those on the ULR fleets, in other words using flight simulators for pilot training/practice. Practice makes perfect!

No doubt a little practice in a RT before a PC blows a few cobwebs away and you are better prepared to undertake the testing for the PC. Doing it the other way will only emphasise our "rustiness" something which is blatantly obvious to us all. In the end most will pass, maybe more retests will occur, but what is the point if after 2 days sim you go back to the line more or less at the same level of competency as if it was undertaken the other way around, probably demoralising some candidates. (maybe thats the intention)

When a pilot has been off work for 6 months, 2 years etc are we going to strap him in to do a PC on day one and then give him/her some training on day 2? Flt Ops has gone mad!! , we are using a fantastic expensive training machine as a culling device and that is sheer lunacy!

It is simply ridiculous to bow to the idea of doing it the other way around without tangible benefits. So what is the basic purpose of a Flight Simulator


A flight simulator seeks to duplicate the experience of flying as realistically as possible for the purpose of training pilots.

BuzzBox 12th Nov 2012 03:49

As others have said, the ultimate aim is tailor the training (and checking) to where it's really needed in order to get the best value for money (ie the best safety outcome). If most people can fly a V1 cut to an acceptable standard without practice (and I sincerely hope they can, given they're not going to get a practice if it occurs for real!), then do we really need to spend all that time practicing V1 cuts and engine out work during RT sessions? Perhaps the time could be better spent practicing other things that would provide a greater safety benefit. Taking it a step further, the likelihood of a V1 cut occurring in the real world is very low, so do they really need to be checked every 6 months or should they be part of a 2-3 year cycle?

The biggest problem in implementing such a system (apart from convincing the pilots!) is convincing the regulators, who are notoriously slow to accept any kind of change. The airlines need data in order to convince the regulators, but that data is skewed when everybody gets to practice beforehand. On the other hand, if the airlines can show that most people can fly a V1 cut to an acceptable standard on the first attempt, then perhaps the regulators will be more willing to change.

nitpicker330 12th Nov 2012 04:08

1/ the Aircraft is a damn side easier in a V1 cut to fly than the Sim
2/ the problem isn't "flying the V1 cut" its getting the mouth music 100% for the pedantic checking system that is CX using the crap ECAM….

It's your job on the line each 6 months, why shouldn't we get an opportunity to fine tune before the "test"

Just another BS change brought to you by the man that tells HC what to do.


All times are GMT. The time now is 20:39.

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.