EK B777 Upgrade Delayed
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Dubai
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EK B777 Upgrade Delayed
On my ALC last week the TRE told me that the B777 upgrades are going to be delayed. Apparently, this is being informed to the F/O at the upgrade interview. Can any F/O doing the interview confirm this? Could anyone else confirm? Does it mean even more DECs?
pitoss
pitoss
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 576
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EGT's being FCUKer, he's turning the FOM into a recall item and asking the most stupid questions. 
Damm good F/O's are being failed who really do know their stuff. EGT also thinks he's some kind of psychologist sending people for anger management and psycho tests, if anyone need the psycho he does!
He needs to be jumped on big time and bringing down a peg or two.
Damm good F/O's are being failed who really do know their stuff. EGT also thinks he's some kind of psychologist sending people for anger management and psycho tests, if anyone need the psycho he does!
He needs to be jumped on big time and bringing down a peg or two.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: i don't know
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Could it be the first sign of too low experience when joining? Just reciting the FOM has little to do with airmenship and just exposes the interrogators incompetence.
Could it be the first sign of not enough trainers? Just outsourcing the training does not seem to help .......
Could it be the first sign of too many hours but not enough manoevers for FOs with the ULR flying? Just wait until the FOs will HAVE to do the rare landing and they'll just shift the problem to the LH seat .......
Could it be that they have to reassess the numbers, as some very disturbed pax-friends of one of our top-shots seem to have discovered that for quite a while enroute the only skipper is burried behind 300 Y-pax who will very readily and politely let him pass during a decompression or smoke in the cabin......
(Apparently TC is not happy with that aswell, allthough he is the architect of this tragedy, as HE ordered to change the location of the bunk!!!)
This might call for a increase of skippers, but it will take a lot of brainstorming for EK to discover that and might end up with more DECs, as they think this is the faster and cheaper way......
It starts biting them!
Could it be the first sign of not enough trainers? Just outsourcing the training does not seem to help .......
Could it be the first sign of too many hours but not enough manoevers for FOs with the ULR flying? Just wait until the FOs will HAVE to do the rare landing and they'll just shift the problem to the LH seat .......
Could it be that they have to reassess the numbers, as some very disturbed pax-friends of one of our top-shots seem to have discovered that for quite a while enroute the only skipper is burried behind 300 Y-pax who will very readily and politely let him pass during a decompression or smoke in the cabin......
(Apparently TC is not happy with that aswell, allthough he is the architect of this tragedy, as HE ordered to change the location of the bunk!!!)
This might call for a increase of skippers, but it will take a lot of brainstorming for EK to discover that and might end up with more DECs, as they think this is the faster and cheaper way......
It starts biting them!
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 576
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But that doesn't apply to them all atiuta, one of them is an SFI and knows his stuff and like many others gave up a command to come here.
EGT has a big problem with his lack of management skills and peoples careers are a risk because of it.
Something should be done.
EGT has a big problem with his lack of management skills and peoples careers are a risk because of it.
Something should be done.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: In the seat
Posts: 284
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GMDS
What crap are you talking about, TC would have been behind the layout of the aircraft and the savings of one million US on the front crew compartment.
You do have a point though regarding the experience, all these commuter chaps are in for a shocker when they approach EGT!! Lets face it, the standard of pilot recruited has dropped off in the passed two years, EGT has his standards and good for him that he's sticking to them, unlike the recruitment dept. Personally I don't have a problem with it, it only takes one to mess the whole place up!
What crap are you talking about, TC would have been behind the layout of the aircraft and the savings of one million US on the front crew compartment.
You do have a point though regarding the experience, all these commuter chaps are in for a shocker when they approach EGT!! Lets face it, the standard of pilot recruited has dropped off in the passed two years, EGT has his standards and good for him that he's sticking to them, unlike the recruitment dept. Personally I don't have a problem with it, it only takes one to mess the whole place up!
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Jew-Buy Mate
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is a case of reaping what you sow and weakness in the recruitment department some three/four years ago is coming home to roost. AAR removed the Pilot recruitment manager and replaced him with a very pleasant but totally useless TAT who subsequently retired. During his tenure the bar was dropped significantly and training were the first witnesses to the drop in quality.
A lot of the pilots recruited during that period were ok First Officers given a bit of training, but needed a lot of work when it came to promotion. The training department was then denied the resources to deal with the extra training required so these guys were allowed to muddle along. Admittedly weaknesses should have been picked up during re-currents and ALCs but with the the training department under pressure a lot would have been allowed to slip past in the "minimum acceptable" category. Statements like " it wasn't pretty but I guess it was safe" were common amongst trainers.
I am not in any way condoning a system where an individual is judge and jury with regard to a colleagues career however someone has to have the balls to stand up ensure that the training departments strained recourses are not further wasted on an upgrade candidate who isn't up to the task.
As a TRI of many years I would probably struggle to concisely answer some of the questions asked at the interviews but I would be able to put together a convincing case as to why I need not have that particular information on instantaneous recall. There is no excuse however for not being prepared. The guys know what is coming so should get in the books and do some ground work. Being an SFI, TRI, TRE does not immunize anyone from any requirements, in fact that individual should be expected to perform to a higher standard.
Additionally it appears that there have been a number of incidents on the line that none of us are privy to which has caused the word to come from above that we cannot afford to have weak captains in the airline. This has caused a tightening all round which although a knee jerk reaction is well overdue. I hope this level of policing and required knowledge is extended to the DECs joining the company.
A lot of the pilots recruited during that period were ok First Officers given a bit of training, but needed a lot of work when it came to promotion. The training department was then denied the resources to deal with the extra training required so these guys were allowed to muddle along. Admittedly weaknesses should have been picked up during re-currents and ALCs but with the the training department under pressure a lot would have been allowed to slip past in the "minimum acceptable" category. Statements like " it wasn't pretty but I guess it was safe" were common amongst trainers.
I am not in any way condoning a system where an individual is judge and jury with regard to a colleagues career however someone has to have the balls to stand up ensure that the training departments strained recourses are not further wasted on an upgrade candidate who isn't up to the task.
As a TRI of many years I would probably struggle to concisely answer some of the questions asked at the interviews but I would be able to put together a convincing case as to why I need not have that particular information on instantaneous recall. There is no excuse however for not being prepared. The guys know what is coming so should get in the books and do some ground work. Being an SFI, TRI, TRE does not immunize anyone from any requirements, in fact that individual should be expected to perform to a higher standard.
Additionally it appears that there have been a number of incidents on the line that none of us are privy to which has caused the word to come from above that we cannot afford to have weak captains in the airline. This has caused a tightening all round which although a knee jerk reaction is well overdue. I hope this level of policing and required knowledge is extended to the DECs joining the company.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: i don't know
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GMDS
What crap are you talking about, TC would have been behind the layout of the aircraft and the savings of one million US on the front crew compartment.
What crap are you talking about, TC would have been behind the layout of the aircraft and the savings of one million US on the front crew compartment.
What I meant is that it was TCs decision to scrap the nice front bunk, which would allow a skipper to rest in either a seat or bunk and be able to rejoin the cockpit in a matter of seconds. Undoubtedly he will fail to even show up there in case of a rapid deco or smoke in the cabin, when resting in the torpedo tube having 300+ panicking pax inbetween.
As now it becomes more and more apparent that a too high number of FOs need a lot more time, training and experience to upgrade, it shows that having two of them in the driver seat and the skipper trapped in the rear coffin might not be what the company wanted the public to know. And everything, every little incident eventually comes out and such a safety sensitive issue is very detrimental to a company's reputation, especially among frequent and upper class flyers.
We might end up with either two skippers on a 3 men flight, or a seat behind the cockpit, to calm some customers or regulators. But both solutions will evaporate the initial saving of 1mio$ for the rear bunk quite rapidly.
As I always said: Greed inevitably ends up in higher cost, if the decision makers are biased either by incompetence, ignorance, arrogance, corruption or pure and simple greed.
With such issues it makes a lot of sense to take advice from the professionals who will work with the system. EK has a lot of such pros with experience from former operations. But like a silly wise-a** teenager, arrogance prevails to the result that the pros involved lose motivation and just sing along the looney tune and everything ends up costing heaploads more.
"WTF" the mismanagers might think, our bonus stays the same, we just cut the one for the employees .....
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 60
Posts: 277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Determining an upgrade candidates suitability from an interview in the office by a group of individuals who are simply unqualified to do this is a f_cking embarrassment.
Quizzing someone on their memory abilities regarding the FOM 4-5 month before their course is a total waste of time. IT IS NOT a MEMORY ITEM! It is a REFERENCE MANUAL!
Do we quizz DECs on their knowledge of the FOM before we employ them? Or do we let the training department assess their knowledge and understanding at a more appropriate time?
F/Os have been under training and examination from GCAA and EK approved TRIs and TREs many times prior to them being recommended for upgrade. They have a fully documented history of their strengths and weaknesses. Interview them if there have been problems and some doubt still remains, otherwise let their records determine their suitabillity and trust the judgment of your training department.
Quizzing someone on their memory abilities regarding the FOM 4-5 month before their course is a total waste of time. IT IS NOT a MEMORY ITEM! It is a REFERENCE MANUAL!
Do we quizz DECs on their knowledge of the FOM before we employ them? Or do we let the training department assess their knowledge and understanding at a more appropriate time?
F/Os have been under training and examination from GCAA and EK approved TRIs and TREs many times prior to them being recommended for upgrade. They have a fully documented history of their strengths and weaknesses. Interview them if there have been problems and some doubt still remains, otherwise let their records determine their suitabillity and trust the judgment of your training department.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: House
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some very pointed remarks and comments here without much real information. EK needs commanders but will not drop a basic standard. I agree it is not a memory test but F/O's about to very shortly be commanders need to know where the information is and who to call. At least 2 candidates failed 5 out of 6 basic questions. One could not even read a flight plan correctly. The interview is a confirmation of a place on the course and not a selection. The SFI fell embarassingly into the 'don't know' category raising serious doubts about his ability.
Outsourcing TRE and TRI training is for the core course. EK still trains and checks against an international standard, externally audited and government checked. Currently there are sufficient TRE's and TRI's except for July when there are 7 short for 2 weeks in the programme.
The pass rate on command courses is 82%, one of the highest in the longhaul industry. Everybody gets 2 go's. The trouble is, when a guy fails either a course, check or interview they tend to blame the system rather than themselves.
All DEC's (and EK are not actively seeking DEC's at the moment) have to pass an upgrade course session, 3 LOS and and LOE and be passed by a TRE competent. Their course is actually much harder than a F/O who then upgrades.
Outsourcing TRE and TRI training is for the core course. EK still trains and checks against an international standard, externally audited and government checked. Currently there are sufficient TRE's and TRI's except for July when there are 7 short for 2 weeks in the programme.
The pass rate on command courses is 82%, one of the highest in the longhaul industry. Everybody gets 2 go's. The trouble is, when a guy fails either a course, check or interview they tend to blame the system rather than themselves.
All DEC's (and EK are not actively seeking DEC's at the moment) have to pass an upgrade course session, 3 LOS and and LOE and be passed by a TRE competent. Their course is actually much harder than a F/O who then upgrades.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: In the seat
Posts: 284
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jet99
You're talking crap. The DEC course is no where near as difficult as an upgrade course. The LOS's for the DEC's are scripted, why, because if they we're you would have a very high failure rate.
You cannot compare the two courses and interviews. EK has two different systems and what's scary is that some DEC's have never done LOS or LOE. I believe that both should be treated equally but such is not the case.
I do however have no sympathy for someone who fails his command interview, they believe they should be given it. For an SFI to fail, I'm not surprised, he thinks he knows how to do certain exercises in the sim HOWEVER someone like him should be flying the line and getting experience to become a captain, he created this himself.
Like I said before, EK has not recruited the same sort of experience over the last 3 years. Before that we had 744, 738 and 777 joining, after that is was commuters from the states or charter outfits (UK Charter Co are an exception) - no offense, but the fact is that there just isn't any experience, commonsense and initiative there. May this be a lesson to all who think they are to be given a command, pull your finger OUT do some work and you'll get what you deserve.
You're talking crap. The DEC course is no where near as difficult as an upgrade course. The LOS's for the DEC's are scripted, why, because if they we're you would have a very high failure rate.
You cannot compare the two courses and interviews. EK has two different systems and what's scary is that some DEC's have never done LOS or LOE. I believe that both should be treated equally but such is not the case.
I do however have no sympathy for someone who fails his command interview, they believe they should be given it. For an SFI to fail, I'm not surprised, he thinks he knows how to do certain exercises in the sim HOWEVER someone like him should be flying the line and getting experience to become a captain, he created this himself.
Like I said before, EK has not recruited the same sort of experience over the last 3 years. Before that we had 744, 738 and 777 joining, after that is was commuters from the states or charter outfits (UK Charter Co are an exception) - no offense, but the fact is that there just isn't any experience, commonsense and initiative there. May this be a lesson to all who think they are to be given a command, pull your finger OUT do some work and you'll get what you deserve.
Jet 999, unless you were in the interview with the EGT then you are following the classic EK "rumours" becoming "news" story line.
DEC's dont do 3 LOS and 1 LOE, the pass rate is higher than 82%. And if you thinks EK is an airline with high standards then you are a fool ( I should know I slipped thro the net
).
As far as the command interview process goes , to have an untrained bufoon with poor to non-existant man managemant skills having the final say with no right of appeal or re-trial , unless you wait 6 months or longer if HE feels that way inclined is a joke.
If someone passes the interview and then fails the upgrade, what does it prove??? and if someone fails interview, passes on re-test and passes upgrade what does that prove?....sweet f@#k all...is the answer.
As far as I know no-one has failed Upgrade because of poor FOM or Tech knowledge :- poor decision making, poor handling , lack of confidence ..a big yes , not sure if that can accurately be assesed in an interview by the EGT or any other office based wallah.
Sorry for the rant but EK has some very good people , alas in the wrong positions, and even worse some very bad people in the very worst places and if I appear to have it in for our East German friend then you would be right, have had other dealings with him, not a pleasant or rewarding experience.
The training dept. is the place where UG should be decided, in a fair and totally transparent way, they after all have looked after and groomed the F/o's for several years before the big swap.
Sorry day dreaming, open and honest are two words that will never be used in the same sentence as EK management.....ever
DEC's dont do 3 LOS and 1 LOE, the pass rate is higher than 82%. And if you thinks EK is an airline with high standards then you are a fool ( I should know I slipped thro the net
).As far as the command interview process goes , to have an untrained bufoon with poor to non-existant man managemant skills having the final say with no right of appeal or re-trial , unless you wait 6 months or longer if HE feels that way inclined is a joke.
If someone passes the interview and then fails the upgrade, what does it prove??? and if someone fails interview, passes on re-test and passes upgrade what does that prove?....sweet f@#k all...is the answer.
As far as I know no-one has failed Upgrade because of poor FOM or Tech knowledge :- poor decision making, poor handling , lack of confidence ..a big yes , not sure if that can accurately be assesed in an interview by the EGT or any other office based wallah.
Sorry for the rant but EK has some very good people , alas in the wrong positions, and even worse some very bad people in the very worst places and if I appear to have it in for our East German friend then you would be right, have had other dealings with him, not a pleasant or rewarding experience.
The training dept. is the place where UG should be decided, in a fair and totally transparent way, they after all have looked after and groomed the F/o's for several years before the big swap.
Sorry day dreaming, open and honest are two words that will never be used in the same sentence as EK management.....ever
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Dubai
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with 145qrh Jet 999 unless you were a fly on the wall there was only EGT and the candidate in the office, stop making out you know what went on else you would also have
Some very pointed remarks and comments
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: i don't know
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Even if 82% upgrade passing rate is considered high or low by industry standard, I stand by my comment:
If EK operates with 1 Capt and 2 FOs on a lot of routes and burries the resting skipper in a remote coffin with guaranteed "no show" in case of a major problem, then the crew and passengers should only accept close to 99% passing rate at the upgrade. Else EK itself admits to a high probability that two pilots sit up front for a long time over remote locations with inadequate skills. No more and no less.
If such a high number of upgrade applicants display a lack of fundamental knowledge, then the recruitement AND training departement have failed. You need to recruit adequate applicants with sufficient basic knowledge and skills. Then you need to continue to train them as to have them "skipper-ready" when they take the left seat as relief pilots. The numbers seem to show that this is not the case. As simple as that.
Just what can we do to improve the situation?
If EK operates with 1 Capt and 2 FOs on a lot of routes and burries the resting skipper in a remote coffin with guaranteed "no show" in case of a major problem, then the crew and passengers should only accept close to 99% passing rate at the upgrade. Else EK itself admits to a high probability that two pilots sit up front for a long time over remote locations with inadequate skills. No more and no less.
If such a high number of upgrade applicants display a lack of fundamental knowledge, then the recruitement AND training departement have failed. You need to recruit adequate applicants with sufficient basic knowledge and skills. Then you need to continue to train them as to have them "skipper-ready" when they take the left seat as relief pilots. The numbers seem to show that this is not the case. As simple as that.
Just what can we do to improve the situation?
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: S.H.
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
jet999.......
OK I'll bite.......please tell me
1. who is the external audit company you're referring to?
2. to what standard are they auditing to (and if the answer's IATA IOSA then you really need a rethink on: i) the so-called IOSA standard(s), and ii) the so-called qualification of the any IOSA auditors.............simply jet999, the so-called IOSA audit standard is QUESTIONABLE!
3. who were the auditors? (see 2 above)
4. what were the qualifications and experience of the auditors? (you'd be surprised at the lack of experience AND qualifications of some of the clowns who are supposedly doing these audits!)
5. were the government standards in accordance with international standards and recommended practices (ICAO Annexes)?
6. were the government inspectors properly qualified AND trained to conduct oversight inspections? (many aren't jet999)
7. has the State regulatory authority undergone an ICAO USOAP audit?
8. was the State considered to be in compliance with ICAO standards and recommended practices as a result of the USOAP Inspection?
The so-called 'mantle' offered by an external audit is pretty-well useless in 99% of cases jet999.
I've been asked to do a follow-up audit after the so-called experts have been in jet999, and you could drive a damn steam train through the holes that exist after the so-called 'experts have been in and charged $000s for their so-called expertise.
EK still trains and checks against an international standard, externally audited and government checked.
1. who is the external audit company you're referring to?
2. to what standard are they auditing to (and if the answer's IATA IOSA then you really need a rethink on: i) the so-called IOSA standard(s), and ii) the so-called qualification of the any IOSA auditors.............simply jet999, the so-called IOSA audit standard is QUESTIONABLE!
3. who were the auditors? (see 2 above)
4. what were the qualifications and experience of the auditors? (you'd be surprised at the lack of experience AND qualifications of some of the clowns who are supposedly doing these audits!)
5. were the government standards in accordance with international standards and recommended practices (ICAO Annexes)?
6. were the government inspectors properly qualified AND trained to conduct oversight inspections? (many aren't jet999)
7. has the State regulatory authority undergone an ICAO USOAP audit?
8. was the State considered to be in compliance with ICAO standards and recommended practices as a result of the USOAP Inspection?
The so-called 'mantle' offered by an external audit is pretty-well useless in 99% of cases jet999.
I've been asked to do a follow-up audit after the so-called experts have been in jet999, and you could drive a damn steam train through the holes that exist after the so-called 'experts have been in and charged $000s for their so-called expertise.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was offered a dec position. Im not accepting it for reasons other than mentioned on these forums.
I have a few friends who have upgraded or are upgrading, maybe one of them was a fail who knows.I do know that I operate to at least the same standard as these chaps and as for experience, well pre EK they were not exactly flitting across the atlantic in the winter in a big boeing. Puddle jumping would be more appropiate.
The point I am making is that maybe ,just maybe there is a superiority complex existant. Not all are suitable, despite the magical three years at EK which, to read here endows the recipient with levels of skills and default airmanship that put the rest of the world to shame.Simply not so.
Had I taken the job , i would be confident of pasing all and any course on my dodgy DEC ability, and judging by some of my mates that have passed, an upgrade course as well.
Gents you are in danger of having a very "flat earth" mentalty.
I am in agreement on one point in that it is easy to fail anyone if you WANT to however being an FSI where you control a session is not the same as controlling a situation and doesnt make them better in anyway. You would think the book knowledge would have been sharper though. Only based on what I have read here.
I have a few friends who have upgraded or are upgrading, maybe one of them was a fail who knows.I do know that I operate to at least the same standard as these chaps and as for experience, well pre EK they were not exactly flitting across the atlantic in the winter in a big boeing. Puddle jumping would be more appropiate.
The point I am making is that maybe ,just maybe there is a superiority complex existant. Not all are suitable, despite the magical three years at EK which, to read here endows the recipient with levels of skills and default airmanship that put the rest of the world to shame.Simply not so.
Had I taken the job , i would be confident of pasing all and any course on my dodgy DEC ability, and judging by some of my mates that have passed, an upgrade course as well.
Gents you are in danger of having a very "flat earth" mentalty.
I am in agreement on one point in that it is easy to fail anyone if you WANT to however being an FSI where you control a session is not the same as controlling a situation and doesnt make them better in anyway. You would think the book knowledge would have been sharper though. Only based on what I have read here.