Why are so many EK FO's failing the upgrade interviews?
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: >FL310
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Obla, Me thinks you are or will be the poster child for EK TREs. Thank for exposing the basic mentality of training by many trainers. Oy mate, you sorry git, don't you know.........
Didn't realise we are "fighting". And you said it, TRAIN HARD. Anyone want to comment of the TRAINING received?
Didn't realise we are "fighting". And you said it, TRAIN HARD. Anyone want to comment of the TRAINING received?
Join Date: May 2008
Location: pit
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is a system installed.
No one can change it as it is installed top down and the paranoid sits on top. It’s all about power and the infamous ‘divide et impare’ is applied to retain the power. The absence of modern leadership qualities wouldn’t matter too much if on the lower levels you only have home grown equally immature subjects.
The pilots group however, is the one group containing way more professional who were trained in a more modern environment than any other in this society. Knowing this and knowing about his own inadequacies, the paranoid leader can either adopt a learning and adapting attitude or he can revert to the medieval repression through power system that oppresses any criticism, therefore no change will happen. It’s management by mushrooms: Everything sticking its head out of the turf gets chopped. We know what the choice is.
The second and third level of management is either as inadequate as the leader, or it adapts and adopts the same methods. Any new and good ideas get very quickly diluted and the individual disillusioned. Advancements happen only through adapting to the lowest common coercion denominator and not through competence. Such a system has proven to work for quite a long time, but each and every one has failed, just as any dictator will eventually fail. It’s all a matter of time and ability of the lower levels to cover up the mess. Quite often the leaders get their sandals polished and their paranoia upheld by them, simply to keep that privileged position in the unhealthy food chain.
On the front the symptoms of such a archaic system are loss of interest of the average employee, he performs to a very low percentage of his capacity and customer service becomes a nuisance. He will be led by coercion which means that superiors no longer thrive for a better product, but use up all their energy to bully their subjects and cling to their seat. The top guru will not be informed, he wouldn’t listen anyway, the statistics bent and the system failure deferred until it implodes with a big bang. The blame will then be put on everything but the paranoid.
The pilots group is somewhat different, that’s the reason why some symptoms show much earlier. They could be used as warning signs, however with the wrong man at the top, they are diligently disregarded.
The high upgrade failure rate is a huge warning sign. Why? Because upgrade does not happen through favoritism or creeping up something (maybe only a little number though), the selection through competence and experience should take place. This however means a basic threat to leaders, as the competent could expose his inadequacies. To avoid too much of a change, he will install filters that weed out such danger. Filters are HR, Psych department, guys like SP and so on. With a halfway acceptable training department even such filters allow some competence to be applied for advancement, but in the process the subjects are intimidated to the point that they will never question any directives from above, during training and once passed.
Therefore they become EK captains who are easily led by the wish of the incompetent paranoid. The EK books give a captain final responsibility, but if he applies it where the company does not like it, even strictly by the book, he is punished. This as long as everything goes well, the moment something happens, the leaders will instantly hide again behind their books and punish him just as much.
Such a system is very handy for the company. It would however be exposed by unions or the public in civilized countries. Not that it works fine there, but the responsible pilot has at least some legal possibilities to defend decisions and expose coercion. Here the leaders are protected throughout all levels, whatever happens it will always be the pilots blamed and sacked.
All this leads me to predict that nothing will change.
Just live with it and hope you will not be on board when the shortcomings of such a system strike.
No one can change it as it is installed top down and the paranoid sits on top. It’s all about power and the infamous ‘divide et impare’ is applied to retain the power. The absence of modern leadership qualities wouldn’t matter too much if on the lower levels you only have home grown equally immature subjects.
The pilots group however, is the one group containing way more professional who were trained in a more modern environment than any other in this society. Knowing this and knowing about his own inadequacies, the paranoid leader can either adopt a learning and adapting attitude or he can revert to the medieval repression through power system that oppresses any criticism, therefore no change will happen. It’s management by mushrooms: Everything sticking its head out of the turf gets chopped. We know what the choice is.
The second and third level of management is either as inadequate as the leader, or it adapts and adopts the same methods. Any new and good ideas get very quickly diluted and the individual disillusioned. Advancements happen only through adapting to the lowest common coercion denominator and not through competence. Such a system has proven to work for quite a long time, but each and every one has failed, just as any dictator will eventually fail. It’s all a matter of time and ability of the lower levels to cover up the mess. Quite often the leaders get their sandals polished and their paranoia upheld by them, simply to keep that privileged position in the unhealthy food chain.
On the front the symptoms of such a archaic system are loss of interest of the average employee, he performs to a very low percentage of his capacity and customer service becomes a nuisance. He will be led by coercion which means that superiors no longer thrive for a better product, but use up all their energy to bully their subjects and cling to their seat. The top guru will not be informed, he wouldn’t listen anyway, the statistics bent and the system failure deferred until it implodes with a big bang. The blame will then be put on everything but the paranoid.
The pilots group is somewhat different, that’s the reason why some symptoms show much earlier. They could be used as warning signs, however with the wrong man at the top, they are diligently disregarded.
The high upgrade failure rate is a huge warning sign. Why? Because upgrade does not happen through favoritism or creeping up something (maybe only a little number though), the selection through competence and experience should take place. This however means a basic threat to leaders, as the competent could expose his inadequacies. To avoid too much of a change, he will install filters that weed out such danger. Filters are HR, Psych department, guys like SP and so on. With a halfway acceptable training department even such filters allow some competence to be applied for advancement, but in the process the subjects are intimidated to the point that they will never question any directives from above, during training and once passed.
Therefore they become EK captains who are easily led by the wish of the incompetent paranoid. The EK books give a captain final responsibility, but if he applies it where the company does not like it, even strictly by the book, he is punished. This as long as everything goes well, the moment something happens, the leaders will instantly hide again behind their books and punish him just as much.
Such a system is very handy for the company. It would however be exposed by unions or the public in civilized countries. Not that it works fine there, but the responsible pilot has at least some legal possibilities to defend decisions and expose coercion. Here the leaders are protected throughout all levels, whatever happens it will always be the pilots blamed and sacked.
All this leads me to predict that nothing will change.
Just live with it and hope you will not be on board when the shortcomings of such a system strike.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Stairways to heaven
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
not sure why queen's english has something to do with it....
i guess the oozies, yanks, sa etc don't qualify since they have zero command of it but they do however have a reasonable command of the english language
i guess the oozies, yanks, sa etc don't qualify since they have zero command of it but they do however have a reasonable command of the english language
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TU, me thinks you are one of the very people I mentioned! Perhaps you ARE one of the lazy little gits that does c0ck all study and then EXPECT the upgrade to fall in their lap?
No-one can 'teach' or 'train' you to be a Captain. It is a frame of mind mixed with technical ability and experience. Some guys are ready for it, some are not...simple really!
But frankly if I was a TRE and you showed up for your upgrade expecting me to wipe your bottom for you and teach you stuff you should already know then you can f@ck right off back to the RHS for all of eternity for all I care.
If however you turn up having put in the work, made the effort and have a professional attitude, I would bend over backwards to help you out.... See where we're going with this? Act like a loser, remain a loser!! Got a problem with that?
Let me put it like this, have you EVER in the history of aviation known of an occasion where someone has turned up for a sim/interview fully prepared, knowledgeable and with a good attitude and who puts in a great performance that has failed?? No, I didn't think so. There are however many who have thought they have put in a great performance but actually had a gaping hole in their ability but refuse to admit it..... these are the ones who will do their hardest to blame everyone/everything but themselves. We all have bad days in the sim and occasionally you WILL come across a sh1tty trainer (this incidentally is not exclusive to EK), but this is accounted for by flicking through your records and seeing that it was a one off because 'bloggs' clearly just had a bad day in the office...... Bloggs will not fail, he will be given the opportunity to improve and prove himself. There are however those who have crap records full of 2's and 3's who become vocal on how everything's crap, life's unfair and its all EK's fault and then vent it on Pprune! But as was mentioned above, there are many who just quietly get on with their jobs in a professional manor and gladly accept the 12k dhs pay rise.
No-one can 'teach' or 'train' you to be a Captain. It is a frame of mind mixed with technical ability and experience. Some guys are ready for it, some are not...simple really!
But frankly if I was a TRE and you showed up for your upgrade expecting me to wipe your bottom for you and teach you stuff you should already know then you can f@ck right off back to the RHS for all of eternity for all I care.
If however you turn up having put in the work, made the effort and have a professional attitude, I would bend over backwards to help you out.... See where we're going with this? Act like a loser, remain a loser!! Got a problem with that?
Let me put it like this, have you EVER in the history of aviation known of an occasion where someone has turned up for a sim/interview fully prepared, knowledgeable and with a good attitude and who puts in a great performance that has failed?? No, I didn't think so. There are however many who have thought they have put in a great performance but actually had a gaping hole in their ability but refuse to admit it..... these are the ones who will do their hardest to blame everyone/everything but themselves. We all have bad days in the sim and occasionally you WILL come across a sh1tty trainer (this incidentally is not exclusive to EK), but this is accounted for by flicking through your records and seeing that it was a one off because 'bloggs' clearly just had a bad day in the office...... Bloggs will not fail, he will be given the opportunity to improve and prove himself. There are however those who have crap records full of 2's and 3's who become vocal on how everything's crap, life's unfair and its all EK's fault and then vent it on Pprune! But as was mentioned above, there are many who just quietly get on with their jobs in a professional manor and gladly accept the 12k dhs pay rise.
Last edited by Oblaaspop; 30th Apr 2011 at 10:27.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: >FL310
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Olala, Hit a nerve did I? Wow. Let's just say, I have probably seen and been involved in more training than most here. Without a shred of doubt in my mind, this training here, historicaly (and I believe MM is trying to turn the tide), is the worst I and many contempories have ever seen. You probably know as well as I, that a true and competent captain is not measured by what he can recite but rather where to access the information and his resources.
To me it is a sad state of affairs when someone has been here for 4-5 years has to take a psyometric battery of testing and then have an UNTRAINED person in HF, human performance, and psychology, evaluate a persons ability to be a captain by the interpetation of testing that is way outdated (check the original date of the MMPI). If through line checks, PPCs, and line operations over 4 plus years you can't get the measure of the pilot; what will a two hour interview provide? Fail on body language?
I have been involved in developing training for airlines, administrating the training, setting up standards and standardisation criteria. The very very first item on the agenda is to standardise the checkers and training. That my friend is the crux of the whole matter here. And that HAS been documented here. I have seen the same filmed event been evaluated a 1 and a 5 by two different sets of TREs. You want to tell me how to prepare for that?
One example...first officer here for 4 years. Never a blip on his PPCs, line checks, highly experienced in numerous wide bodied aircraft and including several captain stints. No counseliing, no "chats" with those in cubicles about anything, no nothing....But was told he will be delayed another year, because SP wants to see another PPC result. Never an explaination when asked. Just the way it is.
Finally, Olala, I will agree, if someone shows up unprepared then they deserve not to be upgraded. However, prepared for what? Memorise the OMA, recite all of the weights, etc? Not enough asking the copilot if he is "happy" or not? But do we set or f/o's for failure? According to those in training, most failures are due to the lack of decision making ability. How do you "prepare" for that? EK beats down any decision making outside of their little box. Then it is not decision making. (eg, removed from roster until we, sitting in our cubicles, decide your decision agrees with ours) And when do firsts really get the opportunity to make decisions (re, prepare) here? When they have captains telling them to not disconnect the a/p until clearance to land has been received, IMHO, we are setting up a system rife with failure.
But there does seem to be a disparity between pass and failure rates on the two fleets. Where's the standard. If there is a high failure rate, perhaps it's time to look inwards. But Pool
expressed the reason for that much better than I am capable of doing.
But Olala, you hit the nail on the head. If a copilot shows up unprepared don't expect for me to ........and he can f@ck off for the rest of his career in the right seat. And that does exemplify the attitude of many trainers. "Don't expect me to train, teach, mentor, or cajol your preparedness." Easier to say just F@ck off. I love it.
To me it is a sad state of affairs when someone has been here for 4-5 years has to take a psyometric battery of testing and then have an UNTRAINED person in HF, human performance, and psychology, evaluate a persons ability to be a captain by the interpetation of testing that is way outdated (check the original date of the MMPI). If through line checks, PPCs, and line operations over 4 plus years you can't get the measure of the pilot; what will a two hour interview provide? Fail on body language?
I have been involved in developing training for airlines, administrating the training, setting up standards and standardisation criteria. The very very first item on the agenda is to standardise the checkers and training. That my friend is the crux of the whole matter here. And that HAS been documented here. I have seen the same filmed event been evaluated a 1 and a 5 by two different sets of TREs. You want to tell me how to prepare for that?
One example...first officer here for 4 years. Never a blip on his PPCs, line checks, highly experienced in numerous wide bodied aircraft and including several captain stints. No counseliing, no "chats" with those in cubicles about anything, no nothing....But was told he will be delayed another year, because SP wants to see another PPC result. Never an explaination when asked. Just the way it is.
Finally, Olala, I will agree, if someone shows up unprepared then they deserve not to be upgraded. However, prepared for what? Memorise the OMA, recite all of the weights, etc? Not enough asking the copilot if he is "happy" or not? But do we set or f/o's for failure? According to those in training, most failures are due to the lack of decision making ability. How do you "prepare" for that? EK beats down any decision making outside of their little box. Then it is not decision making. (eg, removed from roster until we, sitting in our cubicles, decide your decision agrees with ours) And when do firsts really get the opportunity to make decisions (re, prepare) here? When they have captains telling them to not disconnect the a/p until clearance to land has been received, IMHO, we are setting up a system rife with failure.
But there does seem to be a disparity between pass and failure rates on the two fleets. Where's the standard. If there is a high failure rate, perhaps it's time to look inwards. But Pool
expressed the reason for that much better than I am capable of doing.But Olala, you hit the nail on the head. If a copilot shows up unprepared don't expect for me to ........and he can f@ck off for the rest of his career in the right seat. And that does exemplify the attitude of many trainers. "Don't expect me to train, teach, mentor, or cajol your preparedness." Easier to say just F@ck off. I love it.
Last edited by TangoUniform; 30th Apr 2011 at 11:49.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Crawley, Surrey
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Very interesting topic......keep it sensible lads. We just wanna learn something and hear different opinions from those who have been there and those that make you get there .........
(obviously will take it some of the info with a pinch of salt :Pprune DISCLAIMER)
(obviously will take it some of the info with a pinch of salt :Pprune DISCLAIMER)
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,091
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No-one can 'teach' or 'train' you to be a Captain. This is garbage.
I have been in the SIM when highly regarded FOs have been in the LHS and things have started to go wrong, it is not a situation they are accustomed to, everyone looks at them for a decision, "A competent but inexperienced FO in the RHS" is the best they can hope for.
The physical transition from RHS to LHS is easy, one or two SIM sessions, the hard part is the mental transition from FO to Captain. If the basic materials, (qualities), are there than a captain can be constructed but if those materials are missing then no amount of training will help.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yada, I can only assume that you were disadvantaged by the lack of increments. I went from 24k to 36k (approx). You basically jump 10 scales when you get a command.
It seems para and shift are able to see the obvious, but for some reason TU cant, why is that?
The 'friend' that you describe that had a perfect record of PPC's/ALC's proves my point admirably. For it was HE that told you he had a blindingly superb record wasn't it? Well if it was as good as he said it was then why was he asked for another PPC result? Surely even you can admit that it just doesn't add up? I suggest that he wasn't quite as good as he thinks he was!! Food for thought?
For what it's worth mate, I too think the involvement of the psych and HR departments is damned ridiculous and completely worthless, but that's the corporate mentality we have to deal with sadly.
Also for your information, it is utter crap to actually believe that you cannot make command decisions without fear of reprisal! I use airmanship, logic and previous command experience to do my job daily and if I have time I might or might not refer to the books, but it will always come a long way behind!
Nowhere did I say you had to memorise the books, jeez me of all people would have failed miserably if that was the case!! A good upgrade candidate should be able to wipe the floor with most trainers when it comes to knowledge from the books...... despite what you believe, that's NOT what they are looking for!
It seems para and shift are able to see the obvious, but for some reason TU cant, why is that?
The 'friend' that you describe that had a perfect record of PPC's/ALC's proves my point admirably. For it was HE that told you he had a blindingly superb record wasn't it? Well if it was as good as he said it was then why was he asked for another PPC result? Surely even you can admit that it just doesn't add up? I suggest that he wasn't quite as good as he thinks he was!! Food for thought?
For what it's worth mate, I too think the involvement of the psych and HR departments is damned ridiculous and completely worthless, but that's the corporate mentality we have to deal with sadly.
Also for your information, it is utter crap to actually believe that you cannot make command decisions without fear of reprisal! I use airmanship, logic and previous command experience to do my job daily and if I have time I might or might not refer to the books, but it will always come a long way behind!
Nowhere did I say you had to memorise the books, jeez me of all people would have failed miserably if that was the case!! A good upgrade candidate should be able to wipe the floor with most trainers when it comes to knowledge from the books...... despite what you believe, that's NOT what they are looking for!
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: >FL310
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One more reply and that's it. No one is saying here that one should not be prepared. That is obvious. Do as much preparation as possible. Don't go to your upgrade interviews etc, unprepared. The question? Prepared for what? How does one prepare for subjective material such as personality, body language and weaknesses exposed on an outdated psycometric test. "Do you hear voices?" "Would you rather get sick on a bus or hit your thumb with a hammer?"
If the product that EK delivers for training is so good, then why the proliferation of the study guide, the guide of all the questions ever asked, the systems guide? Is that the kind of preparation you guys are talking about? If it were the random failure no angst from anyone. But from the line perspective there appears to be a systemic failure of training, mentoring, and motivation and more of an atmosphere of paranoia, fear and intimidation.
If the product that EK delivers for training is so good, then why the proliferation of the study guide, the guide of all the questions ever asked, the systems guide? Is that the kind of preparation you guys are talking about? If it were the random failure no angst from anyone. But from the line perspective there appears to be a systemic failure of training, mentoring, and motivation and more of an atmosphere of paranoia, fear and intimidation.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: uae
Posts: 2,777
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You just have to go back 4 or so years and see who they were forced to hire. I can remember very senior trainers saying at the time " these guys will have problems upgrading" Note : it does not apply to all
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TU if you are looking for guidance on what to study then you are barking up the wrong tree.
As we all know, it's airmanship and leadership that will save you from crashing and not what's written in the books.
However, one must have a good 'working knowledge' of the books in order to know what might or might not be an issue. For instance if EGT says to you in interview the visibility for take off is 400m in fog, then you must consider the fact that its a captains only take off. If you miss it, then he is now gonna start to dig deeper into your knowledge and may well uncover more stuff you are unaware of. The point being, if you can impress in the first 10 minutes and not make an arse of yourself, then I'd lay money on the fact that you'd get an easy ride for the remainder of the interview. If he asks you to recite the stabilisation criteria and you fumble around for 10 minutes and come up with crap, then you will likely fail........simply put, a lot of this stuff should already be at a good F/O's finger tips.
A good keen F/O with a professional attitude will have been practicing being a Captain from the RHS for a very long time before his upgrade. He should have been trying to think like a skipper and come up with his own solutions to problems. If something arises he should assess it as if he was in the LHS, come up with an answer in his own mind, see what the capt did and look at the out come. He should be asking as many questions as possible coming up to his upgrade, he should be asking the line guys how to do the tech log, how to apply the MEL and continually ask himself 'what would I do now if x happened'. This is the attitude that will sail you briskly through your upgrade interview AND course with minimal fuss. On the other hand, I fly with some who I can spot a mile off will fail. They are the ones who, with just a couple of months to upgrade are happy to sit there reading the Gulf News, chatting up the crew and generally have 'sloping shoulders' not giving a sh1t.
These guys can fly! Their stick and rudder skills are probably better than mine in some respects, this is because 99% of their attention is given to the basic task of flying and NOTHING else. Being a skipper is 10% Flying skills and 90% management and problem solving/decision making. Like I said before being a good Captain is a frame of mind, not a taught skill. You can teach a monkey to fly, but it's unlikely you could teach it to manage effectively!
Good luck in any case
As we all know, it's airmanship and leadership that will save you from crashing and not what's written in the books.
However, one must have a good 'working knowledge' of the books in order to know what might or might not be an issue. For instance if EGT says to you in interview the visibility for take off is 400m in fog, then you must consider the fact that its a captains only take off. If you miss it, then he is now gonna start to dig deeper into your knowledge and may well uncover more stuff you are unaware of. The point being, if you can impress in the first 10 minutes and not make an arse of yourself, then I'd lay money on the fact that you'd get an easy ride for the remainder of the interview. If he asks you to recite the stabilisation criteria and you fumble around for 10 minutes and come up with crap, then you will likely fail........simply put, a lot of this stuff should already be at a good F/O's finger tips.
A good keen F/O with a professional attitude will have been practicing being a Captain from the RHS for a very long time before his upgrade. He should have been trying to think like a skipper and come up with his own solutions to problems. If something arises he should assess it as if he was in the LHS, come up with an answer in his own mind, see what the capt did and look at the out come. He should be asking as many questions as possible coming up to his upgrade, he should be asking the line guys how to do the tech log, how to apply the MEL and continually ask himself 'what would I do now if x happened'. This is the attitude that will sail you briskly through your upgrade interview AND course with minimal fuss. On the other hand, I fly with some who I can spot a mile off will fail. They are the ones who, with just a couple of months to upgrade are happy to sit there reading the Gulf News, chatting up the crew and generally have 'sloping shoulders' not giving a sh1t.
These guys can fly! Their stick and rudder skills are probably better than mine in some respects, this is because 99% of their attention is given to the basic task of flying and NOTHING else. Being a skipper is 10% Flying skills and 90% management and problem solving/decision making. Like I said before being a good Captain is a frame of mind, not a taught skill. You can teach a monkey to fly, but it's unlikely you could teach it to manage effectively!
Good luck in any case
Last edited by Oblaaspop; 30th Apr 2011 at 16:48.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: >FL310
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Obla, thanks, but I don't need the luck. Been in LHS for years. And your final post, I can agree with. My points are that EK does not foster any sort professional development as other airlines do. Second, why the failures on the B and not the A? If there is a significant amount of failures, I believe someone needs to identify areas that need improvement, better recruiting, yearly performance reviews other than PPCs, evaluations by line captains...... Amazingly, other airlines seem to get along just fine without an untrained psych profiler (SP) digging into an outdated, irrelevant psychological profil test and looking for psychological deficiencies. And who determines what those deficiencies are for a pilot/captain? So throw all that away and someone answer why there are significantly more failures on the Boeing (fact) than the Airbus?
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe that result is because no one has TAUGHT them what to widen their focus to encompass items and areas beyond that which an FO will typically think about. And because no one has TAUGHT them to make decisions in a more comprehensive fashion than an FO might engage in.
All trainees get a 2 day upgrade LOS workshop course which goes into great detail about developing a workable management model for decision making as well as giving them scenarios to work through in slow time in the classroom to get them thinking along the right lines. Not to mention the fact that ALL F/O's now get Command Development training for 6 sectors a couple of months before upgrade where the instructor also nurtures PSDM and allows them to 'run the show' as far as possible.
Again as I said before, a good trainee will have already spent many months mentally preparing for this and so should not find the course a shock. Its a lot better now than it ever used to be. At least a LOS can be paused to discuss a course of action whereas before you would just be allowed to plough on and c0ck it up! The emphasis actually is on training these days (thanks to MM in no small part), however there are some guys with the wrong attitude and approach that will never succeed regardless of the amount of training on offer......... These are the ones I suggest who continually cry foul!
(Sorry TU, assumed that by the content of your previous posts that you were approaching upgrade, no offence intended, just trying to help guys get their minds focused....... Not sure the Airbus is that far behind the Boeing now with failures as it seem DT is trying to follow in EGT's footsteps!)
Last edited by Oblaaspop; 30th Apr 2011 at 16:55.
Obla is giving sound advise. Heed his info as a good bases of starting your upgrade.
Have a read of the latest training bulletin. It refers to candidates turning up for command and not even knowing their 9 memory items on the Boeing. Maybe that's why there is a disparity.
There has been little change in the upgrade interview process since l have been here. It is not new. So why is there a sudden surprise that some don't make it? History says that some just aren't prepared or have a bad day. You at least get a second chance or more. Better to find out at this stage than in training, or worse on the line, where there is "no going-back". But this has been spelled out before.
The other day l did a flight with an FO who was coming up for command. He told me his assentiveness had been questioned in the past. Well, did he try to make up for it on that flight, as his interview was coming up. It was annoying to the point of distraction on all parties involved on a late departure. There were many inputs with many questions and solutions offered. But at the end of the day there was only one answer, and unfortunately for him, after all his involvement, the decision was made by load control. Having tried to tell him he had no control over what was going on, he kept on proving his assertiveness. 10 points for that. 0 points for result.
He will make a good skipper, as soon as the assertive stigma collar is removed.
It's all about preparedness and attitude.
Good luck to you all approaching, as most l fly with will be on my OK list for the family to fly with.
halas
Have a read of the latest training bulletin. It refers to candidates turning up for command and not even knowing their 9 memory items on the Boeing. Maybe that's why there is a disparity.
There has been little change in the upgrade interview process since l have been here. It is not new. So why is there a sudden surprise that some don't make it? History says that some just aren't prepared or have a bad day. You at least get a second chance or more. Better to find out at this stage than in training, or worse on the line, where there is "no going-back". But this has been spelled out before.
The other day l did a flight with an FO who was coming up for command. He told me his assentiveness had been questioned in the past. Well, did he try to make up for it on that flight, as his interview was coming up. It was annoying to the point of distraction on all parties involved on a late departure. There were many inputs with many questions and solutions offered. But at the end of the day there was only one answer, and unfortunately for him, after all his involvement, the decision was made by load control. Having tried to tell him he had no control over what was going on, he kept on proving his assertiveness. 10 points for that. 0 points for result.
He will make a good skipper, as soon as the assertive stigma collar is removed.
It's all about preparedness and attitude.
Good luck to you all approaching, as most l fly with will be on my OK list for the family to fly with.
halas
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,501
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A good keen F/O with a professional attitude will have been practicing being a Captain from the RHS for a very long time before his upgrade. He should have been trying to think like a skipper and come up with his own solutions to problems. If something arises he should assess it as if he was in the LHS, come up with an answer in his own mind, see what the capt did and look at the out come. He should be asking as many questions as possible coming up to his upgrade, he should be asking the line guys how to do the tech log, how to apply the MEL and continually ask himself 'what would I do now if x happened'. This is the attitude that will sail you briskly through your upgrade interview AND course with minimal fuss. On the other hand, I fly with some who I can spot a mile off will fail. They are the ones who, with just a couple of months to upgrade are happy to sit there reading the Gulf News, chatting up the crew and generally have 'sloping shoulders' not giving a sh1t.
It's very little about flying, and a whole lot about managing.
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,091
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not surprised that is the result if you have given him no training.
As Oblaaspop says, you can help to open up a persons mind, getting them thinking in the right direction, thinking like a captain, (which they should have been doing for the previous months anyway), but you cannot teach the human qualities that make a good commander/manager, you can only develop them.
In the military we were always taught that if you want to be promoted to the next rank up then you must behave like the next rank up.
Last edited by parabellum; 1st May 2011 at 02:16. Reason: Speeeeling/grammer
Join Date: May 2008
Location: pit
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reading through your posts I really coldn't agree more. All your points about preparation, aquiring management skills etc. are more than valid and most probably many applicants didn't completely step up to them.
But I think the main point is missed. It's the reigning culture that is a huge obstacle. All applying pilots are assessed as future captains. If there is a high upgrade failure rate, then either recruitment did a lousy job, or something happenes during the 4+ years as FOs. My point is the latter.
I observed that many FOs during their early years are first flabergasted by some events, then bewildered and finally almost intimidated.
The company pretends a lot of things, writes beautiful books and in meetings assure us of every assistance and confirm skippers of having all the authority and so forth. But then they see a skipper grilled for letting the FO land (successfully) after an engine failure (BKK), they witnessed a skipper beeing grilled of aborting at high speed when a tire exploded (DXB), they heard about a skipper beeing grilled for landing in Dyarbakir and not where the company would have wished, with an engine failure. They know about the many letters, some even warnings, to skippers for loading fuel when they deem it necessary. They read about the multiple mess-ups by a certain DCP (NRT, DXB, SIM) and must ask themselves why he's still acting PIC AND in charge of upgrade interviews. And I am not even talking about some dismal sackings.
THAT is the actual culture they are witnessing.
There is a huge dicrepancy between what is said and what is done. THAT'S what hinders many FOs to perform adequatly at the interview. They no longer go by what makes aviatic sense, or common sense, they try to accomodate the culture. But, as I mentioned, this is a double edged sword, because the company can apply what is written OR what they deem necessary. It acts in a hugely opportunistic way and this is somewhat difficult to read and live by.
I have heard about an upgrade loft beeing terminated after a few minutes simply because the trainee chose to change runway, due to lenght/crosswind reason, and because the trainer disagreed, he failed him. I can't confirm this, but it would fit the above and greatly increases fears among candidates.
And fear or intimidation, finally the wrong culture, is one of the worst enemies in aviation.
Unfortunately more pilots we encounter than not would strongly confirm this. At a wash-up the ABDCP asked if captains feel pressured by the company in fuel decision making, he was aghast to see two thirds of hands raised.
As long as this culture is upheld and its protagonists can continue nothing can change.
But I think the main point is missed. It's the reigning culture that is a huge obstacle. All applying pilots are assessed as future captains. If there is a high upgrade failure rate, then either recruitment did a lousy job, or something happenes during the 4+ years as FOs. My point is the latter.
I observed that many FOs during their early years are first flabergasted by some events, then bewildered and finally almost intimidated.
The company pretends a lot of things, writes beautiful books and in meetings assure us of every assistance and confirm skippers of having all the authority and so forth. But then they see a skipper grilled for letting the FO land (successfully) after an engine failure (BKK), they witnessed a skipper beeing grilled of aborting at high speed when a tire exploded (DXB), they heard about a skipper beeing grilled for landing in Dyarbakir and not where the company would have wished, with an engine failure. They know about the many letters, some even warnings, to skippers for loading fuel when they deem it necessary. They read about the multiple mess-ups by a certain DCP (NRT, DXB, SIM) and must ask themselves why he's still acting PIC AND in charge of upgrade interviews. And I am not even talking about some dismal sackings.
THAT is the actual culture they are witnessing.
There is a huge dicrepancy between what is said and what is done. THAT'S what hinders many FOs to perform adequatly at the interview. They no longer go by what makes aviatic sense, or common sense, they try to accomodate the culture. But, as I mentioned, this is a double edged sword, because the company can apply what is written OR what they deem necessary. It acts in a hugely opportunistic way and this is somewhat difficult to read and live by.
I have heard about an upgrade loft beeing terminated after a few minutes simply because the trainee chose to change runway, due to lenght/crosswind reason, and because the trainer disagreed, he failed him. I can't confirm this, but it would fit the above and greatly increases fears among candidates.
And fear or intimidation, finally the wrong culture, is one of the worst enemies in aviation.
Unfortunately more pilots we encounter than not would strongly confirm this. At a wash-up the ABDCP asked if captains feel pressured by the company in fuel decision making, he was aghast to see two thirds of hands raised.
As long as this culture is upheld and its protagonists can continue nothing can change.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Earth
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let`s Benchmark upgrade:
EK : psychometric, command check flights as an FO, interview (40% fail) with chief pilot and HR (new since a year), tech exam, around 12 sim sessions, every session pass/fail, PAM markers 1-5; 5 =not given because to much work, 1 and 2= no good, 3 =below average, so only 4 is normal, an LOE, then two(!) final line checks. Half a year monitoring on line, early OPC/PPC.
KLM/AirFrance/Lufthansa (Over 75 years of experience)
Your number comes up, Operating manual exam (in case you miss you do it again after your linecheck!), around 14 sim sessions, exam, done.
Markers : standard, standard plus/minus. Excellent TRAINING.
On the nail!
Oblaaspop
that' exactly the medieval condescending SAS/RAF/military philosophy that has been critised and banned from civil aviation since CRM was invented. 'Going through the mud, like your brothers in arms, conquer and victory for queen an country' Haleluya! 'We are on (another) Imperial Mission to Trivandrum at 3 o'clock in the morning, bombs away!'
Try to rethink the training philosophy a bit, Oblaas, it's 2011.
Oh, and an upgrade is NOT a gift from the company, it's a basic right embedded in the contract you sign. Remember the EK road shows: 'A wonderful career is waiting for you!'
EK : psychometric, command check flights as an FO, interview (40% fail) with chief pilot and HR (new since a year), tech exam, around 12 sim sessions, every session pass/fail, PAM markers 1-5; 5 =not given because to much work, 1 and 2= no good, 3 =below average, so only 4 is normal, an LOE, then two(!) final line checks. Half a year monitoring on line, early OPC/PPC.
KLM/AirFrance/Lufthansa (Over 75 years of experience)
Your number comes up, Operating manual exam (in case you miss you do it again after your linecheck!), around 14 sim sessions, exam, done.
Markers : standard, standard plus/minus. Excellent TRAINING.
the sense that the training department was there to TRAIN you than catch you out
There's an old British SAS saying "Train hard, Fight Easy". The same rules apply here chaps, the company doesn't owe you a command!!
Oblaaspop
that' exactly the medieval condescending SAS/RAF/military philosophy that has been critised and banned from civil aviation since CRM was invented. 'Going through the mud, like your brothers in arms, conquer and victory for queen an country' Haleluya! 'We are on (another) Imperial Mission to Trivandrum at 3 o'clock in the morning, bombs away!'
Try to rethink the training philosophy a bit, Oblaas, it's 2011.
Oh, and an upgrade is NOT a gift from the company, it's a basic right embedded in the contract you sign. Remember the EK road shows: 'A wonderful career is waiting for you!'