Lowered requirements Emirates
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: earth
Posts: 1,098
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Impressive, i would struggle, honestly.
But you are simply proving my point. Any flight operation is challenging. Any pilot has to adapt to a different one. Now having filled a sizeable backpack of experience makes adaption much easier and faster. A 1500h TPFO needs more training to adapt than a 10000 DEC.
Funny thing that the same blokes complain about having to nurse around narrow body DECs at EK with their infinitely more vast experience on worldwide WB and ULR network. They would certainly be more suited as upgraders than those pretentious skippers. Due to what, that is the question!
When confronted with a similar argument but this time working against these low hour astronauts, suddenly it should no longer apply. They would certainly be just as suited as the big hour WB worldwide experienced colleague FO. Once again: Due to what, that is the question.
We transited from piston underpowered light twins onto 82t MD80ies. I know what taking a lot of steps at a time means. I also know what training they gave us and simply compare to what is on the table today.
The two man ops over critical terrain is not a hands on exercise. I know that every FO i share the cockpit with has better stick skills than me .... But today's operation on EKs network is not easy. 95% yes, but dear colleague FOs, it's about the other 5%. And Murphy is remorseless, he will hit us when i am stuck between 350 panicking wobblers and the other FO taking a leak. That is exactly when i want some more experience, training and exposure up front. A very outspoken dude thinking his seat should be further left and pulling his stick into stall for minutes, because of being completely overwhelmed by the situation, is unfortunately a product of a might be very good aviator but with too little and inadequate training.
I am not alone in no longer trusting the local companies to assess the total risk accordingly. Too much greed and 'who cares' involved. That is the reason of our concern and criticism, not doubting of possible skill or professionalism of fellow pilots.
But you are simply proving my point. Any flight operation is challenging. Any pilot has to adapt to a different one. Now having filled a sizeable backpack of experience makes adaption much easier and faster. A 1500h TPFO needs more training to adapt than a 10000 DEC.
Funny thing that the same blokes complain about having to nurse around narrow body DECs at EK with their infinitely more vast experience on worldwide WB and ULR network. They would certainly be more suited as upgraders than those pretentious skippers. Due to what, that is the question!
When confronted with a similar argument but this time working against these low hour astronauts, suddenly it should no longer apply. They would certainly be just as suited as the big hour WB worldwide experienced colleague FO. Once again: Due to what, that is the question.
We transited from piston underpowered light twins onto 82t MD80ies. I know what taking a lot of steps at a time means. I also know what training they gave us and simply compare to what is on the table today.
The two man ops over critical terrain is not a hands on exercise. I know that every FO i share the cockpit with has better stick skills than me .... But today's operation on EKs network is not easy. 95% yes, but dear colleague FOs, it's about the other 5%. And Murphy is remorseless, he will hit us when i am stuck between 350 panicking wobblers and the other FO taking a leak. That is exactly when i want some more experience, training and exposure up front. A very outspoken dude thinking his seat should be further left and pulling his stick into stall for minutes, because of being completely overwhelmed by the situation, is unfortunately a product of a might be very good aviator but with too little and inadequate training.
I am not alone in no longer trusting the local companies to assess the total risk accordingly. Too much greed and 'who cares' involved. That is the reason of our concern and criticism, not doubting of possible skill or professionalism of fellow pilots.
I see your point Glofish. But remember this lack of pilots has been there for some time. Even with the pressure to find more warm bodies the recruiting pilots and TREs have not lowered the standard required to pass the recruiting SIM/process etc. Failure rate at recruiting is pretty large. This isn't going to change now, just as it hasn't changed in the past. Just a larger group are eligible to undergo the process.
We haven't had 10000hr pilots apply for a long time. If they do they will float to the top of the list. 1500hrs/2000hr in a multi crew multi engine aircraft are pretty much the same, be they jet or turbo prop.
We haven't had 10000hr pilots apply for a long time. If they do they will float to the top of the list. 1500hrs/2000hr in a multi crew multi engine aircraft are pretty much the same, be they jet or turbo prop.
short flights long nights
I have a question Don. If you put a guy into a 777 sim, that has never flown a jet, what do you assess him on? I mean flying a high performance, swept wing, wide body jet, is very different to flying a Dash 8. I'm not talking about operating it, but flying it.
I'm not trying to be funny, it is a serious question.
I'm not trying to be funny, it is a serious question.
You did the SIM SOPs. It's not overly demanding. A bit of attitude flying and management skills, and the ability to learn. The john deere is just an aeroplane after all.
Is it more of a jump than what the CRJ/ERJ, 146 etc fellas had to do?
Is it more of a jump than what the CRJ/ERJ, 146 etc fellas had to do?
short flights long nights
Ok, fair point. Anyway, time will tell I suppose.
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: the ridge where the west commences
Posts: 770
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now that WOULD be interesting, if you know some of the individuals who have been running the interview sims. Some of these chaps have been doing that assessment for years. Wouldn't you just love to be in the room when some HR numpty explains to them why they can now lower their standards?
That would have to be a really good Powerpoint.
That would have to be a really good Powerpoint.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: uae
Posts: 2,777
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
White none ,I don't believe it! There is one thing about changing the entry requirements but TC was very clear the standard will not change, but ( and it's a big one) 10 years ago interview sim average 4/5 min 3 guess where we are now. Bottom of the barrel (3). I've been involved with sim eval and know the level of candidate .
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: In a pipe in the upstairs water closet
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
When I went through the recruitment process for the airline I've worked for now for the past 8 years, we were put into either a B767 or B747-300 simulator for assessment. The usual stuff, all to be flown within regulatory tolerances, hand flown, no A/P or A/T. So I was going from flying C402s and C340s to being assessed in a B743 simulator (Most of the applicants like myself only had about 1000hrs TT - all on pistons)
Managed to pass (along with a lot of other applicants), got the job with an airline that flies only a fleet of Dash 8 Classics and Q400s.
So we had to be assessed on a jet to fly a turboprop. It's all down to the aptitude of the candidate, and how reliable the training system is of the organisation.
And a bit of the good ol' Power + Attitude = Performance.
Fuel-Off
Managed to pass (along with a lot of other applicants), got the job with an airline that flies only a fleet of Dash 8 Classics and Q400s.
So we had to be assessed on a jet to fly a turboprop. It's all down to the aptitude of the candidate, and how reliable the training system is of the organisation.
And a bit of the good ol' Power + Attitude = Performance.
Fuel-Off
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: France
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with donpizmeov,
Actually the NG is easier to fly than the q400 (especially with one engine out). Except energy management and high altitude high speed flight which are a matter of adaptation, not handling. FMS, FMA are almost the same both are Cat C approach (with usually about 10-20 kts difference) both are glass cockpit.
In my opinion a normal guy with >1000 h on q400 or atr 72 600 shouldn't have any problem to fly any jet aircraft.
Actually the NG is easier to fly than the q400 (especially with one engine out). Except energy management and high altitude high speed flight which are a matter of adaptation, not handling. FMS, FMA are almost the same both are Cat C approach (with usually about 10-20 kts difference) both are glass cockpit.
In my opinion a normal guy with >1000 h on q400 or atr 72 600 shouldn't have any problem to fly any jet aircraft.
Monarch man,
So a 2500hr LCC FO is experienced, but a 2500hr Dash 8 pilot isn't? I cant follow your logic?
So a 2500hr LCC FO is experienced, but a 2500hr Dash 8 pilot isn't? I cant follow your logic?
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How about a 2500 hr 777 FO? Wouldn't he be the most qualified?
Me? I'd take the 2500 hr TP FO. Why? Stick time and landings. How many jet landings does a cadet trained 777 FO have at 2500 hrs? 100? 125?
How many landings does this hypothetical A320 with 2500 hrs have? 350?
How many landings does the TP FO have? 700?
Alex - for $500 I'll take the guy with 700 landings.
Me? I'd take the 2500 hr TP FO. Why? Stick time and landings. How many jet landings does a cadet trained 777 FO have at 2500 hrs? 100? 125?
How many landings does this hypothetical A320 with 2500 hrs have? 350?
How many landings does the TP FO have? 700?
Alex - for $500 I'll take the guy with 700 landings.
Join Date: May 2015
Location: FL053
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Disclaimer, i'm not an EK driver. So i got no dog in this fight.
@Misd Again, the 777 FO might have less landings, but they are actually on a T7, and he has already proven that he can actually fly the aircraft. If he has the aptitude then all he has to do is adopt to the EK way of operation.
If two candidates meet the min. requirements set at the time, then i think what sets them apart is not necessarily the aircraft they were on before, rather their aptitude and ability to adopt to their new role.
@Misd Again, the 777 FO might have less landings, but they are actually on a T7, and he has already proven that he can actually fly the aircraft. If he has the aptitude then all he has to do is adopt to the EK way of operation.
If two candidates meet the min. requirements set at the time, then i think what sets them apart is not necessarily the aircraft they were on before, rather their aptitude and ability to adopt to their new role.
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Domaine de la Romanee-Conti
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
1 Post
You guys are all still missing the point
It's not about the aircraft the guy has previously flown, it's about the overall quality of the candidate and the quality of his previous airline background.
I know a couple of ATR and Dash-8 instructor/examiners from Air NZ and Virgin Australia who are probably going to apply for this. Captains with extensive backgrounds in CRM training, sim checking, safety investigations, writing of ops manuals etc, guys who live and breathe aviation.
These guys have been performing at the highest level, in airlines with some of the highest expectations and operating standards on earth. They have 10,000ish hours, most of it command time, they're still in their 30s or early 40s.
When you have your captain incapacitation event, would you seriously rather have that guy sitting next to you? Or some wet behind the ears rich kid from you-know-where, who left school, faked his licence and logbook, and then bought 1500 hours of A320/B737 time with daddy's money from some shonky third world Indo or Thai outfit? And has learned nothing in that time except how to say "yes captain", move the flap lever, fake a load sheet, and ignore an MEL, and has never made a command decision in his life?
Yes of course there are some useless turboprop pilots out there also. Yes of course the "most" preferred option is good and highly experienced jet pilots. I don't disagree with either of those facts. It's the job of your interview and sim screening guys to sort out the good guys from the muppets though isn't it.
But seriously some of you sky gods need to climb down from your "jet" high horses, and look at the big picture of overall candidate quality.
It's not about the aircraft the guy has previously flown, it's about the overall quality of the candidate and the quality of his previous airline background.
I know a couple of ATR and Dash-8 instructor/examiners from Air NZ and Virgin Australia who are probably going to apply for this. Captains with extensive backgrounds in CRM training, sim checking, safety investigations, writing of ops manuals etc, guys who live and breathe aviation.
These guys have been performing at the highest level, in airlines with some of the highest expectations and operating standards on earth. They have 10,000ish hours, most of it command time, they're still in their 30s or early 40s.
When you have your captain incapacitation event, would you seriously rather have that guy sitting next to you? Or some wet behind the ears rich kid from you-know-where, who left school, faked his licence and logbook, and then bought 1500 hours of A320/B737 time with daddy's money from some shonky third world Indo or Thai outfit? And has learned nothing in that time except how to say "yes captain", move the flap lever, fake a load sheet, and ignore an MEL, and has never made a command decision in his life?
Yes of course there are some useless turboprop pilots out there also. Yes of course the "most" preferred option is good and highly experienced jet pilots. I don't disagree with either of those facts. It's the job of your interview and sim screening guys to sort out the good guys from the muppets though isn't it.
But seriously some of you sky gods need to climb down from your "jet" high horses, and look at the big picture of overall candidate quality.
Luke, I'm not missing the point, you and I are talking about the same thing, it's why I prefaced my initial comments by speaking about the quality of candidate.
What you are missing is that from the perspective of the EK training machine, previous experience, qualifications, hours etc etc etc matter not, you are treated as an unknowing Luddite. Hence the need for relevant training, it doesn't matter to EK if these guys can write an ops manual, train CRM or live an breathe aviation, they will be low seniority F/O's who when they want their opinion it will be given to them, that's the EK checking department which BTW is slowly reversing all the positive gains it has made in recent years.
As to my comments relating to who I would prefer sat next to me when the proverbial hits the fan? someone who is comfortable in the environment, that comfort level comes from being trained correctly, based on what I see that won't happen.
For context Luke, my previous employer took many many 2-3-4-5-6000 HR TP guys and plonked them in the right seat of a 757 or 320, I trained a lot of them and it was recognised by those far more enlightened than me that the conversion and line training needed to be tailored a bit more, that won't happen at EK with its cookie cutter approach, and so I will be left to pick up the slack, probably at 3am during the monsoon somewhere.
What you are missing is that from the perspective of the EK training machine, previous experience, qualifications, hours etc etc etc matter not, you are treated as an unknowing Luddite. Hence the need for relevant training, it doesn't matter to EK if these guys can write an ops manual, train CRM or live an breathe aviation, they will be low seniority F/O's who when they want their opinion it will be given to them, that's the EK checking department which BTW is slowly reversing all the positive gains it has made in recent years.
As to my comments relating to who I would prefer sat next to me when the proverbial hits the fan? someone who is comfortable in the environment, that comfort level comes from being trained correctly, based on what I see that won't happen.
For context Luke, my previous employer took many many 2-3-4-5-6000 HR TP guys and plonked them in the right seat of a 757 or 320, I trained a lot of them and it was recognised by those far more enlightened than me that the conversion and line training needed to be tailored a bit more, that won't happen at EK with its cookie cutter approach, and so I will be left to pick up the slack, probably at 3am during the monsoon somewhere.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Permanent JET LAGGG
Posts: 206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I may...
I think we've beaten the "experience" horse to death. An individual is just that, an individual. At my previous outfit we had ab-initio guys flying a jet with 250hrs. Some were good(enough to get by) and some were phenomenal operators. There is a point where we blossom as aviators and become who we will be. At times we are humbled and we are ALWAYS learning from our mistakes and the mistakes of our colleagues.
I think the real point is this: we've all worked really hard to get to the point in our career where we are wide body Captains or FO's. It's taken myself and my colleagues years of instructing, crappy low cost airline flying, long hours, low pay, and now we've made it to the big leagues. Except there is one problem, our T and C keep dropping and keep dropping. We are now overworked and highly underpaid and not respected from our company. Bringing in 1500hr guys (regardless of experience) will be thrilled to fly big jets on long haul routes, stay in lavish hotels, and work with a planeful of young cabin crew... ...it's a big carrot to dangle. They haven't worked as hard or as long as we have to get to this position and it bothers many people. They won't "know" how they deserve to be treated because they haven't dealt with the amount of sh1t we had to deal with to get this far. And the only reason we dealt with all that sh1t at previous companies was that there was a light at the end of the tunnel. One day we will make it to an airline that values us, pays us, and treats us well!
It's our job as current crew to educate them on how they deserve to be treated and that they need not be pushed around by management. Our current conditions are unacceptable and the rest of the "sky gods" would agree. If you don't think every captain you flew with when you were low time taught you something(positive or negative) then think again. Even as a Captain I'm still learning, and that won't stop until I quit breathing.
If 1500 TP guys stepped onto property and demanded to only fly 75-80hrs/month, expected more pay and more days off I think we would all be singing a different tune. Just my thoughts
Safe flying to all.
CC
I think we've beaten the "experience" horse to death. An individual is just that, an individual. At my previous outfit we had ab-initio guys flying a jet with 250hrs. Some were good(enough to get by) and some were phenomenal operators. There is a point where we blossom as aviators and become who we will be. At times we are humbled and we are ALWAYS learning from our mistakes and the mistakes of our colleagues.
I think the real point is this: we've all worked really hard to get to the point in our career where we are wide body Captains or FO's. It's taken myself and my colleagues years of instructing, crappy low cost airline flying, long hours, low pay, and now we've made it to the big leagues. Except there is one problem, our T and C keep dropping and keep dropping. We are now overworked and highly underpaid and not respected from our company. Bringing in 1500hr guys (regardless of experience) will be thrilled to fly big jets on long haul routes, stay in lavish hotels, and work with a planeful of young cabin crew... ...it's a big carrot to dangle. They haven't worked as hard or as long as we have to get to this position and it bothers many people. They won't "know" how they deserve to be treated because they haven't dealt with the amount of sh1t we had to deal with to get this far. And the only reason we dealt with all that sh1t at previous companies was that there was a light at the end of the tunnel. One day we will make it to an airline that values us, pays us, and treats us well!
It's our job as current crew to educate them on how they deserve to be treated and that they need not be pushed around by management. Our current conditions are unacceptable and the rest of the "sky gods" would agree. If you don't think every captain you flew with when you were low time taught you something(positive or negative) then think again. Even as a Captain I'm still learning, and that won't stop until I quit breathing.
If 1500 TP guys stepped onto property and demanded to only fly 75-80hrs/month, expected more pay and more days off I think we would all be singing a different tune. Just my thoughts
Safe flying to all.
CC
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Terra Firma
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The TP guys will be welcome to share the workload in EK, simple.
As to their professionalism as a pilot, no different than any EK pilot.
As to the experience of an EK pilot. All EK pilots prior to joining had Jet time, Wide body time (perhaps), Global route experience (likely), a proven ability to adapat for the EK mould to fly jets on global/international routes.
As to the experience of the TP pilot. These guys are often going to be younger in their career than the previous EK applicant and might be more adaptable than the pilots who came to EK with jet time who were possibly older. The TP guys will have a beyond vertical learning curve as they will have to learn the "Jet" way of flying, the "Global" route structures, the new Med Haul and Long Haul work regime and associated fatigue issues. Also to be learnt will be the EK way of doing things and for those going to any Airbus, sidestick handling. A tall ask YES, impossible, NO. Give these guys a break and let us see how this plays out.
The only issue for the EK guys in particular will be the fact that every flight with a new TP guy is going to be a training flight for the TPs first year or more in EK and this will mean that the EK Captain is going to have to be even more aware than normal or the 'tea and biscuits" trip is inevitable + letters + cash loss (no bonus etc or upgrade if multicrew).
Time will tell, only the results will settle this one out so lets wait and see.
J
As to their professionalism as a pilot, no different than any EK pilot.
As to the experience of an EK pilot. All EK pilots prior to joining had Jet time, Wide body time (perhaps), Global route experience (likely), a proven ability to adapat for the EK mould to fly jets on global/international routes.
As to the experience of the TP pilot. These guys are often going to be younger in their career than the previous EK applicant and might be more adaptable than the pilots who came to EK with jet time who were possibly older. The TP guys will have a beyond vertical learning curve as they will have to learn the "Jet" way of flying, the "Global" route structures, the new Med Haul and Long Haul work regime and associated fatigue issues. Also to be learnt will be the EK way of doing things and for those going to any Airbus, sidestick handling. A tall ask YES, impossible, NO. Give these guys a break and let us see how this plays out.
The only issue for the EK guys in particular will be the fact that every flight with a new TP guy is going to be a training flight for the TPs first year or more in EK and this will mean that the EK Captain is going to have to be even more aware than normal or the 'tea and biscuits" trip is inevitable + letters + cash loss (no bonus etc or upgrade if multicrew).
Time will tell, only the results will settle this one out so lets wait and see.
J