Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Middle East
Reload this Page >

EK training a disgrace

Middle East Many expats still flying in Knoteetingham. Regional issues can be discussed here.

EK training a disgrace

Old 8th Oct 2017, 14:43
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: US
Posts: 2,160
What's the minimum TT required to get hired? 3000? 5000? That's a long time to learn how to land in a crosswind. Blaming the rudder wagging on lack of landings misses what the real problem is.
misd-agin is offline  
Old 8th Oct 2017, 15:41
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: mids
Age: 54
Posts: 0
TT is a daft way of looking at it.

TT 5000 hours could mean less than 1000 approaches out of which 500 on the stick.

Or it could mean 5000 plus approaches and 2500 plus on the stick.
tescoapp is offline  
Old 8th Oct 2017, 17:02
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: Blandings
Posts: 690
In defense of our DUS colleagues, is there perhaps yet another layer of Airbus idiocy (non-moving thrust levers, control inputs being made by the PF that the PM has no way of monitoring on his flaccid (!) stick, control responses being changed by the computers which the pilots are unaware of, cf Report: Lufthansa A320 at Hamburg on Mar 1st 2008, wing touches runway in cross wind landing) which makes crosswind landings unusually difficult?
Dropp the Pilot is offline  
Old 8th Oct 2017, 19:19
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Dubai - sand land.
Age: 51
Posts: 2,587
Not at all Dropp. The 380 is an easy aeroplane to fly in strong crosswinds; both take-off and landing!

Start kicking the rudder though (as on any type) and she'll bite ya!
White Knight is offline  
Old 8th Oct 2017, 20:39
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: uk
Posts: 466
I used to offer a 'no jeopardy' 35 knot crosswind landing in the A380 sim if there was anytime left. I reinforced the offer by having a go first thereby fine tuning my own skills (!) and hopefully encouraging les autres. The offer was usually accepted and I hope that (particularly) first officers knew that I meant the no jeopardy statement. How else will they learn? I (probably misguidedly) mentioned this at a training meeting and cue large intakes of breath. " Oh, if they screwed it up you have to give them a 1/2." I rest my case. There has to be a complete cultural sea change in attitude. I must stress that there are some stellar instructors/ examiners @ EK for the sake of balance.

Also, yes the A380 is relatively easy to land (well, in the sim) in a crosswind. As a previous correspondent said you do need to be careful with the rudder. Plus, tech knowledge helps. The normal law in the air versus direct law on the ground issue can make the subsequent arrival 'untidy' in a not dissimilar manner to the video.

Cheers
olster is offline  
Old 8th Oct 2017, 21:23
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Midlands
Posts: 160
Originally Posted by olster View Post
I used to offer a 'no jeopardy' 35 knot crosswind landing in the A380 sim if there was anytime left. I reinforced the offer by having a go first thereby fine tuning my own skills (!) and hopefully encouraging les autres. The offer was usually accepted and I hope that (particularly) first officers knew that I meant the no jeopardy statement. How else will they learn? I (probably misguidedly) mentioned this at a training meeting and cue large intakes of breath. " Oh, if they screwed it up you have to give them a 1/2." I rest my case. There has to be a complete cultural sea change in attitude. I must stress that there are some stellar instructors/ examiners @ EK for the sake of balance.

Also, yes the A380 is relatively easy to land (well, in the sim) in a crosswind. As a previous correspondent said you do need to be careful with the rudder. Plus, tech knowledge helps. The normal law in the air versus direct law on the ground issue can make the subsequent arrival 'untidy' in a not dissimilar manner to the video.

Cheers
Is there a particular reason AB chose to revert to direct law on the rollout for the rudder? If it’s possible to blend g-load and pitch rate in one axis of C* laws, why not for the rudder too?
Odins Raven is offline  
Old 8th Oct 2017, 21:34
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sincity
Posts: 1,013
Originally Posted by Dropp the Pilot View Post
In defense of our DUS colleagues, is there perhaps yet another layer of Airbus idiocy (non-moving thrust levers, control inputs being made by the PF that the PM has no way of monitoring on his flaccid (!) stick, control responses being changed by the computers which the pilots are unaware of, cf Report: Lufthansa A320 at Hamburg on Mar 1st 2008, wing touches runway in cross wind landing) which makes crosswind landings unusually difficult?
Centreline tracking or lack thereof is pretty easy to spot looking out the window
maggot is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2017, 00:28
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: cocos islands
Posts: 1
Why can't some people see their own faults?

It really bothers me to see how people in this company are so scared of someone checking their performance. If you are such a weak operator that you are scared of random line checks and a simple Xwind landing on the sim, please do us all a favor and change your profession.
IMHO, there is no doubt that in this company I've seen the best flight managers, but the pilots with the worse hand flying skills and situational awareness.
are you curious to know if you are part of the problem? let's find out.
If you are the typical skipper who asks your FO to engage the autopilot ASAP after take off, you are part of the problem, same goes for the guys who want to wait till landing clearance just in case of a go around, or even worse, wait till minimums, as you are too scared to deal with a bit of wake turbulence.
Same to the guys who are scared of random line checks, or the ones who are scared of any kind of simulator, or those who start or finish the briefing with ''lets stay out of the office''.... you are making the ''enemy'' bigger than it is , you have a problem, not the company.
Since I joined Emirates I find that my flying skills are degrading and it's not due to the company's fault, but mainly due to these panicky operators who rely too much on the automation.
The company needs to check you, to verify that your family and my family are safe flying with you, your neighbor or me....if you are one of those who are unable to figure out if you are high or low without following the magenta...please do everyone a favor and go back to your basics,and if you don't feel comfortable doing so, please start a coffee shop somewhere and leave aviation.
lepimiente is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2017, 04:37
  #29 (permalink)  
FL3
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: World
Posts: 29
FO's limitations...and when it is time for upgrade, you suddenly no longer have these limitations...
FL3 is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2017, 05:15
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: dxb
Posts: 71
I agree that we have some excellent instructors and examiners. We also have a lot of good ones. It's that toxic mentality that has to change. When you are in a training session and you make a mistake, or don't do a perfect crosswind landing, there should not be an issue to do it over a few times without having to fear a grade that will have you in the sim again, checked in another 3 months and a big fat remark for your next ppc. Or worse, your upgrade delayed. Training is what it is, training. How often do you get to do challenging xwind landings on the line? Hardly ever. If you have to do a few in the sim to get confident again, so be it. That's why we have training sims, or at least, should have. Thankfully the majority of our trainers still think that way. It's a shame they get pressure from above when they try to do the right thing.
VLS with ice is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2017, 09:20
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: uk
Posts: 466
Odins, I do not know the answer to your question - probably someone here does! The control laws change depending on the flight phase / technical status but do not differentiate in terms of elevator / rudder etc. For example: the A380 V1 'cut' is possibly the easiest manoeuvre imho on any aircraft / sim if.... you know what the aircraft is doing. The engine fails @ v1, you keep it straight with a reasonable amount of rudder (direct law), rotate @ Vr to 10 degrees pitch then... normal law blends in, the system says, "let me help you" and you then have to ease off on the rudder application, the sop is to apply rudder trim hopefully in the correct direction and select the autopilot. A potential error is the almost reversal of rudder input leading to trim in the wrong direction followed by some out of synch peddling... However, if you know what the control laws are doing it should be a piece of cake. An effective demo is to fail the engine and once airborne take hands and feet off the controls and observe the aircraft fly in a straight line seamlessly! As I have already stated, the training system has to change to allow instructors / examiners to use common sense and dare I say, airmanship to develop the trainees, not in a climate of fear! Self - evidently there are systemic and cultural issues that need shifting to encourage training in a professional climate. However, I do not agree that the training department is a 'disgrace', quite the opposite in fact. The original, emotive statement is rather unfair to the vast majority of trainers who are extremely professional.

Last edited by olster; 9th Oct 2017 at 11:12. Reason: grammar!
olster is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2017, 11:23
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 184
Don't panic to much EK. All the airlines are having the same issues . Your A380's just stand out a bit more. At least you guys and gals are concerned about it !
Fluke is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2017, 12:58
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Springfield
Posts: 282
Originally Posted by FL3 View Post
FO's limitations...and when it is time for upgrade, you suddenly no longer have these limitations...
That's correct, which is why the trainees complete zero flight time in the LHS. Tucked away in their flight bag is a license or at least a GCAA letter that says 380 P1, and he/she is qualified to fly from the LHS to the a/c limits.
Praise Jebus is offline  
Old 9th Oct 2017, 14:16
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: MIDDLE EAST
Posts: 1,040
lepimiente

I agree entirely. Unfortunately, the situation self perpetuates with 'inexperienced handling F/O's' upgrading to the left seat. Their own insecurities and under confidence on the aircraft then filters down to their F/O's. They don't allow them to hand fly and so they too have diluted experience and confidence in manual handling. And so the problem multiplies.

Engaging the A/P at 80' says it all really...........

Harry
harry the cod is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2017, 09:17
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Austria
Posts: 351
Remember the Austrian Instructor NH who got a warning letter from the Training Department because according their opinion he is a bad instructor because he didn't fail any trainee within the last 6 month?
Many more stories like this can be mentioned!
Yes the training department is a disgrace and has it's share of responsibility for the present spiral dive of the whole company.
Talparc is offline  
Old 10th Oct 2017, 16:54
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: The Sharp End.
Posts: 433
As have all the other departments/managers involved with flight ops.
sluggums is offline  
Old 11th Oct 2017, 01:23
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: not in Dubai anymore
Age: 90
Posts: 712
at the end NH paid the ultimate price
GoreTex is offline  
Old 11th Oct 2017, 03:24
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Retired
Posts: 95
Originally Posted by GoreTex View Post
at the end NH paid the ultimate price
Hardly the ultimate price. A lot would see it as a blessing.
Dirigible is offline  
Old 11th Oct 2017, 05:00
  #39 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: new zealand
Posts: 5
Response to a response EK trainig dep a disgrace

I would like to elaborate on my initial post and let's hope some of my more condescending colleagues don't consider me hysterical, because at the time of writing this I do not feel in any way hysterical.

I will clarify and mention some points in no particular order;

How can one be accused (which I fortunately never have been) of being substandard or inadequate if you have had NO way to practice your skills. The training department somehow thinks that reading the manual more is the answer to poor line based performance. This logic is fundamentally flawed. I am not talking about the very few limitations and memory items one is supposed to know. I am talking about general performance.
There is a trend by Airbus to move away from knowing all the detail. There is just too much to know. What’s considered important for one instructor is irrelevant for another, and that proves my point. Remembering some small insignificant figure or detail for a training session and forgetting it soon after because it’s irrelevant does not surmount to good training or a good operator. But that’s where the focus is in Ek training….to learn the books more. Know level 3 more.
It’s not the solution. Of course I am not suggesting a lack of general interest in the profession.
Most colleagues I know are happy to read up about the job at an acceptable level.


If I come to a session/flight and my performance is substandard, but I have had NO opportunity to hone my skills then I think it is very inappropriate to say that I'm unprofessional and subpar. Of course I must put some effort in, that goes without saying. But if my EO is wobbly and I get a 2 somehow this is all my fault?
(BTW a 2 today is not the 2 of yesteryear)
If I could have trained to competency even in my own time, because the tools were available, and I show up and deliver a poor performance then I have no excuse.
THIS would reflect a poor attitude and a lack of motivation as the pilot has not taken the initiative to optimize himself, which I believe most of the type A personality pilots that I know would have done.
But there is nowhere to practice!!
There is only one way to enhance proficiency and unfortunately it costs money. We need TOOLS!
We need a simulator (static would do) that can be used by the pilots to sharpen their skills. Like British Airways has, we need a SIM driver who is not affiliated with training so that the pilot can feel 100% confident that he is free to experiment and discover in a very safe and holistic way regardless of the outcome of his actions. This is how we learn - by experience.
We need ECAM/ICAS software that we can work through and it behaves and acts like the real thing so we become familiar with the more challenging parts of this interface. This software is available on the open market but not for EK type AC otherwise I would purchase it myself.
How can ones ECAM/ICAS management be up to speed if we have not seen a complex example unfolding for 6 months or more.

Only with the correct tools available can checking somebody on day one make sense and lead to a truly competent pilot.

As automation becomes more complex and not less so, the nuances and complexities of what we are trying to do in the cockpit become more not less.
The only way to mitigate this is hands on practice and utilizing basic muscle memory. Muscle memory is the only modality that has been proven to deliver results under pressure.
Familiarization is key in order to manage unforeseen and stressful events.
The only way to enhance automation familiarization, is exactly that, familiarization.
You don't see a 12 year old playing Xbox or PlayStation with the tsunami of information pouring out of that interface confused do you? Why? Because he is very comfortable and familiar with the information coming out of the interface due to repeated exposure.
Have you ever seen a teenager become good at a console game by reading the manual??

Modern pilots on the other hand are not familiar with non-standard automation information. We don't regularly see anything other than standard line flying automation and no wonder we are confused when something out of the ordinary is presented. The instructors of course see a lot more from the back, so they are much more comfortable with interpreting the information and expect the line pilot to be as familiar.

This idea that evidence-based training is the solution, is in my opinion flawed. What happens with this training is that a trend is noticed and is then trained for, but it's the cart leading the horse because those events have already happened. There are new trends manifesting already. Something else will always be TRENDING
I am trained in something that is trending and it's ticked off the list and I never see it again for five years but I'm supposed to ALWAYS be proficient at it because it's been ticked off the list.
So when that latest flavor of the month event happens to me in five years and one day, I have no bloody clue on how to do it because I've not had the opportunity to review it in 5 years ( other than the manual).

What needs to be embraced is a solid base for dealing with any issue. And that lies in repetitive training and familiarization, not knowing level 3 of a specific event because it happened once or twice in history.
Again, reading and trying to learn complex tasks form a manual has very limited effect under duress. It’s not the correct way to become proficient in stressful situations when they happen. This concept is understood in all levels of education except in aviation and EK specifically.

Lets look at some scenarios to determine which one will produce the safest outcome:

I have not been to Moscow for approximately five years. I read some text and “think” I understand the procedure. Then go to Moscow and realize I didn't truly understand it correctly and make a hash of it. There was nobody to ask and run my ideas by because the training department is what it is.

Alternatively, I can contact somebody respectful and knowledgeable in training (not a friend) and ask them to run by the procedure with me to make sure that I understand it correctly and that I am comfortable with it. Even better, if that imaginary sim was available I could even shoot some approaches using my new knowledge and test my understanding. So I wonder which one of these options is fundamentally safer?

Let’s look at another scenario:
I don't feel confident with 40kts Xwinds. I get through them in my simulator checks but it's not pretty. I pass and I'm on the line dreading the day that 40Kt is waiting for me.

Alternatively,
I can contact the training department and tell them as a professional, “listen folks, I can get through crosswind Landings in the SIM but I've never done it in real life in 10 years. I don't feel 100% confident with my own ability, it might be good enough to pass a check but it's not good enough for me as a professional so can I please practice.” “Yes of course training says” and they say thank you so much for coming to them and commend you for being so professional and mature. They offer to schedule some time so that you can practice for as long as you want until YOU feel up to speed with this activity that is very rarely practiced let alone encountered for real. I'm sure you can see where I'm going with this, to me it's so blindingly obvious which one is safer but somehow there still seem to be some people that defend the other narrative and suggest I should read THE TECHNIQUE AGAIN and not be so lazy!

It is naive and foolish in my opinion to think that a memory item can be flawlessly performed from reading it in the manual and then regurgitating it later. Under stress this theory will not deliver. Only muscle memory can deliver under stress.

I'm not advocating that we don't know memory items, I'm just saying that it goes against all fundamental educational principles to expect a procedure to be replicated under stress perfectly when memorized from text in a manual.

As for the level of experience I can only say that I am so impressed with the level of dedication and piloting skills of our first offices of late, even if they have very little experience. If these people were nurtured and properly trained they would be outstanding. I am personally very opposed to the dropping of entry standards but I must say that the new guys that I have been flying with have been generally excellent operators.
I am not confusing this with lack of experience which is understandable.
In my opinion the "slackers" are the demotivated, scared of their own shadow colleagues who have been jaded by the broken system over time.

The amount of lives that the training department (and subsequently fleet) have ruined of late is alarming. The word is certainly out there by now and many people don't want to come to Emirates in case they get through the whole selection process and most of the training only to be canned at the last minute.
How is it possible that experienced pilots who get through selection cannot be trained to land properly or fly a raw data ILS but instead get terminated? Personally this makes no sense.
If someone is battling in all fields then of course certain harsh action needs to be taken.

How can it be acceptable that captains are getting downgraded for one or two issues on a line check or PPC when they have immaculately served 10 or 12 years or more with perfect records .This is basically saying that every flight needs to be perfect which goes against all logic because we all know that that's not true and impossible to replicate.
It is well known and understood if you fall into the cracks of the training department you will be ravaged until there's nothing left of your soul. Your confidence will be shattered and that a very dangerous reality for a pilot to have no confidence.
They will come down on you like a pack of wolves. Treating respectable long serving veterans and new joiners with utter distain and disrespect. This is certainly a disgrace because it’s uncalled for and unnecessary. Deliver the message, but have some respect and humanity. That’s for free.

I notice a lot of instructors are very demotivated due to their conditions being eroded but are also of late very ashamed to be affiliated to the training dep.
They try to distance themselves somehow from the training dep as a whole. That’s sad and reflects on its management and where the dep is.

Way too much emphasis gets placed on who the instructor is for ones check. It’s the first thing people say when it’s mentioned that your PPC is due. “Oh who’s the instructor? “
It should not matter if proper standards where in place and the terrors in training could be further rooted out and the emphasis was rather on training nurturing and advancement.

There are a certain amount of loyal followers of MM. Good for them. I’m not one of them. But requiring a certain amount of statistical failures is a recipe for disaster and this training reality we have now is under his watch. This post is not a personal attack on anyone so I will leave it there.

As for the manual handling which apparently we should be so grateful for. A lot of the time is spent completing, in order to certify, EK special procedures which are badly thought out, not clearly understood, with very little consensus between trainers on how to do them. They general get revised soon after to another version.

I will say it again, that the ethics of the training department are completely flawed and compared to what it could be- a disgrace. I think a complete novice would be able to see the shortcomings. Let me be clear that I am not having a go at individual instructors, I'm having a go at the training department as a whole and probably the “lost few” in charge of this airline.

Let me say in closing, because a lot of negativity has surfaced in this post, that EK is still an amazing job with an unfortunately mounting amount of issues…but still amazing. I have had a privileged 10+ years but it has systematically ruined my love of the profession and I will get out of it as soon as I can. It’s an industry wide cancer of which EK is NOT the sickest. Not by a long shot
My own pride keeps me motivated and as professional as I can be. I just wish I could be more so, and have a training dep that would help me get there, and a company culture that embraced the grind that aviation has become, rather than added to it.
acryingshame is offline  
Old 11th Oct 2017, 08:07
  #40 (permalink)  
FL3
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: World
Posts: 29
Originally Posted by Praise Jebus View Post
That's correct, which is why the trainees complete zero flight time in the LHS. Tucked away in their flight bag is a license or at least a GCAA letter that says 380 P1, and he/she is qualified to fly from the LHS to the a/c limits.
FO's also do that after the course. Xwinds all the way up to 40kts.
But still a 20kts limitation...
FL3 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.