EK training
 

I've read all the stuff I could find on this site, but can anyone tell me how the training is at EK. Computerbased groundschool? How long from start to finish? Do people not make it through?
Thanks.

There is CBT for aircraft systems. Training is rather long compared to U.S. carriers. The first three weeks is all generic while you run around town getting all the requisit visas, licenses, uniforms, bank accounts, etc, etc. CBT, FMS trainer, Fixed Base Sim, and finally full flight sim follow. That goes for another 6 weeks or so. Line training takes another 5 to 6 weeks. People do fail, but it is relatively rare.

The training culture is very different from North America. Others, I'm sure, will chime in with their views on that. Training at EK feels a lot like this: :ugh:


TP

You mean checking?:E :E :E

A lot will depend on what your background has been. In some respects I found the training easier than some in the US and in other respects harder. No oral exam, and limited examining on systems. This also may just be a Boeing trend. No spoon feeding, but found the training to be very much like fomer military training, ie, be prepared for the session through self study and the debrief is where the training takes place. The "nit picking" debriefs is what I found most distressful. And some real lack of published standardization. Overall, IMHO, just be prepared for sim sessions.

Of course if you have never flown glass Boeings, or have Airbus experience to fall back on-Good Luck.
TU

Until the deadwood ex A310 echelon move out of the training dept, nothing will change. Most of them come from zero training backgrounds and are responsible for the sub zero training standard. So agreeing with the above.....prepare to train yourself and be checked on what you taught yourself! ;)

This posted by a current EK TRI says a lot about the airline as a whole. Tell us XXXX what you are doing to improve it.

Name removed - yellow card sandkfir. := 4HP

SandKfir, dude, no names, pls edit post:ok:

Maybe Typhoon's comment regarding the wall/head bashing is from an Instructor's point of view.....

The Training Pie
 

I knew a lad once who's Mum had baked a pie. His Mum put the pie on the counter and told him very sternly, "Now don't have any of this pie!" The little boy walked back and forth past that pie, and finally when his Mum wasn't looking, put his finger in the pie, took it out and kept walking. Over the course of several days, when his Mum wasn't looking, he kept putting his finger in the pie, and low and behold after several days there was no more pie.

That's what TP will do......patience lads! All things change in time for the best.;)

I am rekrooting sum of zer trainers fur mein new airline. I vant arroganze, ein religious zeal fur zer cause und a scheun katch phrase zat goez "This ist more fur mein benefit zan yurs, liebling!".

Unfortunately I kan only get zer Oz mates applying. Ver are zer Tommy Atkins und zere nice as pie vays, mit ein kup of ze old Rozee Lee?

Yahvohl, Zer German ist back yah! :E

Maybe I shouldn't have posted that last comment, but thought it needed to be said as so many come from North America/other places unaware/unprepared for the different style. Not saying it is all for the worse, but it is definitely different. As TU pointed out, the training places far less emphasis on systems knowledge which makes the actual "type" ride ( PPC ) easier. There is certainly more emphasis on decision making and certain generic book knowledge. Line training versus a North American carrier is far more involved and, owing to EK's extensive route network, the exposure to different regions is necessary.

Standardization is an issue and can be very frustrating for students when they are told conflicting ways that something must be done. Hopefully that will improve in the near future.

Student performance is held to a higher level than it would be in North America. Getting graded on each training session, especially being graded on something the first time you ever do it takes some getting used to. The best advice given to me and one I pass along is to "hit the ground running" when you arrive at EK. That means you want to excel from day one, not be a know it all, but just be prepared for each training session and do a little bit of extra work. It's still a small airline in many respects and poor performance initially can and does follow you through for the rest of your career at EK. It's very difficult to change that initial impression.

There are many good instructors at EK, at least on the Boeing :ok: :p , whether or not I'm one of them is for the students to say. I try my best to give a good training session and hopefully the student walks away with a better understanding of the material covered.


Not initially, but it is very annoying when someone shows up unprepared.

Hopefully there are more kids in that house, otherwise that one kid will get fat :eek:


TP

i beg to differ. emphasis is not on classic decision making. you are
simply expected to reproduce a prerecorded recipe hidden in the jungle
of ek's electronic library. any other decision, based on as you say
generic knowledge or analysis of the actual situation and common sense,
is hardly accepted. the eternal excuse of high need of standardization due
to the multicultural structure and ek's extensive network just cover up the
@..-covering behaviour of ek training and trainers in this blaming culture.
other carriers, young and established ones, have the same structure and have
long adopted the more modern way of instructing. the outcome is a higher
rate of successful transitions and upgradings with less training, thus less
cost. a experienced skipper once used the metaphor of the see-saw. if it's
down on one side it needs a lot of weight to bring it down on the other side.
who wants to be the weight to bring ek training to the better side? considering
the heavyweights keeping it down of the other side it looks like suicide.

So are you saying that everybody should just do his own thing as he deems fit with disregard to SOPs?

From my view, that is not what he is trying to say. Aviation is never black or white. There is a lot of grey when it comes to the day to day operation. But where EK falls down, not just operationally, but in the training is that it appears that one should see everything as black and white.

And regard to SOPs. No one should disregard SOPs, but since there is so much "tribal knowledge" and as I said before about the lack of "published" SOPs, that is where the trainers have a real challenge. They do the job given them. All of the TRIs were dedicated and professional that I dealt with. However, some see only black and white and others understand the grey.
TU

picu:
the answer to your question is in the next sentence following the one you quoted:

"other carriers, young and established ones, have the same structure and have
long adopted the more modern way of instructing. the outcome is a higher
rate of successful transitions and upgradings with less training, thus less
cost. "
they certainly adhere to sop's.
one typical example is ek's interdiction of shooting np approaches on line, as training,
even in perfect conditions.



tangouniform:
thanks, i couldn't have put it any better.
ttn

One can only teach the Black and White. For Grey area one can only say "in the situation I would have..., but that my personal opinion".
If you pass on grey area decision making as Black and White, then as someone said, you are into Tribal Knowledge.

The grey are is for the individual to figure out themselves on the day.....and there are many many grey days!

I suppose that why flying is not for everone.

payscale,
thanks, I couldn't have put it any better
picu :}