Air Nelson
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NZ
Posts: 835
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MOR, I really have to disagree with some of your argument. I don't see any reason why a pilot who has even 10,000 hours in command of more sophisticated aircraft would be a better candidate for a command with Air Nelson than one of their own F/Os who has probably been there at least 3 years and amassed over 2000 hours on that specific operation. I'm sure the experienced pilot would do a great job, but doubt they would be any better (on average) than the upgraded F/O.
I think there is far too much emphasis placed on numbers. The type of experience, and particularly the quality of the applicant are more important factors. I'm sure you will agree that many 1000 hr pilots are more competent than some 3000 hr pilots etc.
It is agreed that there is no reason for an airline like Air Nelson to preclude the hiring of overseas pilots or ex pats, but that doesn't mean they should be able to jump the queue.
By the way, for those interested - JetConnect are interviewing like crazy now all the Jet* stuff is sorted out. Non T/R F/Os can expect to pay $15 G for the pleasure.
I think there is far too much emphasis placed on numbers. The type of experience, and particularly the quality of the applicant are more important factors. I'm sure you will agree that many 1000 hr pilots are more competent than some 3000 hr pilots etc.
It is agreed that there is no reason for an airline like Air Nelson to preclude the hiring of overseas pilots or ex pats, but that doesn't mean they should be able to jump the queue.
By the way, for those interested - JetConnect are interviewing like crazy now all the Jet* stuff is sorted out. Non T/R F/Os can expect to pay $15 G for the pleasure.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Surrounding the localizer
Posts: 2,200
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
Yeah Cloud..I got offered an interview..and told em to stick it when I was told Id have to fork out 15K AUD for a 300
(not even an NG! for gawds sake
)
While this may be true in isolated cases..insurance companies all over the world will disagree with you..and they are ones who end up paying for hull losses, which I suspect means they know more than both you or I
Sorry mate I have to beg to differ....having been there and done it on T/P's..an experienced operator (jet or T/P) has a bigger treasure trove to fall back on..than a new young player with less toys in the tool kit. Truth be told I dont think there is a lot in it..but thats just my opinion
(not even an NG! for gawds sake )
I think there is far too much emphasis placed on numbers. The type of experience, and particularly the quality of the applicant are more important factors. I'm sure you will agree that many 1000 hr pilots are more competent than some 3000 hr pilots etc
I'm sure the experienced pilot would do a great job, but doubt they would be any better (on average) than the upgraded F/O
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: darwin
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I reckon the old captain young captain/ jet experience/local TP experience argument is very interesting and am not sure where I stand on it. My initial reaction is that once a guy has a couple thousand hours belting around NZ with Nelson he would be less likely to make inadvertant SOP deviations than a fifty something Captain with 20,000hrs and lots of jet time.
The main reason for me thinking that is that the older captains I fly with tire earlier than the young ones and after a nine hour duty that has involved six approaches and departues and turn arounds, they are often "feeling it". Now I guess that's going to get some 'reaction ' from MOR, but it is my honest opinion and one based on observation. I am not assuming that would be the case for you MOR, for all I know you run marathons and stay alert after the 20yr olds are dozing.
To balance things up I would suggest that the jet captain in this scenario would better handle an emergency that has no checklist and requires more experience to draw on in order to solve it.
Cheers
The main reason for me thinking that is that the older captains I fly with tire earlier than the young ones and after a nine hour duty that has involved six approaches and departues and turn arounds, they are often "feeling it". Now I guess that's going to get some 'reaction ' from MOR, but it is my honest opinion and one based on observation. I am not assuming that would be the case for you MOR, for all I know you run marathons and stay alert after the 20yr olds are dozing.
To balance things up I would suggest that the jet captain in this scenario would better handle an emergency that has no checklist and requires more experience to draw on in order to solve it.
Cheers
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Te Reti
Age: 48
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a thought it may sound like a counter to you but its my 2 cents. Having changed from short to long haul about a year ago. The old guys may appear to tire a bit around the edges but they really now when to turn it and have much better fatigue management than I have ( the girls in the back have nothing to do with it ). I come back from an alnight Chicago trip absolutely dog tired yet these guys have it sorted out when to be alert and when not to be. We are always learning and when you can bring so good outside experience into your companies ranks it does not upset SOP's if your company has it well trained. We have over 3500 pilots from those that blew up the Argies in the Falklands, dumb arse Kiwi's like me and cadet guys who go onto 757/767 as F/O's with 200hrs through a fantastic training system. Some of our people may mention there can be better ways to operate our aircraft but if they want too they will have to go out and buy their own 777 or 747-400.
Haughtney I reckon judging by the car park in LGW you fellas have the youngest girls with the biggest eyes
). I come back from an alnight Chicago trip absolutely dog tired yet these guys have it sorted out when to be alert and when not to be. We are always learning and when you can bring so good outside experience into your companies ranks it does not upset SOP's if your company has it well trained. We have over 3500 pilots from those that blew up the Argies in the Falklands, dumb arse Kiwi's like me and cadet guys who go onto 757/767 as F/O's with 200hrs through a fantastic training system. Some of our people may mention there can be better ways to operate our aircraft but if they want too they will have to go out and buy their own 777 or 747-400. Haughtney I reckon judging by the car park in LGW you fellas have the youngest girls with the biggest eyes
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: back to the land of small pay and big bills
Age: 50
Posts: 1,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MOR if you mean what you say about the Focker, then give Airwork a call..they're looking for a direct entry Captain based in Woodburn with an F27 rating..work at night..couple of sectors..play all day..good vino in Marlborough and pays OK..fly the pony express!
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: darwin
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good point Waka,
I haven't flown long haul so haven't seen what you are describing but can imagine that the case would be as you described.
Do you think that the skill they have developed in long haul at managing fatigue could be put to use in regional? To me it seems like the fatigue is related to the "intensity" of the flying. If that were not the case surely the older regional guys would be more adept at handling it than the younger guys for the same reasons as on lng haul, they have been doing it longer and have stratagies in place to manage it.
Now, having used the words "intensity of the flying" I want to get in first and make it clear I am not talking about airspace and movements etc, it is not a comparison between Euro and nz flying, just a comparison between regional and long haul, the "pace" of the sectors/approaches/turnarounds might say it better. Also, I would not presume that the jet jockeys are not doing six sector days with 20 minute turn arounds, for all I know they are. Cheers.
I haven't flown long haul so haven't seen what you are describing but can imagine that the case would be as you described.
Do you think that the skill they have developed in long haul at managing fatigue could be put to use in regional? To me it seems like the fatigue is related to the "intensity" of the flying. If that were not the case surely the older regional guys would be more adept at handling it than the younger guys for the same reasons as on lng haul, they have been doing it longer and have stratagies in place to manage it.
Now, having used the words "intensity of the flying" I want to get in first and make it clear I am not talking about airspace and movements etc, it is not a comparison between Euro and nz flying, just a comparison between regional and long haul, the "pace" of the sectors/approaches/turnarounds might say it better. Also, I would not presume that the jet jockeys are not doing six sector days with 20 minute turn arounds, for all I know they are. Cheers.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NZ
Posts: 835
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
haughtney1
Have you ever flown with a very experienced captain whom you found 'uninspiring' in terms of aptitude and CRM? That's where my argument stems from.
Just to clarify, I realise I would be stupid to say that experience is not a very important component. But it is a generalisation, and must be viewed as part of the whole package. Of course most airlines have minimum hours for PIC which are in part determined by insurance requirements, but I'm talking about people who meet these requirements.
Have you ever flown with a very experienced captain whom you found 'uninspiring' in terms of aptitude and CRM? That's where my argument stems from.
Just to clarify, I realise I would be stupid to say that experience is not a very important component. But it is a generalisation, and must be viewed as part of the whole package. Of course most airlines have minimum hours for PIC which are in part determined by insurance requirements, but I'm talking about people who meet these requirements.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Surrounding the localizer
Posts: 2,200
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
Now, having used the words "intensity of the flying" I want to get in first and make it clear I am not talking about airspace and movements etc, it is not a comparison between Euro and nz flying, just a comparison between regional and long haul, the "pace" of the sectors/approaches/turnarounds might say it better. Also, I would not presume that the jet jockeys are not doing six sector days with 20 minute turn arounds, for all I know they are. Cheers
Cloud..yep mate of course I have (havent we all)..but the vast majority Ive operated with have been bloody good in a pinch..good operators, and they've made several tough situations seem simple. And yeah I take your point about generalisations.
My experience to date tells me Id rather fly with these old salts who have been there and done it..not cos I dont think a younger guy cant do it, but because I know I can learn a lot more from a salty old B'stard
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: All over the show like a madwomans crap
Posts: 494
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MOR, who says you have to be in the left seat to make a contribution? I know your attitudes about starting at the bottom, but at an outfit like Nelson, it makes very little difference what your number is, as the roster etc are not based on seniority, just time to command. Like a previous poster, I too am a former Nelson pilot, now flying shiny fast toys around asia. I can say for fact, there are no "aerolcub" wannabees in the management team, they have been there, done that, got the t-shirt. The guys there, MF in particular, are excellent managers, and I would be highly surprised to hear that anyone of them did not have the time of day for you if you rang. Their door was always open, they all fly the line and are always good for a chat around the crewrooms. I had a good experience there, and maybe one day would like to return, and I don't mind going back to the bottom of the list, thats the way it works there. My ego can take it, afterall, I've been married for years!!!
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: here and there
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yo MattyJ,
You're a bit behind the times there Mr. We filled that spot a while ago. Maybe those JetA1 fumes are getting to ya! The Blenhiem base is turning into Little Texas.
You're a bit behind the times there Mr. We filled that spot a while ago. Maybe those JetA1 fumes are getting to ya! The Blenhiem base is turning into Little Texas.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cloud Cutter
Others have said it, but it is the depth of experience that is important. For example, it is perfectly possible for a 3-year F/O to have never experienced an emergency, never seen really bad weather, and so on. Even if they do, they are not managing the situation and making decisions. It is likely that your 10,000 hour guy will have plenty of that sort of experience - I know I have had several engine failures and some very nasty weather emergencies (like, over the North Sea... past PNR... whole of Norway goes out with bad wx... what do you do...?)
Any expert in risk management will tell you that the airline business is one big risk. If only one of your pilots screws up, and people die, the airline can end up out of business. It is therefore vital to maximise the experience and skill of your workforce, and that should not be limited by outdated seniority policies. In other words, smart airlines take the best guys they can and don't operate a rigid seniority system.
As many more progessive airlines have realised, there is no such thing as a "queue". Joining as an F/O does not (in most airlines) guarantee that you will always be next in line. Vacancies should be (and usually are) filled on the basis of the best person for the job. In fact, sticking to a rigid seniority system is far more likely to result in less competent people getting through to command, than the other way around.
BTW 15K is extremely cheap for a 737 rating, it would cost you double that in Europe...
justathought
The bit that I don't think a lot of people get, is that most 20,000 captains are extremely self-disciplined and have no issues with SOP's. I have this problem every time I take up a contract, but in reality there are only a few ways to operate a 737 or whatever, and most operators just use the Boeing FM as the basis for their SOP (as it is a certification requirement to follow the manufacturers procedures). Any deviations from SOP are therefore likely to be minor and not a safety issue.
Regarding fatigue, sure the older guys will feel it, but they are also better at managing fatigue. Personally, I have had less problems with being tired (through noisy hotels etc) than many of the F/Os I have flown with, mainly due to their propensity for staying up late and drinking, in the hope of bedding one of the hosties... some of them turn up for work very much the worse for wear, and are useless after three sectors. For what it's worth, it is pretty hard to find a short-haul jet job these days that has less than 6 sectors and/or 8-10 hours duty... not to mention the 20-minute turnarounds...
As far as longhaul goes, I have no desire to ever fly longhaul. It must be as boring as hell! Bad enough being a pax...
NoseGear
Well, if you don't know where the authority gradient flows from... 
All joking aside, you can only make the contribution that you are allowed to. Having spent a lot of time in checking and training (in an environment where CRM is a pass/fail item on the proficiency check), I have noticed that when you have a young, relatively inexperienced skipper and a very experienced, older F/O, the result is usually that the captain asserts his authority rather too strongly, and the F/O is out to prove a point. All very human, sadly, but a flight safety nightmare. My observation is that a lot of younger captains tend to be arrogant, whereas the older ones tend to be more concilatory. Just my observation, you might have a completely different take on it.
I think you will find that, a few years down the track, you will most definitely NOT want to start again at the bottom. It has nothing to do with ego, it is about pay and conditions (and possibly having to fly with a captain half your age, trying to prove what a hot shot he is).
At the end of the day, it is a choice we have to make, and I choose not to bother with it. Although I did get a call from Jetconnect yesterday... hmmm...
I don't see any reason why a pilot who has even 10,000 hours in command of more sophisticated aircraft would be a better candidate for a command with Air Nelson than one of their own F/Os who has probably been there at least 3 years and amassed over 2000 hours on that specific operation.
Any expert in risk management will tell you that the airline business is one big risk. If only one of your pilots screws up, and people die, the airline can end up out of business. It is therefore vital to maximise the experience and skill of your workforce, and that should not be limited by outdated seniority policies. In other words, smart airlines take the best guys they can and don't operate a rigid seniority system.
but that doesn't mean they should be able to jump the queue.
BTW 15K is extremely cheap for a 737 rating, it would cost you double that in Europe...
justathought
My initial reaction is that once a guy has a couple thousand hours belting around NZ with Nelson he would be less likely to make inadvertant SOP deviations than a fifty something Captain with 20,000hrs and lots of jet time.
Regarding fatigue, sure the older guys will feel it, but they are also better at managing fatigue. Personally, I have had less problems with being tired (through noisy hotels etc) than many of the F/Os I have flown with, mainly due to their propensity for staying up late and drinking, in the hope of bedding one of the hosties... some of them turn up for work very much the worse for wear, and are useless after three sectors. For what it's worth, it is pretty hard to find a short-haul jet job these days that has less than 6 sectors and/or 8-10 hours duty... not to mention the 20-minute turnarounds...
As far as longhaul goes, I have no desire to ever fly longhaul. It must be as boring as hell! Bad enough being a pax...
NoseGear
MOR, who says you have to be in the left seat to make a contribution?
All joking aside, you can only make the contribution that you are allowed to. Having spent a lot of time in checking and training (in an environment where CRM is a pass/fail item on the proficiency check), I have noticed that when you have a young, relatively inexperienced skipper and a very experienced, older F/O, the result is usually that the captain asserts his authority rather too strongly, and the F/O is out to prove a point. All very human, sadly, but a flight safety nightmare. My observation is that a lot of younger captains tend to be arrogant, whereas the older ones tend to be more concilatory. Just my observation, you might have a completely different take on it.
I think you will find that, a few years down the track, you will most definitely NOT want to start again at the bottom. It has nothing to do with ego, it is about pay and conditions (and possibly having to fly with a captain half your age, trying to prove what a hot shot he is).
At the end of the day, it is a choice we have to make, and I choose not to bother with it. Although I did get a call from Jetconnect yesterday... hmmm...
