Air hours slashed for co-pilots (Merged)
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Permanently lost
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Air hours slashed for co-pilots (Merged)
I know airline training is going to change in Australia but for all our sakes I hope not in this manner. 
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=244114
This would seem to be the height of idiocy and rampant policy making ruling over rational thought. I can see it being very attractive to some here though.
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=244114
This would seem to be the height of idiocy and rampant policy making ruling over rational thought. I can see it being very attractive to some here though.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Alice Springs
Posts: 1,744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting
This will be interesting. It will certainly be good for GA, as GA pilots will know that their GA flying is not just an apprenticeship to qualify for that obscene lottery that the airline recruiters run. Those who fly in GA will take a great interest in developing conditions, pay, and safety in GA. The "prostitute" pilots and operators will not come anymore. Pilots will not be exploited as they are now as the oversupply of cpl's will slow down. Conditions will improve.
But there will need to be a transition period in Australia, as there are a lot of pilots who have been working ifor many years trying to get to airlines. I guess they will have to do the MPL training to get there.
And I guess some of the flying schools will invest in good simulators, to teach the MPL syllabus. If the airlines will accept them.
"Empty cruise" on the thread that Peter mentioned has a very interesting post.
If our regulator does not introduce something like this, then they will have missed the opportunity to improve safety in GA. And they will be derelict in their duty.
But there will need to be a transition period in Australia, as there are a lot of pilots who have been working ifor many years trying to get to airlines. I guess they will have to do the MPL training to get there.
And I guess some of the flying schools will invest in good simulators, to teach the MPL syllabus. If the airlines will accept them.
"Empty cruise" on the thread that Peter mentioned has a very interesting post.
If our regulator does not introduce something like this, then they will have missed the opportunity to improve safety in GA. And they will be derelict in their duty.
Think this has been all done before however if this does go ahead the CASA will have to rewrite the regs to remove all the experience requirements for licensing and for getting commands on commercial aircrcaft.
As for cost how expensive would it be to do a 180 hours in a sim?? Endorsement costs alone are upward of AU $30 000. Who's going to have a few hundred grand to throw around just to get paid $50 000 as a Jetstar 2nd officer. Put it in the bank and you'll get a better return.
As for cost how expensive would it be to do a 180 hours in a sim?? Endorsement costs alone are upward of AU $30 000. Who's going to have a few hundred grand to throw around just to get paid $50 000 as a Jetstar 2nd officer. Put it in the bank and you'll get a better return.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Australia
Age: 54
Posts: 253
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It looks as though this could be the future of Australian airline training (cadets). I've heard QF has been pushing CASA to establish a Multicrew licence system developed specifically for airline use. The licence would allow operations only in a multicrew environment and the training very different from current licence process. One of the main factors pushing this is training costs and the lack of interest of appropriate candidates for the cadet program. A training provider in Brissy has a course proposal, its all 717 sim work post GFPT, and entirely multicrew. I'm guessing it would reduce course costs by at least 30%.
I can't see CASA approving anything like this in the near future, and in its [CASAs] current form. However, if there are drastic changes in the authority, and other airlines push it, who knows? Maybe its not such a bad thing, after all single pilot GA ops are very different to multicrew airline jet ops as many here would agree. One thing is certain though, theres no substitution for being up there in crappy weather without the safety of being in a sim or having an instructor behind you.
I can't see CASA approving anything like this in the near future, and in its [CASAs] current form. However, if there are drastic changes in the authority, and other airlines push it, who knows? Maybe its not such a bad thing, after all single pilot GA ops are very different to multicrew airline jet ops as many here would agree. One thing is certain though, theres no substitution for being up there in crappy weather without the safety of being in a sim or having an instructor behind you.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Victoria
Age: 62
Posts: 984
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any airline skippers out ther care to comment?
How do you feel about supervising a co-pilot with that sort of experience (or "in-experience", in this case!)?
IMHO co-pilots are (or should be) treated as potential captains. Makes more work for the training system (especially the captains) given a lower base experience level of such a co-pilot.
How do you feel about supervising a co-pilot with that sort of experience (or "in-experience", in this case!)?
IMHO co-pilots are (or should be) treated as potential captains. Makes more work for the training system (especially the captains) given a lower base experience level of such a co-pilot.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 725
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Make no mistake, this MPL is a very serious push by airlines that are struggling to find suitable candidates.
It was raised at the IFALPA convention in Istanbul, and is vigorously opposed by all professional pilot associations.
However, it does point to the fact that there is a growing shortage of suitably qualified right seaters for airline operations.
It was raised at the IFALPA convention in Istanbul, and is vigorously opposed by all professional pilot associations.
However, it does point to the fact that there is a growing shortage of suitably qualified right seaters for airline operations.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Perth Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 280
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
1 Post
SIA already have an advanced process in this area.
Take a 200/240 hr SP IFR basic twin cadet, give them a ground school, 15 sessions of simulator on a Lear level D, 40 sectors, then a ground school on 777/747/A340, 15 sessions of Sim, 60-80 sectors and you have a fully operational F/O on the type of choice with possibly as little as 400 hours.
The hours are ??? as long range heavy crew sectors can muddy that one.
Then they get 20 P1s a year if lucky on the long range fleets
Singapore had a 1000/1100? total sector, with 350?? P1s as a Min for Command, (I am 3 yrs out of touch) and you have a Capt with the other pilot as the relative newbe.
This process has been pushed hard by various Airlines, particularly with an Ethnic base as they wish/need to be "Local" in the eyes of the traveling masses of that Ethnic base.
To be fair , the ones I had rush past me were not too bad in the main, a small number took a while to catch on, most have gone the full way in 8-12 yrs. Modern aircraft and equipment have seen the demise of Radio Operators, Navigators and Flight Engineers. Most modern Aircraft go along nicely with a little adjustment from the pilots, catastrofic failures get more press than they really deserve, inaccuratly reported as well.
I had 3 failures in 600 hrs on DC-3s, 2 jet failures in 15,000, I do bemone the degredation of the skills I once thought I was good at, and am more a manager than a "pilot" these days, these are the skill changes that will need to be addressed in the proposed changes.
The times they are a changing.
Cheers
Take a 200/240 hr SP IFR basic twin cadet, give them a ground school, 15 sessions of simulator on a Lear level D, 40 sectors, then a ground school on 777/747/A340, 15 sessions of Sim, 60-80 sectors and you have a fully operational F/O on the type of choice with possibly as little as 400 hours.
The hours are ??? as long range heavy crew sectors can muddy that one.
Then they get 20 P1s a year if lucky on the long range fleets
Singapore had a 1000/1100? total sector, with 350?? P1s as a Min for Command, (I am 3 yrs out of touch) and you have a Capt with the other pilot as the relative newbe.
This process has been pushed hard by various Airlines, particularly with an Ethnic base as they wish/need to be "Local" in the eyes of the traveling masses of that Ethnic base.
To be fair , the ones I had rush past me were not too bad in the main, a small number took a while to catch on, most have gone the full way in 8-12 yrs. Modern aircraft and equipment have seen the demise of Radio Operators, Navigators and Flight Engineers. Most modern Aircraft go along nicely with a little adjustment from the pilots, catastrofic failures get more press than they really deserve, inaccuratly reported as well.
I had 3 failures in 600 hrs on DC-3s, 2 jet failures in 15,000, I do bemone the degredation of the skills I once thought I was good at, and am more a manager than a "pilot" these days, these are the skill changes that will need to be addressed in the proposed changes.
The times they are a changing.
Cheers
Last edited by greybeard; 22nd Sep 2006 at 12:53. Reason: missed words
Greybeard
What you are talking about is pretty much already in place around the world as cadet pilot programs. At least in that instance they have a few hundred hours in the air before being thrown into the big jet. Singapore/China Southern guys get to fly biz jets before they get into the heavy stuff. MPL people won't even hold a pilot's license. They are able to fly their type rated aircraft ONLY and ONLY as a FO. They get 50 odd hours in a C172 then it's all sim from there.
Love to see what Singapore Airlines training budget is, Full CPL + IREX + Twin Endo + Jet Endo + Time in Jet + Heavy Jet Endo + Extra Heavy Jet training. Qantas reckon that their pilots are to expensive already and all they pay for is a type endorsement!!
Anyone got some rough hourly figures for a big jet sim?? I'm guessing that this MPL will be almost double to 2.5 times the cost of current licensing
What you are talking about is pretty much already in place around the world as cadet pilot programs. At least in that instance they have a few hundred hours in the air before being thrown into the big jet. Singapore/China Southern guys get to fly biz jets before they get into the heavy stuff. MPL people won't even hold a pilot's license. They are able to fly their type rated aircraft ONLY and ONLY as a FO. They get 50 odd hours in a C172 then it's all sim from there.
Love to see what Singapore Airlines training budget is, Full CPL + IREX + Twin Endo + Jet Endo + Time in Jet + Heavy Jet Endo + Extra Heavy Jet training. Qantas reckon that their pilots are to expensive already and all they pay for is a type endorsement!!
Anyone got some rough hourly figures for a big jet sim?? I'm guessing that this MPL will be almost double to 2.5 times the cost of current licensing
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tasmania
Age: 42
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, in a world where the cost of taking your 172 for a jolly is becoming increasingly difficult, thats a huge advantage. But 150 hours for a bare minimum CPL I still believe really is 'bare minimum'.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ive heard from an operator at Archerfield that they are getting 2 new singles with full glass to start training students for this new MPL. They will be for international airline students however, not local operators. Interesting times ahead...
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Perth Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 280
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
1 Post
One of the main differences in the process is that most if not all of the "old system" had people who liked flying and chose or were chosen to work for a particular Company.
Now a large and increasing number, certainly noticed in a previous life, want the presteige of the job, flying being one of the things necessary to hold that position.
One classic was a Cadet who got of the bus at a wrong stop going for an interview for a non flying job, saw the "walk in interview" sign, survived the process and is now a wide body Captain, go figure that one.
Cheers
Now a large and increasing number, certainly noticed in a previous life, want the presteige of the job, flying being one of the things necessary to hold that position.
One classic was a Cadet who got of the bus at a wrong stop going for an interview for a non flying job, saw the "walk in interview" sign, survived the process and is now a wide body Captain, go figure that one.
Cheers
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Crookwell
Posts: 333
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What can happen with poor recognition of cockpit gradient issues. 
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Oz
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FTA at Adelaide was approached about 8 months ago to come up with a syllabus to present to CASA. The reason for this is the massive shortfall of pilots, and the concern from Airbus and Boeing that they will financially suffer due to not enough pilots thus preventing orders.
This is the future for aviation. I see GA being made redundant as a pathway for airlines, being replaced by schools such as SFC, FTA, Generals and the like. Any flying school that wants a future in Australia must align themselves with an airline and offer the MPL
This is the future for aviation. I see GA being made redundant as a pathway for airlines, being replaced by schools such as SFC, FTA, Generals and the like. Any flying school that wants a future in Australia must align themselves with an airline and offer the MPL
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Permanently lost
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
spin doctor
I agree with you that GA will become redundant as the pathway for airlines, however, is the MPL the best option or rather something like Singapore's scheme? Methinks the latter.
A couple of years ago I was able to look at the logbook of one of their FOs. Basically heaps of C172 followed by BE58 and Learjet followed by A320 endors, line training and operations. He was just about to start an endorsement on the B777.
That airline training will concentrate on multi-crew procedures is a given, my doubts with the MPL concept as set out in the thead that I initially posted is that it gives next to no chance to see how the candidate will cope in a real life aviation environment. After all simulators are a bit like w@nking. They can give you a thrill but its not the real thing.
I agree with you that GA will become redundant as the pathway for airlines, however, is the MPL the best option or rather something like Singapore's scheme? Methinks the latter.
A couple of years ago I was able to look at the logbook of one of their FOs. Basically heaps of C172 followed by BE58 and Learjet followed by A320 endors, line training and operations. He was just about to start an endorsement on the B777.
That airline training will concentrate on multi-crew procedures is a given, my doubts with the MPL concept as set out in the thead that I initially posted is that it gives next to no chance to see how the candidate will cope in a real life aviation environment. After all simulators are a bit like w@nking. They can give you a thrill but its not the real thing.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: desert somewhere
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This would have to be a good thing for GA, but you have to wonder what it will do to the profession of airline pilot. Schools will be able to churn out airline ready (?!) pilots in 12-18 months. How much do you think an airline will be willing to pay a MPL holder – considering the duration of their training will be less that 18months start to finish? 40k? It takes 3 times that long to learn how to be a plumber!
It is true that putting around in a 172 is different to flying a jet, but it is definitely better than nothing. You are flying in the same airspace, in the same weather, making command decisions and arranging traffic separation. In any case, since when have the airlines employed 500hr 172 drivers?
A course like this would be accepted much more easily in countries where low hour F/O’s are the norm. It would be a huge transition for Australia where airline minimum requirements are very high by global standards and generally direct entry recruits have well in excess of the requirements.
It will be very interesting to look back on threads like this in 10 years time!
It is true that putting around in a 172 is different to flying a jet, but it is definitely better than nothing. You are flying in the same airspace, in the same weather, making command decisions and arranging traffic separation. In any case, since when have the airlines employed 500hr 172 drivers?
A course like this would be accepted much more easily in countries where low hour F/O’s are the norm. It would be a huge transition for Australia where airline minimum requirements are very high by global standards and generally direct entry recruits have well in excess of the requirements.
It will be very interesting to look back on threads like this in 10 years time!
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: australia
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it's great. There's no reason why guys with lowish hours can't be perfectly acceptable as airline F/O's after the correct sim and line training.
Lots of twenty year old guys and girls flying solo in F-18's in the military with only a couple hundred hours and a good dose of training.
Not a problem. It also reflects the changed nature of the role of crew in modern jets who are now more systems managers than stick and rudder pilots.
Perfectly acceptable way to get people up to speed I think. Besides, The sims are so good now that this can happen and it's all still perfectly safe.
Lots of twenty year old guys and girls flying solo in F-18's in the military with only a couple hundred hours and a good dose of training.
Not a problem. It also reflects the changed nature of the role of crew in modern jets who are now more systems managers than stick and rudder pilots.
Perfectly acceptable way to get people up to speed I think. Besides, The sims are so good now that this can happen and it's all still perfectly safe.
Seems like a funny idea to consider in Aus. With the hundreds of CPL holders looking for an airline job.
Why would you pay the $70k for a full CPL CMEIR to go and fly around in GA aircraft getting paid crap when you could do the MPL lic and go straight to RHS flying a heavy?
Flying is fun, but GA just doesnt pay the bills in some cases.
Why would you pay the $70k for a full CPL CMEIR to go and fly around in GA aircraft getting paid crap when you could do the MPL lic and go straight to RHS flying a heavy?
Flying is fun, but GA just doesnt pay the bills in some cases.