Industry Standards?? Any below standard Airline Pilots out there?

[Mr. Hat]

not always the case

Ever wondered why the airlines don't require their check pilots to undergo psychological checks for suitability to be a check pilot? Answer: They wouldn't pass the tests

While I wholeheartedly agree on this about some I can definitely say others would pass the test with flying colours. If I count it up in my career its about 50/50. The bad 50 are the "fault" of the Manager standards/training checking. These are the peope that are accountable for this area. In some companies this is done exceptionally well (bullies weeded out quickly) and in others not.

What I find interesting is the fact that there is no requirement to have undergone any training in how to teach people.

[RENURPP]

While I wholeheartedly agree on this about some I can definitely say others would pass the test with flying colours. If I count it up in my career its about 50/50.

I agree as well. What I don't understand or accept is how the good 50% can pass the bottom 50%. It becomes a boys club were their standard is no longer relevant. Look after each others backs.

What I find interesting is the fact that there is no requirement to have undergone any training in how to teach people

Again I can only whole heartedly agree.
I cannot recall how many times I have seen my sim buddy having difficulty with something in the sim. The instructor's, all of them so far, simply say have anotheer go until they do one that can be considered a pass. The same person will return to the sim with the identical problem yr after yr. No improvement, no training.

That two day Methods of Instruccting, or whatever it is called is at best a box ticking exercise. It should not be considered as a serious how to teach course.

[Mstr Caution]

In recent years, commands have been awarded to pilots with 2-3 years on jets---and guess what? The failure rate for these candidates is a whopping (and quantified) 40-50%! This data come from the LCCs here in Australia. This should be evidence to you that the current C&T system in this country maintains the requisite standard.

I have not seen this data, however to me 50% failure rate seems excessive!

I agree this demonstrates the current CHECK system is working well. But what about the TRAINING system?

Disregarding the fact at to whether it is a LCC or not. It would be a concern to any airline, Legacy or otherwise having failure rates this high.

What is happening prior to the final check?

One would have to ask, is the training insufficient? Do they train to a cost or a standard? Do the candidates have insufficient total experience prior to command upgrade?

I'm guessing here, but if the top 50% of FO's can't pass a command check. If the opportunity is past down the line to other FO's with lesser experience. Would the failure rate stay the same at 50% or would it be higher?

I do agree with the statement that commands may be awarded to FO's with 1, 2 or 3 years in a company. Each case should be determined by the merit of the individual concerned. So I don't have a problem with brand new FO's being upgraded to command.

If I was running an airline I'd be concerned where I'm going to get Captains from to cater for future expansion.

[northern.flyer]

Yes.

He works for CASA and will be at Air North next week.