The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions The place for students, instructors and charter guys in Oz, NZ and the rest of Oceania.

FO flight time on ET302

Old 10th Mar 2019, 22:38
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 302
FO flight time on ET302

According to Ethiopian who published this on their Twitter account, the FO had 200 hours of flight time:



Surely that must be some sort of typo. Or is it customary to quote time on type alone? I find that rather disturbing of the airline to publish this at this very time.
Okihara is online now  
Old 10th Mar 2019, 22:45
  #2 (permalink)  
Gender Faculty Specialist
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Stop being so stupid, it's my turn
Posts: 1,701
What's wrong with having 200 hours?
Chesty Morgan is online now  
Old 10th Mar 2019, 23:07
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: scotland
Posts: 82
Boeing has a problem here,not the 200 hour man.
ericsson16 is offline  
Old 10th Mar 2019, 23:23
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: NSW Australia
Posts: 2,346
Boeing has a problem here,not the 200 hour man.
It seems to me, and I may be wrong, that very low-hour copilots are not so much of a help in the cockpit of a multi-crew aircraft. Even copilots with a couple of thousand hours can be well behind the aircraft for their first few weeks on line.
I wonder, in the event of an emergency (whatever its origin), how much useful support Mahommad Nur could have offered the Captain?
Horatio Leafblower is offline  
Old 10th Mar 2019, 23:40
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: scotland
Posts: 82
Lion Air Flight 610 crashed into the Java Sea 12 minutes after takeoff.ET 302, crashed just 6 minutes after taking off.Nothing to link both events,Really!
ericsson16 is offline  
Old 10th Mar 2019, 23:58
  #6 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 302
As always, you all make relevant points. I think that the similarities between the two crashes are more than obvious to anyone and I'm not suggesting that the 200 hours FO was ultimately the reason why the plane went down.

Let me rephrase just to make my point clear: Just how does one become FO at a national airline with just 200 hours under the belt when it takes between 200 and 250 hours to get a CPL? Does that suggest that some national airlines out there are happy to recruit pilots with virtually no experience as a commercial pilot and put them in the right seat? Unless that bloke did his CPL in a 737, what experience can he really count on should the captain become incapacitated? Isn't that a safety concern to some of you?

If maths aren't your strong suit: just hours ago, that copilot was still turning the carb. heat off before landing (and again: nothing wrong with that, just a fact).

Horatio Leafblower is on point:
I wonder, in the event of an emergency (whatever its origin), how much useful support Mahommad Nur could have offered the Captain?
There's definitely an argument to make that a more experienced pilot in the cockpit wouldn't have a hurt the chances for a safe outcome of the aircraft.

Last edited by Okihara; 11th Mar 2019 at 00:10.
Okihara is online now  
Old 11th Mar 2019, 00:13
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: scotland
Posts: 82
Let me rephrase just to make my point clear:What ever is happening here is so instant that the flight crew are immobilised,powerless,paralysed.
ericsson16 is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2019, 00:31
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Vietnam
Posts: 1,246
Europe and many other countries allow pilots of part 142 schools to get a CPL with 200 hours. Australia allows students of integrated courses the ability to gain a CPL with only 150 hours. The 150 hour course doesn't include an instrument rating.
pilotchute is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2019, 01:41
  #9 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 302
Originally Posted by ericsson16 View Post
Let me rephrase just to make my point clear:What ever is happening here is so instant that the flight crew are immobilised,powerless,paralysed.
No doubt you're a good a pilot, no doubt you're probably right, and no doubt you're missing the point of this thread, namely: how do you land a FO job with 200 hours with a national airline?
Okihara is online now  
Old 11th Mar 2019, 02:11
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,932
Originally Posted by Okihara View Post
No doubt you're a good a pilot, no doubt you're probably right, and no doubt you're missing the point of this thread, namely: how do you land a FO job with 200 hours with a national airline?
You start off as a cadet pilot ( by whatever name) with the airline, I would have thought that was obvious.
Since the 1960's, with many/most European airlines and many other carriers, cadets in the RHS of an RPT aircraft with 250 hours has been the (starting) rule, rather than the exception.
The whole point of the MPL was to produce a 250 or so hour pilot much better prepared for said RHS --- now a well proven path.
Tootle pip!!

PS: Most airlines do not regard a couple of years of single pilot bush-bashing in FAR 23 aircraft as great preparation for an airline window seat --- and, indeed, where most of them come from, there is no such source of pilots, anyway.
LeadSled is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2019, 02:11
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 3,866
Originally Posted by Okihara View Post
No doubt you're a good a pilot, no doubt you're probably right, and no doubt you're missing the point of this thread, namely: how do you land a FO job with 200 hours with a national airline?
Its all about statistics. The chances of the captain being incapacitated and the 200 hour second in command copilot having to take over control and fly the aircraft solo, is so remote as to be not even considered. In addition the vast majority of the second in command's training for the type rating is based upon automatic pilot skills. . Manual handling skills taught in the simulator are relegated to an absolute minimum in order to reduce total simulator time and thus costs. . Handling skills gained or taught during line training are the same - SFA. It's all about button punching. So with handling skills training reduced to low priority by both the regulator, the manufacturer and the operator, then a 200 hour second in command is statistically acceptable. It has been happening in Europe for many years with minimum disruption to services.
Centaurus is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2019, 02:17
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Going home
Posts: 239
Originally Posted by Okihara View Post
No doubt you're a good a pilot, no doubt you're probably right, and no doubt you're missing the point of this thread, namely: how do you land a FO job with 200 hours with a national airline?
They obviously have a pilot cadetship like other national airlines do. https://www.ethiopianairlines.com/EAA . And with the MPL where the majority of your hours is in the simulator, you only need about 100 hours in an actual airplane. I'm not in favour of the MPL and would much prefer pilots getting licensed through the traditional pathways with GA experience and all, but that's what's possible these days and the regulators allow it.
VH DSJ is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2019, 02:28
  #13 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 302
Well well... This is all rather scary I should say. If that's what the MPL curriculum entails, then I can't see how either 200 hours or 10k hours of the same push button skills can ever match those of a few hundred hours of stick and rudder bush flying. It's also puzzling to think that a MPL holder can be entrusted to fly a 737 plus the safety of all souls on board but wouldn't be legally allowed to fly solo in a C-172.
Okihara is online now  
Old 11th Mar 2019, 03:34
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Dark Side of the Moon
Posts: 774
Well you might be puzzled by it but heir are thousands of MPL pilots flying around the world and they more often than not are not on aircraft that crash so just because Australia doesn’t do it doesn’t make it wrong. I have seen 200 hour pilots fly an A320 better than ex-military highly experienced pilots ....... and vice versa.
Ollie Onion is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2019, 03:57
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: FL350
Age: 33
Posts: 171
Originally Posted by Okihara View Post
As always, you all make relevant points. I think that the similarities between the two crashes are more than obvious to anyone and I'm not suggesting that the 200 hours FO was ultimately the reason why the plane went down.

Let me rephrase just to make my point clear: Just how does one become FO at a national airline with just 200 hours under the belt when it takes between 200 and 250 hours to get a CPL? Does that suggest that some national airlines out there are happy to recruit pilots with virtually no experience as a commercial pilot and put them in the right seat? Unless that bloke did his CPL in a 737, what experience can he really count on should the captain become incapacitated? Isn't that a safety concern to some of you?

If maths aren't your strong suit: just hours ago, that copilot was still turning the carb. heat off before landing (and again: nothing wrong with that, just a fact).

Horatio Leafblower is on point:


There's definitely an argument to make that a more experienced pilot in the cockpit wouldn't have a hurt the chances for a safe outcome of the aircraft.

First of, it just cant be bare 200 hours on the F/O's log. There has to be 'some' line training on the 737 after the guy passed his simulators. So the figures may be a bit off. If they were flying with a 200 hours rookie on board and this was a training flight (which it was not apparently) there is supposed to be a safety F/O on board.

I'd like to point out that the deadliest crashes in the history of aviation were a result of highly experienced (in some cases decorated) pilots who forgot their professional duties and ended up where they did. It's sad, but that's how this profession is.

I don't know how anyone react differently to an emergency they never saw before. But yes, I do know of an instant or two in a particular airline when the F/O took over and landed the aircraft amidst a complete cockpit incapacitation and crm breakdown on finals on one of the busiest airports in the world due to Captain incapacitation, without breaking any SOPs. So I'd not be quick to judge the inexperienced guys.
Ilyushin76 is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2019, 05:41
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 484
A modern up to the minute new Airliner crashed killing all onboard with two qualified drivers at the wheel/s. That opens a whole Pandora's box as to why?
Investigators will look at them ALL!
Crew, broken down individually covering a huge raft of sub conditions such as fatigue, health/medical inc mental. Experience, training etc etc.
Airframe serviceability
Engines.
Fuel, type & condition.
Maintenance especially recent Maint including washing of the airframe.
Sabotage/interference. Remember the Ethiopian Flt 961 B767 hijack some years ago?. Hijacked from exactly the same route as this crash!
Weather.
It could be anyone of these or multiple, Boeing am sure are somewhat nervous as they should be!

Hope they get to the bottom of the cause, nobody wins here, we just have a lot of devastated people! & mass confusion:-(
machtuk is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2019, 06:32
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Seat 0A
Posts: 7,769
Originally Posted by Ilyushin76
I don't know how anyone react differently to an emergency they never saw before.
I would expect that someone with more experience would react better than someone with less...
Capn Bloggs is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2019, 06:32
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: scotland
Posts: 82
China grounds all Boeing 737MAX aircraft? ? News In Flight
ericsson16 is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2019, 06:35
  #19 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 302
I have seen 200 hour pilots fly an A320 better than ex-military highly experienced pilots ....... and vice versa.
Solid argument here.
Okihara is online now  
Old 11th Mar 2019, 07:04
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 52
Posts: 182
200 hrs

If he had 200 hours most airlines would require a safety pilot or at least a training captain to be operating.
200 hours does not make a poor FO but it can make the upgrade in a few years difficult..
Fluke is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

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