Like all things in life, it is not all good and not all bad. Personally I think there are green-as-grass graduate CPLs who will benefit from doing the course. I know when I graduated from my CPL course I had experience on a PA28 and a Duchess and not much else - totally useless for a first job up North unless I was some sort of gun (and I wasn't). Despite training in a regional area I don't think I had ever landed on grass or dirt until I moved north.

The reality is that flight schools are churning out CPLs of wildly varying quality and the old concept that "holding a CPL meant you are competent to do the job" just doesn't hold now (and to be honest i am not sure it was that true in the 1990s either).

Having a CPL doesn't mean you have the skills or aptitude for GA Charter work. Some have obvious ability and drive and they walk into a job. They probably don't need the course.

Some have intelligence and ability but really haven't been prepared by their flight school for the realities of a GA transition to an airline career. With some exposure to bush conditions and competence in a C210, the GA Ready course will probably give them the confidence to have a decent crack. Some might decide to instruct instead.

...then there are the others, many of whom might never have any aptitude for a flying job of any sort despit e the $200,000 hole in their future. They might make OK instructors in a sausage factory during a pilot shortage until they have enough hours for airlines. The GA ready course won't help them much.

Mach E Avelli and dr dre suggest that an induction and appropriate ICUS is far beyond the scope of the GA Ready course and would be additional to.

You'd put someone ICUS on a check flight with paying passengers as part of an interview?? Surely at the very least a check flight would include some emergency procedures...in which case there would be a cost associated with that.
What I meant was are there really still pilots who are stupid enough to do unpaid ICUS?
So there is a cost, the cost of two pilots on a single pilot operation. Airlines are a two crew operation and they would practice emergency procedures on the sim, so not sure how they can be compared.

The ATSB has raised these points in numerous fatal accidents in previous years.

The ‘build-up’ period to the wet season in Darwin is known for weather conditions hazardous to flying activities. Pilots in tropical areas need to recognise and respond to these conditions to avoid the hazards including turbulence, windshear and reduced visibility. However, this is more challenging when a pilot has not experienced these conditions, and therefore may not accurately assess the situation or perceive the risks. Ball (2008) states that the lack of hazardous weather flying experience plays ‘a role in the pilot’s ability to make timely and safe decisions about flying in and around hazardous weather’. Many of the pilots that the ATSB spoke with indicated that they only learned how to handle the weather during the wet season through their own exposure to the conditions, particularly the distance to keep from rapidly-developing cells.

There were differences in the perception of how much distance to keep from them, ranging from 10 to 40 NM.

In this case, neither pilot had flown during a previous wet season in Darwin. Whilst the ATSB could not determine whether the pilots had ever experienced conditions similar to wet season conditions ever before, there was sufficient evidence to indicate that there were limited opportunities to have done so.

The risk mitigation provided by pairing a supervisory pilot with a pilot new to the company did not adequately address the weather-related risks because neither pilot had experience flying in the region during the wet season.

My reference to check flight means, let’s go for a couple of circuits to see how you perform/ learn. Then we got into the real stuff if suitable.

Just like an airline interview sim, out of GA and into a 737/747/A320 Sim check ride, ya not expected to nail it, but you are expected to learn.

If a fresh CPL has the right attitude and willingness to learn then why would t you as a company invest time and money?

So blowing 5k on a GA ready course… As I said it’s as bad as that company charging for check flight/ interview flights!

I agree with the two above, that a one-size-fits-all course is the reason that a lot of pilots DON'T have all the skills they need. They don't go beyond a smallish distance from base, they have probably never pushed any boundaries, they have probably never had a bit of a fright in an aircraft, something you don''t want for the first time with a load of passengers on board in unfamiliar weather and terrain. They aren't prepared for any of that in the very sheltered and strictly controlled integrated courses. Someone who has hired an aeroplane and gone out hour building under their own steam is more likely to have varied experience. BUt these days the few schools that provide this training are being swamped by the sausage factories, who are also swamping the very limited ATC resources.

So is a one-size fits-all GA ready course any better? Probably not. But it should't all fall on the shoulders of the operator either...especially as those pilots will be gone like a rat out of an aquaduct as soon as they can.

It's not necessary. For some people, it will be a help especially if they have no C206/C210 time and they don't stand out from the other DA40 trained cleanskins.

It's a different world mate.

In my experience it's like observing a driver in a car and you just know it won't be long before that vehicle has panel damage. You don't know the driver or how long he or she has been driving, but you just know. Pilots are no different.

Common sense and risk management is something you have or don't have. You can provide guidance but it cannot be learnt. You can observe a bunch of guys wading through an obstacle course an pick the ones less likely to emerge unscathed.

Hazardous attitudes are one thing but risk management is a separate entity on its own and is absolutely a piloting skillset we all develop with experience, ideally under good mentors. People don't just finish high school or even a CPL as ideal "risk managers" ... we all learn how to make safe decisions and manage evolving risks to flight throughout our careers. Risk management is not some kind of innate "ya born with feathers or ya not" trait. Sure there might be personal attitudes that impact your risk management abilities but you can't pigeon hole CPLs into "risk managers" or not.

I totally agree though that a motivation to learn, be a team player and respond well to critical feedback are far less teachable traits and things an employer would want to see in a new pilot. These GA ready courses might not teach these skills or any "common sense" but they might just make your "5 hours minimum on 200 series" much more valuable with mentorship and exposure to airfields or weather they haven't had prior or wouldn't otherwise do if they hired the machine on their own. It doesn't sound like this course exists to replace a company ICUS or line training program but rather to give some real world context to the plastic-fantastic trained CPLs. Worth it? For some maybe for others maybe not!

I remember not long ago doing some ICUS with a new person in Cairns. Tower asked us to follow the dash 8. I was then asked "which one is a dash 8?".

Next flight was told to follow the 717. Didn't know what that looked like either.

During this persons training they had never, done a fuel drain, put oil in the engine, signed the MR or fueled the plane by themselves. Apparently only instructors were allowed to do these things.

Some people need a lot more than a few hours in a 210.

Beggars belief that any aspiring commercial pilot not know what every other aircraft looks like. Weren’t we all avid plane spotters to some degree at some point in our careers?

“During this persons training they had never, done a fuel drain, put oil in the engine, signed the MR or fueled the plane by themselves. Apparently only instructors were allowed to do these things.”

Flight school probably sick and tired of this generation of entitled, honey badger clientele finds it easier to get an accountable employee to do the dirty work to make sure it’s done correctly. Cant say I blame them. And being unable to recognize a Dash 8 or a 717 pretty much puts them in that category. Ahh well, he or she is probably a gun hand at selfies and social media.

Depends on the exposure a person has had. Was doing instrument training with the company C&T and joining the 26 circuit downwind at Essendon for a visual and were told to follow the red Aztec, had him visual but the C&T had no idea what an Aztec was and fretted that I knew what I was talking about, he had come from a military background, P-51 and Meteor in the Korean war, Huey in Vietnam, later C-130, then our very cloistered company which didn't mix with the broader aviation comunity. Went on to CASA as an FOI.

If the CASA Part 61 MOS syllabus of training was correct for the current industry demands, the additional training wouldn’t be required.

Unless the trainee pilots have been trained by competent instructors with industry experience in legacy/vintage aeroplanes, the green horn freshly minted CPL holders will have absolutely no idea how to handle a full load of passengers and a Cessna 207 on a 35 degree afternoon out of Kununurra, or the Rock doing a scenic, let alone dealing with a bunch of drunks trying to smuggle grog to Port Keats hidden in baby diapers 🤣

I’m sure you can dig up one or two cases of the existence of such instructors, but the reality has always been the opposite. Instructing has always been the play ground of hour builders too “refined” to get their hands dirty with a charter job up north.

Decades ago was visiting Tamworth when QF cadets were going through. Two Sydney lads had been given their two year GA assignment to an operator in Darwin, both refused to go, excuse being it was a %&^$ hole with no off duty pursuits available. Always wondered how their QF career turned out.

Hey, how have you gone with finding a job? I'm looking at heading up north early next year and was wondering if you had any tips for catching the first gig, also did you find work easily in Darwin or have to move more inland?

Such vision and decisiveness probably had them fast tracked to management

There are a few things that a lot of the new bees forget or never learnt.
Aviation, general aviation in particular, only gets small returns on investment.
That means that are there costs that can be avoided. Saying that a new or possible new employer
should shoulder the cost of taking a guy or gal who has a bare DA40 CPL with 200 hours and never been off a sealed runway and teach them all they need to know to become a safe, note that word safe, is very expensive. It means that said employer has to allocate a competent check and training pilot to bring the wanna bee up to standard.
That costs big time in aircraft hours, man power, fuel etc.

The responsibility for all that should be the cost built into the flying school instruction not a charter operator.
The comment by so many is that the employer should do all that job ready training at his expense.

Why do that when if said employer goes through the rubbish bin of applications, or shakes the the local tree that pilots in waiting reside in he will get a pilot with all the tickets who has done the real work to be the right pilot for the job with little more than a thorough Q&A session and briefing and a basic check flight on the type to be used.

Two more things come to mind. Flying schools teach the bare minimum to get a CPL. Usually on a non commercial use aircraft type. The usual spin is get a CPL with us and you will quickly get you a pilot job and get paid big dollars. And I live in dream land.
Did I mention having a VET Fee Loan of money to pay back? Does the budding want to be have charts for the selected area? Done a first aid course? Done any kind of aircraft maintenance? Got a Dangerous Goods Awareness Certificate?
Done a water drill course? Landed off sealed runways? Knows how to do a quick W&B trim sheet?

Next please!

R

Not all flying schools teach the bare minimum. There are still some of us who teach them how to do the job not just tick the boxes to keep the VET gravy train on the rails. We don't use plastic aeroplanes or dress our pre-solo students up like airline captains, we prepare them for their first job by making sure they have already got command time on types and in areas that will be relevant and get them entworking as they build their hours and they are ready to get their hands dirty..
This has been a busy week of people dropping off identical resumes.