Pilot experience/passenger choice
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Terra firma
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pilot experience/passenger choice
You all know that whenever you book a flight you are given numerous options, some important, others inane. Seat number, meals, baggage, entertainment options and many others are available but while they may make the trip more comfortable they will do nothing to enhance my safety.
Even if we travel on the more expensive classes, everything is provided but once again we are not given any option or knowledge about the crew.
Whenever I take a taxi, I can talk to the driver, ensure he knows the route, examine his licence; and if not satisfied then I can take another.
But in the airline game we have no such choice, even though sometimes I have paid more for a taxi journey than for a flight!
Throughout these forums there are numerous threads debating the importance of experienced pilots in an emergency and the airlines taking cost cutting into the cockpit. Taken to its logical conclusion, the airlines will try to crew the plane with pilots with the minimum legislated qualifications and paid as little as possible, all in the name of reducing costs.
But I think it is about time that pax had the opportunity to choose the experience of the flight crew and if necessary pay a little more for the opportunity to have something which may in effect save ones life.
As the airlines have their rosters done well in advance, what I propose is that they give a rough guide as to the experience of the pilots rostered for each flight. Something as simple as does the First Officer have over 1500 hours experience and does the Captain have less than 5000 hours or more than 10000 hours would be enough form us to make an informed decision. It will allow us to choose a flight with which we are comfortable and if necessary pay a little more for an experienced crew if we want.
Even if we travel on the more expensive classes, everything is provided but once again we are not given any option or knowledge about the crew.
Whenever I take a taxi, I can talk to the driver, ensure he knows the route, examine his licence; and if not satisfied then I can take another.
But in the airline game we have no such choice, even though sometimes I have paid more for a taxi journey than for a flight!
Throughout these forums there are numerous threads debating the importance of experienced pilots in an emergency and the airlines taking cost cutting into the cockpit. Taken to its logical conclusion, the airlines will try to crew the plane with pilots with the minimum legislated qualifications and paid as little as possible, all in the name of reducing costs.
But I think it is about time that pax had the opportunity to choose the experience of the flight crew and if necessary pay a little more for the opportunity to have something which may in effect save ones life.
As the airlines have their rosters done well in advance, what I propose is that they give a rough guide as to the experience of the pilots rostered for each flight. Something as simple as does the First Officer have over 1500 hours experience and does the Captain have less than 5000 hours or more than 10000 hours would be enough form us to make an informed decision. It will allow us to choose a flight with which we are comfortable and if necessary pay a little more for an experienced crew if we want.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So when your experienced choice of crew gets stuck overnight because of snow or goes sick and they replace him at the last minute with Mr. New Guy what are you gonna do? Get off?
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 3,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Taken to its logical conclusion, the airlines will try to crew the plane with pilots with the minimum legislated qualifications and paid as little as possible, all in the name of reducing costs.
Airlines don't seek out inexperienced pilots. Some airlines pay little, and that's all they can get. Inexperienced pilots seek out any job they can find. For what some airlines pay, all they can get are inexperienced pilots. That's a relative thing, however.
If you're in much of the world, an inexperienced pilot at the regional level would be one with a few hundred hours. For many years, save for recently, in the US an inexperienced pilot would be one with four thousand hours or less. To get hired for a long time at the lowest rungs, one needed twenty five hundred hours or better. In recent times, pilots were getting hired with three hundred hours. This is not the norm. Certainly not in the US.
Presently we're hiring pilots in the 15,000 hour range. Why? Because we can get them. Like any company, we would prefer to find the most experineced, qualified pilots we can. We're not a regional, but we're also not a legacy carrier, either.
Hours, of course, mean nothing. Experience means everything. More to the point, what the individual pilot takes from his or her experiences, mean everything. Do you know enough to be able to interpret the qualifications of a pilot, and his or her capability, from looking at their hours? If so, then you need to leave whatever job you presently have and seek work in the human resources department of the finest carrier you can; your skill is unique and rare.
Perhaps you'd like to give the pilots a simulator check to determine if they will pass the standards you set.
Would you know what to look for?
If you get to choose me individually for the flight, does that mean I get to review your background and qualifications to fly, and decide if I want you on my flight?
The airline has already evaluated each pilot. Each pilot must undergo regular recurrent training and evaluation. I'm undergoing such evaluation myself, at the moment. I am watched very closely by check airmen who monitor me for safety, good judgement, accuracy and skill in flying, emergency procedures, aircraft knowledge and understanding, policies and procedures, and standardization. The smallest mistakes, errors, omissions, or items that could be improved upon are noted, repeated as necessary, and training is given. If I can't fly, if there's doubt as to my safety or ability or judgement, I'm not allowed back on the line.
Are you more qualified than these check airmen and inspectors to make this determination? Are you more qualified and able to decide who is able, than those professionals with a full career of experience and judgement, who make these decisions and observations every day?
It somewhat negates all that professionalism, training, and experinece, to have passengers with no training or experience making the decisions.
"Ooh, I like him."
"No, I won't fly with him. His chin is crooked."
"That one looks devious. Let's wait for a younger pilot."
"Hang on, that one's too young. Let's wait for one that's older."
"That one's got to be a vegetarian. I don't trust vegetarians. He probably doesn't have enough judgement to make that flight. Let's wait for a meat eater."
"This one says our pilot was a fighter pilot. He's only got seven hundred hours, but he must be good. After all, he flew fast."
"That one was a crop duster. Let's not trust him."
"Here, this is the one. Nice tie."
Perhaps you'd best leave professional evaluation to the professionals, and stick to choosing a window seat.
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: world
Posts: 3,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You might be surprised to learn how many "experienced" pilots have met an untimely end. And then we go into the debate of assessing "experience". Long haul crews pile on the hours in the cruise but make very few rotations per month. Short haul crews by contrast make a significant higher number of rotations per month. That might arguably make them more experienced but they won't be flying your long haul sector. Then there's the part of the world they generally fly in to consider vis-a-vis weather and available ground aids etc etc. The list just goes on.
Lady Lexxington
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The Manor House
Age: 43
Posts: 1,145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So you want to be able to pick a flight based on the number of hours the guys at the pointy end have?
Hypothetical situation. You see flight 1.) crewed by a 1500hr F/O and a 5000hr Cpt or flight 2.) crewed by a 7000hr f/o and 10000hr Cpt. Which do you chose based on that information?
How does that information tell you that flight one have actually dealt with, handled and safely executed a real emergency whereas flight 2 have never had any such thing.
Also when you get in a cab is the guy likely to say "yeah guv, I had a massive smash just last week." Is he hell as like.....
Hypothetical situation. You see flight 1.) crewed by a 1500hr F/O and a 5000hr Cpt or flight 2.) crewed by a 7000hr f/o and 10000hr Cpt. Which do you chose based on that information?
How does that information tell you that flight one have actually dealt with, handled and safely executed a real emergency whereas flight 2 have never had any such thing.
Also when you get in a cab is the guy likely to say "yeah guv, I had a massive smash just last week." Is he hell as like.....
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Terra firma
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While I agree that it will not be a perfect method for determining how good a pilot he is, as a general rule in life the more someone does ANY job the better they become at it. So it will certainly only be a guide but of course I would choose the more experienced crew as on the balance of probability they would perform better in an emergency situation.
As another example, if you were having brain surgery, do you go with the surgeon who has been doing it for 20 years or the guy who has just graduated from med school?
As another example, if you were having brain surgery, do you go with the surgeon who has been doing it for 20 years or the guy who has just graduated from med school?
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is this not more suitable for Jet Blast - are you seriously suggesting that on a commecial flight the airline is not concerned about the Łm++++ or hardware and 100+ pax on board and that pre-screened crew qualifications are more important than time/comfort/price 
If it's that important then I'd suggest a charter with your own choice of pilot would be the best option.
If it's that important then I'd suggest a charter with your own choice of pilot would be the best option.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good enough is good enough, if good enough wasn't good enough then it wouldn't be good enough and it would be not good enough and, therefore, not good enough. Jetblast ho!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Terra firma
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for all your input though I would ask the moderators that this thread not be moved but could we please create a poll instead. Something along the lines of: 'Given the knowledge, would pilot experience be a factor in your decision on which flight to book?'
And for those who trust airlines to do the right think, have a look at this:
Report: Finncomm AT42 at Seinäjoki on Jan 1st 2007, 4 go-arounds due to inexperienced crew
And for those who trust airlines to do the right think, have a look at this:
Report: Finncomm AT42 at Seinäjoki on Jan 1st 2007, 4 go-arounds due to inexperienced crew
Report: Finncomm AT42 at Seinäjoki on Jan 1st 2007, 4 go-arounds due to inexperienced crew
A Finncomm Airlines ATR42-500, registration OH-ATB performing flight FC205 from Helsinki to Seinäjoki, aborted landing at Seinäjoki after an EGPWS terrain alert. After the go-around another attempt was performed resulting again in an EGPWS terrain alert and a go-around. During the go-around, while turning onto final approach course, airspeed dropped, the autopilot disconnected and the stick pusher activated. The crew assumed an electrical malfunction and climbed to 7000 feet to sort the supposed malfunction out. After no malfunction was found, the crew attempted a third approach, again resulting in an EGPWS Too Low Alert and a go-around. Only now the crew discovered, that the first officer's QNH was still set to 1013 millibar instead of the aerodrom's 978 millibar prompting the first officer, who was pilot flying, to fly around 1000 feet too low. The false setting was corrected and a fourth approach attempted using the ILS to runway 32 circling to 14. On downwind to runway 14 a configuration alarm sounded, and during turn onto final the airplane banked 50 degrees triggered a bank angle warning with the airplane rolling out at heading 050 instead of 0130. Another go-around was performed, the captain now deciding to divert to Vaasa, where the airplane finally landed safely.
A Finncomm Airlines ATR42-500, registration OH-ATB performing flight FC205 from Helsinki to Seinäjoki, aborted landing at Seinäjoki after an EGPWS terrain alert. After the go-around another attempt was performed resulting again in an EGPWS terrain alert and a go-around. During the go-around, while turning onto final approach course, airspeed dropped, the autopilot disconnected and the stick pusher activated. The crew assumed an electrical malfunction and climbed to 7000 feet to sort the supposed malfunction out. After no malfunction was found, the crew attempted a third approach, again resulting in an EGPWS Too Low Alert and a go-around. Only now the crew discovered, that the first officer's QNH was still set to 1013 millibar instead of the aerodrom's 978 millibar prompting the first officer, who was pilot flying, to fly around 1000 feet too low. The false setting was corrected and a fourth approach attempted using the ILS to runway 32 circling to 14. On downwind to runway 14 a configuration alarm sounded, and during turn onto final the airplane banked 50 degrees triggered a bank angle warning with the airplane rolling out at heading 050 instead of 0130. Another go-around was performed, the captain now deciding to divert to Vaasa, where the airplane finally landed safely.
The captain had 50 hours on type with 3500 hours total flying time, and the first officer 80 hours on type. The airline had marked both pilots as inexperienced, and they should never have been paired, but that was overlooked because of rapid fleet expansion.
Good suggestion. Maybe we could extend it to experienced ground crew too, and experienced air trafficers and experience firemen and....
Jabiman, may I ask how many times you have turned a taxi away because you thought that the driver was not experienced enough?
Jabiman, may I ask how many times you have turned a taxi away because you thought that the driver was not experienced enough?
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: England
Posts: 1,955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I only want to carry experienced passengers with a minimum of one million air miles.
This will aid the safety of other passengers, the crew and the aeroplane because these experienced passengers know what they are doing and what is required of them. This will eventually lead to a situation whereby cabin crew are no longer needed as the passengers will look after themselves and are able to correctly follow any emergency relevant procedures.
As inexperienced passengers are no longer allowed to fly eventually the number of experienced passengers will dwindle to the point where it is no longer necessary to operate aeroplanes anywhere in the world.
I'm on to you Mr Greenpeace!
This will aid the safety of other passengers, the crew and the aeroplane because these experienced passengers know what they are doing and what is required of them. This will eventually lead to a situation whereby cabin crew are no longer needed as the passengers will look after themselves and are able to correctly follow any emergency relevant procedures.
As inexperienced passengers are no longer allowed to fly eventually the number of experienced passengers will dwindle to the point where it is no longer necessary to operate aeroplanes anywhere in the world.
I'm on to you Mr Greenpeace!
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: North, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 936
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a relatively experienced passenger flying 50-60 times a year for the past 12 years this is the most ridiculous idea I have ever heard. If you are so concerned don't get on an aeroplane. Looks at the statistics about the safety of flying.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 864
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not really sure what your point is there Jabiman. The crew made some errors but in each case they made the right choice and put the aircraft in a safe position. Indeed the bottom line is that they landed safely. No pilot is born with limitless experience and ALL pilots make errors, indeed ALL crews make errors from the most inexperienced to the most experienced. The important thing is that they made safe choices, there are plenty of very experienced pilots that have killed themselves and their passengers because they have pressed on despite the warnings. This crew may not have perfect, they may have been inexperienced but there did the right thing and the article you quoted is reporting a few go-arounds and not a crash. I would rather fly with inexperienced pilots willing to admit they got it wrong and walk away than an experienced pilot that kills you because they cannot admit they screwed up.
Check out this link. In this case the experienced captain and flight engineer were both wrong and the inexperienced co-pilot was right. Experience can lead to complacency and is not, in itself, a measure of competence.
Ducks and Co-Pilots
Check out this link. In this case the experienced captain and flight engineer were both wrong and the inexperienced co-pilot was right. Experience can lead to complacency and is not, in itself, a measure of competence.
Ducks and Co-Pilots
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ashford Kent
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a load of s... er rubbish. When I use any type of service I don't normally check all the credentials of the person operating that service. I trust that the regulating authorities for that service has established that my operator is qualified. That's good enough for me and should be for you. If not, go another way.
Sly Lowlife Freight
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Surrey, UK
Age: 63
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Captain Jacob Veldhuyzen was very experienced with rather a lot of hours.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Goole.East Yorkshire.UK
Age: 59
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a load of tosh....!!!!
You must have at some point experienced in your lifetime,that generally a person who has done a job a short time will have a more conscientious approach to their tasks,& the long termer will have become so accustomed to these tasks,they become complacent & are more liable to make a mistake/s.
Oh...and on my last flight (don/ams) whilst approaching the stairs i could see the pilot through the window,i smiled & a got a friendly wave...my first thoughts were oh noooooooo !!!,he's too happy,has he been on the wacky baccy..?
,& Omg !!!..he just took his hand off the controls ..Asif !!!
You must have at some point experienced in your lifetime,that generally a person who has done a job a short time will have a more conscientious approach to their tasks,& the long termer will have become so accustomed to these tasks,they become complacent & are more liable to make a mistake/s.
Oh...and on my last flight (don/ams) whilst approaching the stairs i could see the pilot through the window,i smiled & a got a friendly wave...my first thoughts were oh noooooooo !!!,he's too happy,has he been on the wacky baccy..?
,& Omg !!!..he just took his hand off the controls ..Asif !!!
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What planet are you on ?
Jabiman, what planet are you on? I love the Idea of you checking a cab driver's licence, I'm sure they'ld all be fine with that, But if you get on a flight, and I do, a lot, then you have to trust the system that has developed long and studied programmes to put pilots in the hot seat, and you can relax in 1A. It's not a menu option, it's common sense. Get a grip !
, But if you get on a flight, and I do, a lot, then you have to trust the system that has developed long and studied programmes to put pilots in the hot seat, and you can relax in 1A. It's not a menu option, it's common sense. Get a grip !
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Terra firma
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You must have at some point experienced in your lifetime,that generally a person who has done a job a short time will have a more conscientious approach to their tasks,& the long termer will have become so accustomed to these tasks,they become complacent & are more liable to make a mistake/s.
Have you had a look at this thread:
http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/4...-incident.html
Looks at the statistics about the safety of flying.
Ok, I have at this web site:
Safety vs Driving
The conclusion of which is (GA=general aviation):
- driving: 1.32 fatal accidents and 1.47 fatalities per 100 million miles
- airlines: .05 fatal accidents and 1.57 fatalities per 100 million miles
- GA: 7.46 fatal accidents and 13.1 fatalities per 100 million miles
I trust that the regulating authorities for that service has established that my operator is qualified. That's good enough for me and should be for you.
Not sure if this was ever true but it certainly is not now. In todays world companies are run to maximise profit and to pay managers fat bonuses. Most have no aviation experience and are running a risk/profit calculation where they try to balance maximum profit with minimal risk…but sometimes they get it wrong (greed is good anyone?)
Next you are going to tell me to trust the bankers because they are all too conservative to lend too much and send governments broke having to bail them out.
Jabiman, you are obviously not a politician, otherwise, you would know that you never ask a question ... unless you know what the answer will be!
In all fairness (someone has to be), perhaps your questions should have been more along the lines of ....
If you had a choice of airlines to fly on a particular route, would you select the one that recruits minimum 200 hour co-pilots ... or would you choose the one that recruits minimum 1500 hour co-pilots?
For the record, I think my preference would be the 1500 hour co-pilots.... but if the fare cost was a big differential, then, in all honesty, I might roll the dice ...
In all fairness (someone has to be), perhaps your questions should have been more along the lines of ....
If you had a choice of airlines to fly on a particular route, would you select the one that recruits minimum 200 hour co-pilots ... or would you choose the one that recruits minimum 1500 hour co-pilots?
For the record, I think my preference would be the 1500 hour co-pilots.... but if the fare cost was a big differential, then, in all honesty, I might roll the dice ...
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 2,584
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is hilarious!
Its hard to comprehend the sheer vanity of anyone who believes he has the knowledge to judge the skill level of a pilot by how many hours he has. Even the most experienced examiner can't begin to do that!
Its hard to comprehend the sheer vanity of anyone who believes he has the knowledge to judge the skill level of a pilot by how many hours he has. Even the most experienced examiner can't begin to do that!