Ball point pen flying experience
Moderator
Thread Starter
Ball point pen flying experience
A quote from a recent list of Transport Canada enforcement actions:
"A private pilot applying for a commercial license made false entries in his pilot's logbook in an attempt to increase his total flying hours. The individual was sanctioned with a license suspension totalling 360 days."
Good for Transport Canada!
When tied in with;
so well written from another post, it is a reminder that a [true] number in a logbook is important milestone, but the experience so much more so. The hour requirements are minimums considered by the authority necessary for adequate exposure to experience building events. It's not how many times you went around the circuit. Even with the real number of minimum hours, you're only just were you need to be to move up. Dummying up the time in your logbook really shows that you don't get that!
It irks me to see threads on "building hours". How about building experience, the hours will fill themselves in while you're doing that!
As another wise poster once said: "You can have 1000 hours, or an hour a thousand times".
Pilot DAR
"A private pilot applying for a commercial license made false entries in his pilot's logbook in an attempt to increase his total flying hours. The individual was sanctioned with a license suspension totalling 360 days."
Good for Transport Canada!
When tied in with;
What we have in flight training today is a heritage of inexperience.
It irks me to see threads on "building hours". How about building experience, the hours will fill themselves in while you're doing that!
As another wise poster once said: "You can have 1000 hours, or an hour a thousand times".
Pilot DAR
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IMHO the reason we see so much "hour building" interest is the artificial way the ATPL is structured - particularly in Europe where it is a CPL/IR followed by a load of hour building to reach 1500 TT including (AIUI) 100 at night.
If we had the concept of "demonstrated competence" then hour building would not take place. Hour building usually involves renting the cheapest possible spamcan and flying back and forth - or PPL instructing - and thus has practically zero relevance to the ATPL which is generally about carrying paying passengers in a highly automated multi crew cockpit.
If we had the concept of "demonstrated competence" then hour building would not take place. Hour building usually involves renting the cheapest possible spamcan and flying back and forth - or PPL instructing - and thus has practically zero relevance to the ATPL which is generally about carrying paying passengers in a highly automated multi crew cockpit.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IO540
The irony is that the problem I see most from the young FO's is that they can't revert to to the "basics", a fully automated ILS to autoland is no problem, ask them to fly a visual circuit and the problems start!
A good dose of VFR european touring would be of more use to them than they (or the industry big wiggs) know
A good dose of VFR european touring would be of more use to them than they (or the industry big wiggs) know
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Betwixt and between
Posts: 666
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IMHO the reason we see so much "hour building" interest is the artificial way the ATPL is structured - particularly in Europe where it is a CPL/IR followed by a load of hour building to reach 1500 TT including (AIUI) 100 at night.
If we had the concept of "demonstrated competence" then hour building would not take place. Hour building usually involves renting the cheapest possible spamcan and flying back and forth - or PPL instructing - and thus has practically zero relevance to the ATPL which is generally about carrying paying passengers in a highly automated multi crew cockpit.
If we had the concept of "demonstrated competence" then hour building would not take place. Hour building usually involves renting the cheapest possible spamcan and flying back and forth - or PPL instructing - and thus has practically zero relevance to the ATPL which is generally about carrying paying passengers in a highly automated multi crew cockpit.
In terms of "demonstrated competence", that is what the CPL and IR skill tests are for, not to mention the sim check, followed by the type rating, the license skill test, then the line training, the recurrent LOFT, OPC/LPC and line checks. So one doesn't get to hold an ATPL without completing at least 23 exams and 12 official skills tests and checks!
It irks me to see threads on "building hours". How about building experience, the hours will fill themselves in while you're doing that!