Do you really want to be a pilot!

[Bla Bla Bla]

"Yes, captains (NOT ALL THOUGH), would have better flying 'skills' than me i suppose, more 'feel' for certain situations.. HUDSON i suppose"


"BUT.... experience doesn't necessarily make you 'better' or 'safer'"

I would hope the Captain would have better flying skills than a 300hr F/O, what is you pic time now and how much Pic time do you have since training. Its not just hand flying skills its the general lack of decision making experience that you only gain with flying hours that concerns me.

[speedrestriction]

A few contributors to this thread seem to have quite a few half baked notions:

dbriglee

And talking about emergencies, with engine failure after take off, for example.
Would you prefer to have a guy who did his IR last year, and knows the THEORY behind what he is doing, and has a feel for the aircraft preventing overcontrol, and correct inputs for a balanced flight....or maybe a captain who hasn't had a REAL engine failure drill.....

Are those our only two rather polar and unrepresentative options? While FFS have their limitations the certainly are no worse at representing engine failures than your instructor and his half mil chart and furthermore can simulate a failure at lower altitude than was possible in the seneca.

feel confident i can handle any emergency under pressure to save the day.

That sounds more like the Hollywood version of your job rather than the correct description which can be found in your company manual. I believe it describes a team effort being lead by the captain, certainly no mention of "saving the day."

Barké

I think Jeremy Clarkson hit the nail on the head last Sunday on TopGear....If people have no interest in driving, then they cannot be good at Driving

That is not true. I have no interest in cutting grass, yet when I have to do it I make a good job of it. Being mindful and conscienciously performing the task in hand (whether driving a car, cutting grass, sweeping the floor, flying an aircraft, cleaning windows) is far more important to a successful outcome than interest in the task itself.

sr

[Vanpilot]

Dbriglee

Re:- dbriglee

Your the type of guy we all don't want in the cockpit with us, your attitude stinks. Fly** must be very proud of what they have produced.

If you think that your IR test is more valuable then years of experience and probably having actually had engine failures in those aircraft that don't take any responsibility to fly then you are so very wrong IMHO. All the guys you sit next to that have taught you how to fly those nice big shinny planes have flown the crappy oil soaked just about legal aircraft in conditions that I'm sure you wouldn't go up in on your own. Skills and experience you can't learn flying two crew airline stuff from the second you get out of flight school. There is no right way of getting your flying experience but you need to appreciate you have been exposed to a very small amount of it.

You are allowed to learn in the right seat because the Captain is sitting with you and at any given point his " experience and judgement" will make the final calls on the safety of your flight, not you.

You learn more every year that you fly and you get a little better every year, provided you don't already think you are Gods gift!!

[Zippy Monster]

If I can just chuck in my two penn'orth... This thread went off at its predictable tangent, and I couldn't help but respond to the 'real pilot' brigade who think that you're not worthy of an airline job unless you've served your time instructing in knackered 152s and working your way up through the ranks. To me, some of the tones from some contributors smack a little bit of jealousy. A few points I'd respond to:

Some might say that's a good thing but I don't, a real aviator has a rounded knowledge and you can't buy or rush that.

Define "a real aviator". Basically someone who isn't one of those fATPLs in the right hand seat you covet?

It will encourage pilots to be pilots and see some real flying before the hum drum life of airlines.

This kind of thing annoys me. Define 'real flying'. I'd love to compare it to what exactly it is that I do when I go to work every day.

Maybe when you get into the airlines and start to fly big jets, you'll see that the Chuck Yeager 'real pilot' brigade are the ones who have the most problems because they can't get out of their 'real pilot' habits and try to fly in a way a big jet isn't designed to be flown. For example, if Airbus and my company tell me explicitly that the FDs, AP and A/THR should be on all the time, then that's what I'll do - I'll save the manual raw data heroism for the sim. I won't be switching it all off and having a 'play' because, by some twisted logic, it makes me more of a pilot.

ALL pilots wanting that RHS should spend an apprenticeship doing the real learning - that means a lot of the 1500 hrs requirement doing work as FIs, para-dropping, taxi work, etc.

Nice rant, and you also managed to get the 'shiny jet' and 'real pilot' comments in. No substance to back it up though...

How many people " the paying public" would still fly on the low cost airlines if they knew that should the captain be not up to speed, they can have full faith in the 300hrs guy/girl that had the largest check book at the time.

Since when were low-houred fATPLs exclusive to the LCCs? Do some research and you'll find that some of the biggest European legacy carriers take/have taken 250hr guys. Including BA.

All the guys you sit next to that have taught you how to fly those nice big shinny planes have flown the crappy oil soaked just about legal aircraft in conditions that I'm sure you wouldn't go up in on your own.

Quite some misconception... Three or four of the captains at my (small) base have come through integrated-style fATPL training courses and they are experienced and throroughly competent in what they do.

The way I see it is this. My airline wouldn't let me be in that seat unless they were thoroughly satisfied that I was safe to be there. There is still much about the Airbus I don't know - I learn something new about it pretty much every time I go to work. As do some of the captains I fly with. In the politest possible way, I don't have to justify my position in the right hand seat of the aircraft to people with thousands of hours worth of bush flying in the third world, who are a bit jealous they haven't got their big break. If I wasn't up to the job, my airline wouldn't let me do it.

I enjoy the job. I enjoy operating the Airbus (and 'flying' it, if you like, when I need/want to.) I enjoy the airline environment. Would I have enjoyed spending years instructing? No. Would I have considered it worthwhile to invest my time in dropping parachutes and aerial photography (taking one of the obviously thousands of available jobs in that area), to get a feel for "flying by the seat of my pants"? No. Would spending years of doing single-pilot VFR ops in crap weather made me capable of flying the Airbus better? No it wouldn't. Would I have wanted to go the the back end of the middle of nowhere flying a Caravan or a B200 to prove I'm a 'real pilot'? Not on your life.

Happy flying.

[artlite]

Slightly different perspective - during my flight training I met a pilot from Africa working for a very respectable company. He came to convert his papers to FAA because their company bought a November plane. Ex F-16 pilot. 300h TT on Glass. He was my safety pilot in C150 during my hour-building and couldn't get to fly the plane no matter how hard he tried. He eventually gave up after almost crashing it. That same day I was asked if I could take my instrument written with him so he could cheat and get my answers because according to himself - ALL HE EVER DID IN LIFE WAS TOWER VECTORS TO THE ILS. And did I say he thought mixture was the throttle? Please - let's not generalize.

[Bla Bla Bla]

Zippy monster

No need to get so irate, I learnt to remain calm at all times when I flew in Africa, people who get wound up easy don't hack it that well. They are best in the RHS with a Captain taking all the stress from them and making any decisions.

You seem to shout that we are all jealous because you are in the RHS, well done. I suspect that this maybe the other way around, its always nice to have something to talk about with other pilots, do you tell them stories from your integrated course.

I'm guessing you are exactly the sort of pilot I was referring to in my very first thread.

[Ian the Aviator]

Thank god......

After all the twaddle that some have posted here (including zippy') I'm just glad I work for a company with quite a small aviation department - just 4 biz-jets.

That means I get some say in who gets selected to sit in my RHS (I have the LHS so in no way covet the RHS in a 'no manual flying' tube full of SLF').

In short, there is no way I would allow many of the arrogent, inexperienced guys that post here anywhere near my aircraft.... my current FO had almost 3000 hrs in GA before he joined us, including glider tugging, instructing and quite a lot of taxi work on an old piston twin - HE KNOWS HIS STUFF AND I CAN TRUST HIS EXPERIENCE, I dont think I could say the same of a 300 hr 'school only' fATPL !

The only reason the low hours, zero experience pilots get the RHS is they are cheap, in some cases even paying for the chance to be there...

OK - end of my rant (again !)

[Zippy Monster]

No need to get so irate

Irate?! I was feeling quite the opposite, thanks - was just enjoying a quiet relaxing beer after a late 4 sectors. The post wasn't intended to sound irate.

You seem to shout that we are all jealous because you are in the RHS, well done

Nope, I didn't say "you are all jealous". What I said, if you re-read my post, is that when you get a bunch of people complaining that low-hour fATPLs are undeserving of a jet job and that bunch of people happen to be self-titled 'real pilots', it smacks a little bit of jealousy. There's a subtle difference.

After all the twaddle that some have posted here (including zippy')

Why was it twaddle? Just because it expressed an opinion different from your own? You're entitled to it just as I am to mine, but at least bother to justify it rather than dismissing it as 'twaddle'.

I have the LHS so in no way covet the RHS in a 'no manual flying' tube full of SLF'

In which case, apologies for the generalisation.

I note nobody has yet sought to define the terms 'real pilot' and 'real flying' though...! And I repeat my suggestion that knowing your stuff about flying a light twin piston VFR in marginal conditions really doesn't have a massive bearing on one's ability to operate a heavy jet. It's like comparing driving a bus and an F1 car - it's two completely different types of flying. Try flying a medium jet like a Seneca and you'll be summoned for a meeting in the office before you can say "flight data monitoring..."!

[Rapha_BA]

I totally agree with Zippy Monster, Dbriglee politely shared his opinion on the subject and because won’t match “the real pilots” opinions, he automatically becomes the “type of guy you wouldn’t want in the flight deck with you, his attitude stinks”.....
Yes, sounds like jealousy to me, and hypocrisy, typical of pprune "real pilots"

[betpump5]

I'm with Rapha and Zippy on this one. Whilst I know jealousy is a basic human act and for pilots it will be even greater during the downturn, I think the jealousy has spiralled into insults.

As what has been said, some of the biggest carriers use 250 hour cadets on the biggest aircraft in the fleet. We have Cadet pilots come straight in as SO on the 744s. Fair enough they don't "fly" the thing for the best part of two years but they still have the Type Rating. And unlike us who moan and sweat about the 6 month sim check, these guys do it once a month - without any hands on flying!

I have more confidence in these guys' abilities than the management Captains I sometimes fly with who take a drive once every 45 days to keep current!

How about choosing an example closer to home when BA recruited 250 hr pilots?

Some of you have said you feel sorry for the pilots who haven't experienced "real flying". Why? They are of no concern to you. I'm glad some of you have had experiences of landing in dirt strips when all of a sudden a mongoose happens on the runway and you need to take evasive action.

My point is that whoever is in that R.H.S has been determined (probably by a 50 year old Chief Pilot who is part of the old-timers club ) that he/she is the best person for the job and has successfully met all criteria during the recruitment stages AND Type Rating. 250hour or 2500 hours I have always had confidence in the cadet and the Chief Pilot's decision to put them there.

I would like to add that the first posts were about having no passion and that one is not a "real" aviator if they haven't done this or that. I won't disagree or agree with that statement. What I will ask though is Who cares? And does it matter?

The cadet pilots that arrive in the cockpit probably don't have a passion for flying from what I can tell. There is no GA in Hong Kong so the love of flying (if there is any) stems from HK'ers watching jets scream over high rise buildings onto RWY 13 when they were little kids. For me that initial love of flying is as good as another cadet who loved flying ever since he took a trial flight in a Cessna out of Southend.

I would agree though that the status and glory of being a Pilot here for the National Airline is a very big incentive for the cadets that apply and for those who succeed. This means that SOs that fly with us are exceptional individuals, very professional and very quick to learn. Flight Grading in Adelaide sorts the wheat from the chaff. The fact that these guys and gals couldn't care less about piston engines doesn't affect their abilities at all.

In the next couple of years, we will be welcoming international cadets to the FD, now the programme has been extended to the world. I look forward to seeing the difference, if any. The only difference I'd expect is internationals won't be be too shocked when they hear the humour coming from Aussie Captains

[Bla Bla Bla]

What I will ask though is Who cares? And does it matter?

No it does not matter in the slightest, its just a point of interest just like the majority of subjects on pprune.

Mongoose on the runway land anyway, Elephant go around.

[Juno78]

Avoiding the rest of the discussion about low hours etc., the initial point about people who aren't that interested in the job isn't limited to this industry. I'm a lawyer and the most FRUSTRATING people to work with are the junior ones who seem to be doing law because it's there, or because they think they'll make loads of money out of it, and don't actually have any interest in the job or law in general. They're frustrating not only because they're not interested and so are reluctant to enter into discussions about the work, but also because they don't make any effort to broaden their knowledge and make themselves better lawyers.

Funnily enough, relevant to the low hours discussion, most of those junior lawyers who aren't interested in the job are the ones who came straight through from university and haven't had any experience in the wider world. In law that extra experience generally makes you a better lawyer - I would have thought it would be reasonable to think the same about pilots.

[Bla Bla Bla]

Juno78,

Fantastic post, so true, as I mentioned earlier but has been lost on the fatpl B/S, having an interest in your industry actually makes it better for yourself and co workers.

My wife is an experienced Civil Engineer and exactly the same applies in her industry. I think it is a product of the I-pod generation ie, to get anything you press a button and it arrives. I don't think this is wrong or that my way is better but I think my route is certainly more satisfying.

[betpump5]

Juno,

D'you know (Sorry he-he) that is an interesting last point. However, you can't even fart without it being in the SOP. I guess the reason why the whole personality/life experience skill is so important is because you spend an awful lot of time with just one person - especially on short haul.

You need to be able to engage in conversations/ discussions/ differences of opinion professionally so that after a stop over, there isn't any weird tension. Also actually having a personality is important when you are either in the cockpit or outside on a stop over.

I find it even more important when you are a 4-man (oops person) crew where the banter can be quite hearty in the cockpit and on the stop-over. You definitely don't want one person to be isolated throughout a 2-3 day trip.

[Vanpilot]

Think again

Re; Zippy

This kind of thing annoys me. Define 'real flying'. I'd love to compare it to what exactly it is that I do when I go to work every day.

Maybe when you get into the airlines and start to fly big jets, you'll see that the Chuck Yeager 'real pilot' brigade are the ones who have the most problems because they can't get out of their 'real pilot' habits and try to fly in a way a big jet isn't designed to be flown. For example, if Airbus and my company tell me explicitly that the FDs, AP and A/THR should be on all the time, then that's what I'll do - I'll save the manual raw data heroism for the sim. I won't be switching it all off and having a 'play' because, by some twisted logic, it makes me more of a pilot.

Sorry......your inexperience kicks in again....you assume that myself or others don't "fly jets" and that for some reason our experience means we can't fly a plane the way it says it must be flown in the SOP's.

Don't forget that the Pilots that you sit next to probably wrote those SOP's I'm not trying to have a go here but you should understand that with the greatest respect you know very little about flying in your early years. I include myself in that statement.

Flying is not rocket science and most people with half a brain can do it well, but experience does and always will count. How did you learn which cells to avoid and when to avoid them. Its not by reading the book, it's sitting next to a guy that has been in one and thought he wouldn't do that again in a rush. He then shows you what the CB looks like with some story. " I once went through a cell like that and etc etc etc. So then you now know if it looks like that I'll avoid it. These experiences are gained through all types of flying but are learnt harder and faster working your way up the ladder. When you get to the point that your command is coming up it will be because you have experienced most if not all the things involved with your type of flying.....but do you really think you'll get in that left seat and not screw up ...even once. Because you will and that's what we are all on about. We have had the chance of screwing up in our flying before we got in the big shinny jets, that stops us making those mistakes (maybe) in those expensive buses. Where you guys may have to make your mistakes in them.

[superdash]

Flying is not rocket science and most people with half a brain can do it well

Well how come soo many 'pilots' struggle with things like IR test's???

[Vanpilot]

"Most"

But it gets easier to do that IR stuff with a bit of experience don't you agree

[152hero]

I think it also important to note however that experience is a doube edged sword , espcially if the said flying is done in a relaxed or at least more relaxed enviroment. It is easy to become acustomed to those things which a pilot can be more lenient on in say glider towing (postion accuarcy , full checks e.t.c ) and then transfer these habbits, although accidently on to a higher scale of flying that demands these standards.

Althouhgh i can appreciate arguements that expericance gives the pilots skills in say people reading , team managment or maybe even a 'flying sense' but much of the mentioned flying is solo work , which would induce the opposite.

In response to the question of a 'real pilot' I think many people are stuck on ideal now lost in the commercialthe world. Adding real to a job simply implies a more direct form of the job , a 'real' banker for instance would trade in a town market with phyiscal coins , whereas a 'normal' banker would deal in computerised figures. However i struggle to see how a 'real' of anything can be more valid than its 'normal' brethren.

Reagrds

Tim

[Zippy Monster]

Sorry......your inexperience kicks in again....you assume that myself or others don't "fly jets" and that for some reason our experience means we can't fly a plane the way it says it must be flown in the SOP's.

I didn't assume anything... I was just trying to counter the assumption that all 250hr fATPLs are rubbish and unworthy. I already apologised if my response contained too much of a generalisation of the group to whom I was replying. Of course it would be ridiculous to suggest that those with thousands of hours experience in different types of aviation are unable to fly jets to SOPs, and I actually wasn't suggesting that at all.

Absolutely I agree I know far less than those I fly with - I wouldn't deny that for a second. I learn every time I go to work and I wouldn't expect this to change. I've lost count of the number of times I've been to work and thought 'crap, I should probably know that' about various things to do with flying. Does that mean my opinions are invalid though?

but do you really think you'll get in that left seat and not screw up ...even once

Of course not. You seem to be inferring from my posts that I'm on some sort of personal mission to promote one way of learning against another. This is absolutely not the case. Of course I expect that one day, when I eventually make it to the left seat (which I hope I will do), I will get many things wrong. Part of life is learning from your mistakes.

I don't want to drag the thread too far off track. The points I made were only ever intended to defend the general corner of the low-hour F/Os who were coming in for what I considered to be a bit of unfair flack. I would suggest however that in response to:

We have had the chance of screwing up in our flying before we got in the big shinny jets, that stops us making those mistakes (maybe) in those expensive buses. Where you guys may have to make your mistakes in them.

People make mistakes in them all the time - I screw up myself and I see others screwing up. We will and do learn from it. If the company thought the risk was too high, or generally unacceptable, they wouldn't let us sit there. It doesn't matter what type of flying you do, the time you stop learning is the time to call it a day. I just have a different opinion to those of the self-titled 'real pilot', 'real flying' etc. disposition. If we agree to disagree on that, so be it.

[philc1983]

IMHO all pilots should have 1500 hrs and an unfrozen ATPL before being allowed to sit as a 1st officer, in an airline.

Well come on lets be serious here. Where are you honestly going to get 500hrs Multi pilot time before gaining employment with an airline? I can imagine some have done it but they will be in the minority.

All experience is good, and all flying is real. Do your own thing and don't hate!

Peace.