Has pilot training got its knickers in a twist?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: UK
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Professional pilot training is a mess, in simple terms. All the big schools run a sausage factory type scheme taking people off the streets, with a large wad of their (or their parents) cash, and spit them out of the other end into a job flying a jet, on poor terms and conditions. The good thing is these kids are rather naive and don't know much better, and the airlines get a cookie cutter bod that follows procedures and can sit in the right hand seat and do the job the airlines want - which is great for the most part.
However, in light of recent incidents, and the simple fact that a slick training system can never make up for real world experience gained over a couple of thousand hours of flying as PIC, learning your craft and making command decisions... many within the industry are suggesting that modular people, who have done the hard yards and built up experience "properly" instead of prostituting themselves to get on a jet, make a better thinking pilot when things go wrong.
The MPL just reduces the training costs/duration and waters it down even more. In all fairness, you could probably train somebody to fly a modern airliner in a matter of weeks and the rest they would pick up on the job. Look at that reality program doing the rounds of the dutch bloke (I think) who they trained up on a 738 and had him flying circuits in it within a month... Contrast that with the MyTravel (airline may be wrong, but someone will link to it no doubt) airbus that a former CTC FO smashed into the runway at one of the greek islands, causing structural damage, and when they went back through his training records he'd been crap all along, but CTC had happily kept taking his money and feeding him through tests until he passed, then the airline had allowed him to buy 500 hours of flying with fare paying passengers. A lot of people despise CTC, and you can understand both sides of the arguments. I'm very anti, and my main problem is the lack of skill/interest that many of their students seem to possess, and in all fairness a bit of jealousy that I've been doing things the hard way working as an FI and flying corporate among other none aviation jobs, and never expected to just turn up and jump into an airliner. Only a few months ago, I passed my first lot of EASA ATPL exams, which I've been studying for in my own time, and is one of the many hoops to jump through to "covert" my FAA professional qualifications to EASA... numerous other exam candidates, who were at the exam venue, from the CTC in-house ATPL theory course were there doing resits! So they were getting spoonfed ATPL theory 5 days a week in a classroom, yet some of them still weren't able to pass.
Things like this wind me up, and the general arrogance hearing them talking about what type ratings they were going to do after, and how they would turn down an offer of 757 at Jet2 in favour of 738 somewhere as it wasn't a "dying type"... like the airlines owe them a favour.
It's a funny carry on. I certainly think corporate work is a bit more free thinking and requires a more versatile character to adapt to the nature of the work. Whereas airlines offer a bit more job security, with a lot more of the same old same old day after day and just being another number.
However, in light of recent incidents, and the simple fact that a slick training system can never make up for real world experience gained over a couple of thousand hours of flying as PIC, learning your craft and making command decisions... many within the industry are suggesting that modular people, who have done the hard yards and built up experience "properly" instead of prostituting themselves to get on a jet, make a better thinking pilot when things go wrong.
The MPL just reduces the training costs/duration and waters it down even more. In all fairness, you could probably train somebody to fly a modern airliner in a matter of weeks and the rest they would pick up on the job. Look at that reality program doing the rounds of the dutch bloke (I think) who they trained up on a 738 and had him flying circuits in it within a month... Contrast that with the MyTravel (airline may be wrong, but someone will link to it no doubt) airbus that a former CTC FO smashed into the runway at one of the greek islands, causing structural damage, and when they went back through his training records he'd been crap all along, but CTC had happily kept taking his money and feeding him through tests until he passed, then the airline had allowed him to buy 500 hours of flying with fare paying passengers. A lot of people despise CTC, and you can understand both sides of the arguments. I'm very anti, and my main problem is the lack of skill/interest that many of their students seem to possess, and in all fairness a bit of jealousy that I've been doing things the hard way working as an FI and flying corporate among other none aviation jobs, and never expected to just turn up and jump into an airliner. Only a few months ago, I passed my first lot of EASA ATPL exams, which I've been studying for in my own time, and is one of the many hoops to jump through to "covert" my FAA professional qualifications to EASA... numerous other exam candidates, who were at the exam venue, from the CTC in-house ATPL theory course were there doing resits! So they were getting spoonfed ATPL theory 5 days a week in a classroom, yet some of them still weren't able to pass.
Things like this wind me up, and the general arrogance hearing them talking about what type ratings they were going to do after, and how they would turn down an offer of 757 at Jet2 in favour of 738 somewhere as it wasn't a "dying type"... like the airlines owe them a favour.It's a funny carry on. I certainly think corporate work is a bit more free thinking and requires a more versatile character to adapt to the nature of the work. Whereas airlines offer a bit more job security, with a lot more of the same old same old day after day and just being another number.
There has been a lot said about the state of pilot training in various articles (e.g. https://www.flightglobal.com/news/ar...needed-363801/)
Is this 'sensationalism', or is there a real issue here.
I've heard rumours that some of the hiring managers are shocked by the low quality of candidates coming through the system. But as I say, just rumours...
What's the solution though?
In the same way as learning to drive, nothing trumps experience. But what can be done to the training system to make pilots better prepared for line work?
Is it raw flying skills purely, or something else?
de minimus non curat lex
CAE Oxford have made a wise decision to reequip with Piper.
Basic skills need to be mastered as part of the CPL/IR course. Without that fundamental skill gained, any future flying is build on quick sand.
"can you select an attitude and maintain it, and TRIM?" The first 20 hours or so of flying is so important.
With this sound foundation, the multi-crew training can commence.
Basic skills need to be mastered as part of the CPL/IR course. Without that fundamental skill gained, any future flying is build on quick sand.
"can you select an attitude and maintain it, and TRIM?" The first 20 hours or so of flying is so important.
With this sound foundation, the multi-crew training can commence.
de minimus non curat lex
The DA42 has the advantage of using AVTUR and uses in the region of 50% less/hr v. Senaca.
In round terms 25% per hour in terms of fuel costs. Big smile on the faces of the beancounters.
Annual maintenance costs can prove to be expensive. Their construction material is modern, but how robust are they with the punishing nature of training?
FTEs PA28s first operated by British Aerospace at Prestwick from1988 are still used at Jerez for the SE phase. An ideal platform for basic training.
As a training platform the DA42 is ideal for ME PPL IR training. Easy to fly. Once qualified on type, put your golf clubs in the back, fly for an hour. Land. Golf, then RTB.
To quote an experienced ME FI from one of the "Big 3" : 'my old Mum could pass her IR on the DA42'.
Piper will be more demanding to fly and require a higher level of basic skill which is necessary for the next phases of training.
The DA42 can mask shortcomings. Piper is far less likely to do so.
Set the ATTITUDE AND TRIM
In round terms 25% per hour in terms of fuel costs. Big smile on the faces of the beancounters.
Annual maintenance costs can prove to be expensive. Their construction material is modern, but how robust are they with the punishing nature of training?
FTEs PA28s first operated by British Aerospace at Prestwick from1988 are still used at Jerez for the SE phase. An ideal platform for basic training.
As a training platform the DA42 is ideal for ME PPL IR training. Easy to fly. Once qualified on type, put your golf clubs in the back, fly for an hour. Land. Golf, then RTB.
To quote an experienced ME FI from one of the "Big 3" : 'my old Mum could pass her IR on the DA42'.
Piper will be more demanding to fly and require a higher level of basic skill which is necessary for the next phases of training.
The DA42 can mask shortcomings. Piper is far less likely to do so.
Set the ATTITUDE AND TRIM
