Ryanair pilots being hired with minimum hours?
Join Date: May 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WWW
Get over what?
Just pointing out that many in the industry feel that this is really an issue of experience and that if the industry were to stay in the realms of only those who had a fair amount of previous experience on smaller stuff moving onto larger aircraft it would be no bad thing.
Whilst I agree that a couple of years experience instructing in a PA28 is of some use the decision making ability and the ability to handle a crisis is honed and can be fallen back on in an emergency, this can be critical.
10 Years as a corperate airline pilot has shown me a few things. These cadets fresh out of OATS for example are way behind the drag curve compared to someone who has just a few hundred hours instructing. A modern airliner is so hands off that if a hands on situation occurs you need to be able to fall back on previous experience.
We went through a phase of hiring newly qualified pilots a few years ago and it didnt work very well. One went away, instructed for a year and a half and came back as an all together more rounded pilot. This is not a slur on the people as they are the same but the system.
If JAA stipulates that you cant fly SPO multi IFR in a Seneca with less than 700hrs how can you say that a F/o on a 737 with 250hrs is OK?
Get over what?
Just pointing out that many in the industry feel that this is really an issue of experience and that if the industry were to stay in the realms of only those who had a fair amount of previous experience on smaller stuff moving onto larger aircraft it would be no bad thing.
Whilst I agree that a couple of years experience instructing in a PA28 is of some use the decision making ability and the ability to handle a crisis is honed and can be fallen back on in an emergency, this can be critical.
10 Years as a corperate airline pilot has shown me a few things. These cadets fresh out of OATS for example are way behind the drag curve compared to someone who has just a few hundred hours instructing. A modern airliner is so hands off that if a hands on situation occurs you need to be able to fall back on previous experience.
We went through a phase of hiring newly qualified pilots a few years ago and it didnt work very well. One went away, instructed for a year and a half and came back as an all together more rounded pilot. This is not a slur on the people as they are the same but the system.
If JAA stipulates that you cant fly SPO multi IFR in a Seneca with less than 700hrs how can you say that a F/o on a 737 with 250hrs is OK?
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Sydney
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Since you asked WWW, there was the Gulf Air A320 CFIT at Bahrain a couple years ago, where the captain messed up whilst the F/O appeared to be a bit of a non-entity. The recent report did suggest the F/O, a fresh cadet, was insufficiently experienced or trained to have been of much use in that situation.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Midlands, UK
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Busterplane,
Quote:
__________________________________________________
If JAA stipulates that you cant fly SPO multi IFR in a Seneca
with less than 700hrs how can you say that a F/o on a 737
with 250hrs is OK?
__________________________________________________
That is a good point! What if the skipper becomes incapacitated and the very inexperienced FO is on his own? He should be ok providing everything is on his side but then throw in some poor weather, a non-precision approach to minimums and possible equipment malfunction and it becomes more than a bit scary! Granted even an experienced FO would have his hands full in such a scenario but a 250hrs FO could quite possibly suffer from max out with all the dire consequences that may follow.
Experience is vital in this industry, it's just a shame the UK doesn't have a decent GA scene to provide it. I used to slag off the US on this one but now I think they have it about right.
Quote:
__________________________________________________
If JAA stipulates that you cant fly SPO multi IFR in a Seneca
with less than 700hrs how can you say that a F/o on a 737
with 250hrs is OK?
__________________________________________________
That is a good point! What if the skipper becomes incapacitated and the very inexperienced FO is on his own? He should be ok providing everything is on his side but then throw in some poor weather, a non-precision approach to minimums and possible equipment malfunction and it becomes more than a bit scary! Granted even an experienced FO would have his hands full in such a scenario but a 250hrs FO could quite possibly suffer from max out with all the dire consequences that may follow.
Experience is vital in this industry, it's just a shame the UK doesn't have a decent GA scene to provide it. I used to slag off the US on this one but now I think they have it about right.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Before anyone gets the wrong idea, Im in no way knocking those of you who have worked incredibly hard to get your fATPLs. Its a great achievement. My views on experience are just that, views.
They are based on a fair amount of experience however and my only point is that those of you who are lucky enough to be able to get some experience instructing, tugging gliders or in aerial photography will I hope never have to use it in an emergency. If you are unlucky enough to be put into an emergency situation it WILL prove to be invaluable time.
RayBan is right to say that USA has a good system. There is hardly an airline Pilot there who hasnt "done thier time" so to speak. Opportunities in GA in the UK are limited as he says which makes it difficult but if you can get some GA time, I for one, look on it very favourably at interview.
We regularly operate into smaller airfields around Europe, in all conditions, and here is where Ive found that my time as a GA pilot, really pays off. If the smallest runway youve ever landed at is Cranfield your going to have fun trying to land at a 700m contaminated runway in the Alps.
Horses for Courses I suppose but give me a GA background pilot any day of the week.
They are based on a fair amount of experience however and my only point is that those of you who are lucky enough to be able to get some experience instructing, tugging gliders or in aerial photography will I hope never have to use it in an emergency. If you are unlucky enough to be put into an emergency situation it WILL prove to be invaluable time.
RayBan is right to say that USA has a good system. There is hardly an airline Pilot there who hasnt "done thier time" so to speak. Opportunities in GA in the UK are limited as he says which makes it difficult but if you can get some GA time, I for one, look on it very favourably at interview.
We regularly operate into smaller airfields around Europe, in all conditions, and here is where Ive found that my time as a GA pilot, really pays off. If the smallest runway youve ever landed at is Cranfield your going to have fun trying to land at a 700m contaminated runway in the Alps.
Horses for Courses I suppose but give me a GA background pilot any day of the week.
Busterplane,
Who do you work for? My backround is exactly as you describe, and your comments comes as a breath of fresh air after so much anti self improver talk of late.
Regards
S
Who do you work for? My backround is exactly as you describe, and your comments comes as a breath of fresh air after so much anti self improver talk of late.
Regards
S
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: He's on the limb to nowhere
Posts: 1,981
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
busterplane
Also in the US, to sit in the RHS of a 737 you usually had first to sit in the LHS in one of the smaller outfits. So the FO in the majors had some real world experience of being a skipper in a part 121 operation. That's how it used to work of course, the economy has stopped pilot hiring now. Also with RJs being used more and more on routes where the 737 was king, things may be different in the future.
Also in the US, to sit in the RHS of a 737 you usually had first to sit in the LHS in one of the smaller outfits. So the FO in the majors had some real world experience of being a skipper in a part 121 operation. That's how it used to work of course, the economy has stopped pilot hiring now. Also with RJs being used more and more on routes where the 737 was king, things may be different in the future.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: London
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Busterplane I agree with you.
I never instructed but after qualifying was fortunate enough to get a job flying F27s on night freight routes. Those first few months taught me more than my previous 2+ years of training for the ATPLs.
Now I'm ready to move onto the jet fleets but if I'm honest I certainly wasn't when I was fresh out of Flying School. You make a very good point when you say flying modern aircraft is a "hands-off" matter. The F27 is certainly the opposite & has given me loads of knowledge to carry forward.
WWW...I think that you'll find the Crossair 146 that crashed last year on a VOR approach was a combination of inexperienced Captain (on type) & F/O with very few flying hours.
I never instructed but after qualifying was fortunate enough to get a job flying F27s on night freight routes. Those first few months taught me more than my previous 2+ years of training for the ATPLs.
Now I'm ready to move onto the jet fleets but if I'm honest I certainly wasn't when I was fresh out of Flying School. You make a very good point when you say flying modern aircraft is a "hands-off" matter. The F27 is certainly the opposite & has given me loads of knowledge to carry forward.
WWW...I think that you'll find the Crossair 146 that crashed last year on a VOR approach was a combination of inexperienced Captain (on type) & F/O with very few flying hours.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Beds
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
>>point us to a single CAA or AAIB report in which FO lack of hours was felt to be in any way an issue in an incident or accident? After all they have been putting Cadets in jets for 30+ years now...<<
WWW, have a look at:
http://www.aaib.dft.gov.uk/formal/garpi/garpi.htm
One of the issues in the Trident PI crash was crew experience.
WWW, have a look at:
http://www.aaib.dft.gov.uk/formal/garpi/garpi.htm
One of the issues in the Trident PI crash was crew experience.
And what of the n-inifity of accidents where the very experienced crew screwed up?
I said AAIB or CAA. The CRM issues in the Gulf Air accident are horrendous and steps way beyond the issue of 200hr jet FO's.
Companies the size and quality of BA, Air France and Lufthansa would not out 200hr FO's in the air if they weren't up to it. It ain't worth the risk. Obviously.
WWW
I said AAIB or CAA. The CRM issues in the Gulf Air accident are horrendous and steps way beyond the issue of 200hr jet FO's.
Companies the size and quality of BA, Air France and Lufthansa would not out 200hr FO's in the air if they weren't up to it. It ain't worth the risk. Obviously.
WWW
Yeah I would be happy with the majority. I trained quite a few and some were damn good pilots with less than 250hrs.
That said the safest place for them to be is not in that performance critical Senecca. Stick 'em in a 737 following an appropriate airline training course and they would be very safe.
You simply can't make huge generalisations about training routes.
WWW
That said the safest place for them to be is not in that performance critical Senecca. Stick 'em in a 737 following an appropriate airline training course and they would be very safe.
You simply can't make huge generalisations about training routes.
WWW
Join Date: May 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"some were damn good pilots" And the rest?
"the safest place" For them or the passengers?
Im not making any huge generalisation at all. As Ive said before fATPLs are well trained as far as the training goes. Its the system that is at fault. Although I have done no basic commercial training I do have some experience of the standard coming out of the schools. I am a TRI.
Im not saying that I was any better than the average with 250hrs in my logbook but I was limited to a BCPL and aerial work such as aerial photography and believe it or not delivering mail in a C206 in the Rockies on a US CPLIRME ticket.
250hrs IS enough when all is going well. When things are rapidly going tits up it `aint. Sorry but that is a basic fact of life! Taking your argument to its logical conclusion would mean putting 2 fATPLs and a total time of 500 hrs into a modern airliner would be ok. And it will be until..................
"the safest place" For them or the passengers?
Im not making any huge generalisation at all. As Ive said before fATPLs are well trained as far as the training goes. Its the system that is at fault. Although I have done no basic commercial training I do have some experience of the standard coming out of the schools. I am a TRI.
Im not saying that I was any better than the average with 250hrs in my logbook but I was limited to a BCPL and aerial work such as aerial photography and believe it or not delivering mail in a C206 in the Rockies on a US CPLIRME ticket.
250hrs IS enough when all is going well. When things are rapidly going tits up it `aint. Sorry but that is a basic fact of life! Taking your argument to its logical conclusion would mean putting 2 fATPLs and a total time of 500 hrs into a modern airliner would be ok. And it will be until..................
It amazes me how some of these threads seem to diverge rapidly into either arguments or point making which hasnt got much to do with the original post. You can take that any way you want.
Yes some were damn good pilots. And some of the others were poor and will always be so. Mostly the process of selection sees to it that they don't end up with jobs involving passengers.
Which is safer? A perf A jet with dozens of system redundancies OR a Perf C/D/E Senecca with very little redundancy?
Personally I'd much rather have - say - an engine fire in a 737 than in a Senecca.
Now of course it would be ideal maybe if everyone carried their first passenger with 1000hrs in their logbook of IFR flying, preferably on type. But that just doesn't happen many times in Europe and hasn't for decades. During all that time there has been no major incident that I can recall whereby training route and low hours has been identified as a cause.
That says to me the system must work.
Of course we'd all rather have Chuck Yeager Jnr in the RHS when we fly. But at the end of the day, an eager young person, fresh off a type rating course, having been signed off by a number of training Captains, who has recently sat the tech exams on the aircraft, and who will in an emergency reach for the QRH and follow it, will just have to do I am afraid.
WWW
Which is safer? A perf A jet with dozens of system redundancies OR a Perf C/D/E Senecca with very little redundancy?
Personally I'd much rather have - say - an engine fire in a 737 than in a Senecca.
Now of course it would be ideal maybe if everyone carried their first passenger with 1000hrs in their logbook of IFR flying, preferably on type. But that just doesn't happen many times in Europe and hasn't for decades. During all that time there has been no major incident that I can recall whereby training route and low hours has been identified as a cause.
That says to me the system must work.
Of course we'd all rather have Chuck Yeager Jnr in the RHS when we fly. But at the end of the day, an eager young person, fresh off a type rating course, having been signed off by a number of training Captains, who has recently sat the tech exams on the aircraft, and who will in an emergency reach for the QRH and follow it, will just have to do I am afraid.
WWW
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Scotland
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Anyway it's all a moot point anyway as if you know the right person in Ryannair then you get in regardless! FACT!"
...When people post statements followed by 'FACT!' it always reminds me of the scene where Inspector Clouseau is running through his idea of the case, and shouting 'FACT!' after every step.
Not having a go, just made me laugh! Is is true??
...When people post statements followed by 'FACT!' it always reminds me of the scene where Inspector Clouseau is running through his idea of the case, and shouting 'FACT!' after every step.
Not having a go, just made me laugh! Is is true??
Guest
Posts: n/a
Would you rather have people getting an Interview with RE who have done 1500 hours going up and down their local railway track in a Piper Cub doing as they please, building naff hours, and recently got their ATPL at a below par school, or someone whose had a recent full integrated Airline Professional Pilots course with top class instruction all the way through?
How about the guys flying Dash 8s, J41, DO 328s and other EFIS types ?
Do you reckon they wouldn't be suitable to fly the 73 or that none of them is good enough to do that ?
When will people realise that its Quality not Quantity that matters with regard to Flying experience/Airmanship!!!!!!
