Pay-to-fly wannabee damages Thomas Cook Airbus
At the risk of collecting some of the invective aimed at less experienced pilots, who bent this 757 in 2002 ?
An 11,000 hour captain who'd developed an inappropriate technique. Who was watching over him then ?
I'm not well enough versed in the rights and wrongs / ups and downs of low time pilots on the flight decks of airliners, but it seems to me no-one's immune from making cockups.
Besides, had the FO signed for the aircraft or was it the commander ? So who's finally responsible ?
An 11,000 hour captain who'd developed an inappropriate technique. Who was watching over him then ?
I'm not well enough versed in the rights and wrongs / ups and downs of low time pilots on the flight decks of airliners, but it seems to me no-one's immune from making cockups.
Besides, had the FO signed for the aircraft or was it the commander ? So who's finally responsible ?
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Risk assessment...risk assessment. There will always be errors and misjudgements from experienced crew, the going rate is one every 60 seconds...yes 60 seconds. Losa and ofdm provide the evidence. Lets not encourage an unnecessary risk by lowering the cross bar.
koi
koi
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Doue la Fontaine, France
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After all the dust has settled on this, surely the crux of the matter is that the paying SLF's are entitled to expect that there will be two trained and competent pilots up front.
Nothing against low timers but with 250 hours they can hardly have had time to look around!
As someone else posted, no US carrier would look at a candidate with less then 1000 hrs. No guarantee that they will be better but at least they will have shown that they paid their dues to aviation- and not in cash.
Nothing against low timers but with 250 hours they can hardly have had time to look around!
As someone else posted, no US carrier would look at a candidate with less then 1000 hrs. No guarantee that they will be better but at least they will have shown that they paid their dues to aviation- and not in cash.
Mistrust in Management
Roy Bouchier
On the face of it, and to be reasonable to you, I can understand your concerns. However just to look at this particular example I fail to see that pax safety was put at 'undue' risk.
As others have pointed out we are unlikely to ever have the luxury of new Pilots being trained by flying empty Airbuses and Boeings around for hundreds of hours. It can happen if the 'paying SLF's' are prepared to pay significantly more for air travel. All the indicators in the world economy this year would seem to indicate that SLF's will try and find the cheapest ticket without a care to how many hours the chap in the RH seat has - I can't see that situation changing anytime soon.
If you want to fly with a UK airline then you will have to run the risk of the chance that the chap in the RH seat has less than 1000 hours on type. Only yesterday my F/O taught me a thing or two and he only had 200 hours in total of commercial operations, all in a 757. Was I worried about his experience - not in the least - and in my opinion nor should you be.
By the way do you also worry about junior Officers on cross channel ferries? Or how about new train drivers? New ATC Officers? How about junior Doctors? Did you ask your Dentist how many teeth he has pulled?
Regards
Exeng
As others have pointed out we are unlikely to ever have the luxury of new Pilots being trained by flying empty Airbuses and Boeings around for hundreds of hours. It can happen if the 'paying SLF's' are prepared to pay significantly more for air travel. All the indicators in the world economy this year would seem to indicate that SLF's will try and find the cheapest ticket without a care to how many hours the chap in the RH seat has - I can't see that situation changing anytime soon.
If you want to fly with a UK airline then you will have to run the risk of the chance that the chap in the RH seat has less than 1000 hours on type. Only yesterday my F/O taught me a thing or two and he only had 200 hours in total of commercial operations, all in a 757. Was I worried about his experience - not in the least - and in my opinion nor should you be.
By the way do you also worry about junior Officers on cross channel ferries? Or how about new train drivers? New ATC Officers? How about junior Doctors? Did you ask your Dentist how many teeth he has pulled?
Regards
Exeng
Last edited by exeng; 22nd Dec 2008 at 10:06. Reason: Spelling as usual
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Doue la Fontaine, France
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Exeng - all points taken except that in this case the FO was clearly incompetent. Had he been in the military he would have been relegated to the cookhouse long ago! But this was a management problem of course.
According to the AAIB Report...
1. The incompetence of the FO in flare and landing phase was identified early during the FO's sim training.
2. The FO's incompetence in these areas continued throughout his sim training.
3. The FO's incompetence was identified again during flight training on the aircraft required for licence endorsement.
4. The FO's incompetence was identified during line training in which of 28 landing attempts, the captain had to intervene on 9 occasions.
5. The FO's incompetence was again identified when the aircraft monitoring system identified an earlier hard landing for which he was counseled.
6. And finally the FO's incompetence was indentified when he hard landed the accident aircraft causing severe damage to the main landing gear.
However, the REAL incompetence was demonstrated by the Airline's Management in not acting in the manner that a fair-minded man would expect as a minimum duty of care to prevent this FO becoming the threat to public transportation safety that eventually resulted in the subject accident.
1. The incompetence of the FO in flare and landing phase was identified early during the FO's sim training.
2. The FO's incompetence in these areas continued throughout his sim training.
3. The FO's incompetence was identified again during flight training on the aircraft required for licence endorsement.
4. The FO's incompetence was identified during line training in which of 28 landing attempts, the captain had to intervene on 9 occasions.
5. The FO's incompetence was again identified when the aircraft monitoring system identified an earlier hard landing for which he was counseled.
6. And finally the FO's incompetence was indentified when he hard landed the accident aircraft causing severe damage to the main landing gear.
However, the REAL incompetence was demonstrated by the Airline's Management in not acting in the manner that a fair-minded man would expect as a minimum duty of care to prevent this FO becoming the threat to public transportation safety that eventually resulted in the subject accident.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: north
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Two points
1: The uk licence until recently was greatly respected for its difficulty to get and the standards set in check ride tolerance.
Since JAR , however, there are three ways to get a job. The front door which costs money to open but everyone sounds like a good chap so they must be good (sstr). The back door which ryr and the like exploit thru loopholes validations, and being registered in dubln with the hq in stn, milking the gullible and desperate etc etc.
The third way is the patio doors which is a sstr system using the likes of Turkey (jar ha ha)where it is even possible to pay for the left seat line trg and check..
One such product is still managing to blag his way thru the uk companies, I think race card is the preferred methodology at the moment. A dangerous individual by all accounts and from personnal interaction.
2: BEN. The reason you may have had conflicting info on landing technique at XL is because you may have had one or two of the known total plonkers talking nonsense who could barely land themselves.
There was never any comittment to weeding these guys out regardless of how many tailstrikes, nervous breakdowns or hissy fits they had.
The best guys to have helped you had changed fleet have now moved onwards and upwards.Unlike the selected few mentioned above whose real employability outside their protected bubble is evident.
The biggest Irony of all. The head of CRM being the jumpiest most talentless LTC in the world and the grumpiest moodiest most difficult person (tosser) to fly with since early sabre days. Demonstrating a lack of appropiate skills that was a laughing stock and company joke. Didnt stop them lording it over poor saps like BEN though.
In short . Give this guy a break. A well as the good guys the trg system is full of blaggers, plonkers, arrogannt know alls.This poor guy is probably at his wits end and all we can do is sink the knife in deeper.
Hardly fair when in my experience partially alluded to above , there but for the grace of god, luck and timed served go alot of todays current and useless trainers.
1: The uk licence until recently was greatly respected for its difficulty to get and the standards set in check ride tolerance.
Since JAR , however, there are three ways to get a job. The front door which costs money to open but everyone sounds like a good chap so they must be good (sstr). The back door which ryr and the like exploit thru loopholes validations, and being registered in dubln with the hq in stn, milking the gullible and desperate etc etc.
The third way is the patio doors which is a sstr system using the likes of Turkey (jar ha ha)where it is even possible to pay for the left seat line trg and check..
One such product is still managing to blag his way thru the uk companies, I think race card is the preferred methodology at the moment. A dangerous individual by all accounts and from personnal interaction.
2: BEN. The reason you may have had conflicting info on landing technique at XL is because you may have had one or two of the known total plonkers talking nonsense who could barely land themselves.
There was never any comittment to weeding these guys out regardless of how many tailstrikes, nervous breakdowns or hissy fits they had.
The best guys to have helped you had changed fleet have now moved onwards and upwards.Unlike the selected few mentioned above whose real employability outside their protected bubble is evident.
The biggest Irony of all. The head of CRM being the jumpiest most talentless LTC in the world and the grumpiest moodiest most difficult person (tosser) to fly with since early sabre days. Demonstrating a lack of appropiate skills that was a laughing stock and company joke. Didnt stop them lording it over poor saps like BEN though.
In short . Give this guy a break. A well as the good guys the trg system is full of blaggers, plonkers, arrogannt know alls.This poor guy is probably at his wits end and all we can do is sink the knife in deeper.
Hardly fair when in my experience partially alluded to above , there but for the grace of god, luck and timed served go alot of todays current and useless trainers.
Last edited by wee one; 22nd Dec 2008 at 13:09.
I've got a great idea. Why don't we invite all passengers to pay 3 times the fare that they are presently paying so that we can spend the extra 66% on the specialised training and experience that they are demanding.
I can think of nothing nicer than being allowed to fly an empty 747 for 100 hours between international airports just to keep them happy.
On the other hand, any airline that tried this idea would never get another passenger on to their aeroplanes. Passengers' pockets are usually deeper than the Mariana Trench and their understanding of aviation matters is usually in inverse proportion!
What a shame!
I can think of nothing nicer than being allowed to fly an empty 747 for 100 hours between international airports just to keep them happy.
On the other hand, any airline that tried this idea would never get another passenger on to their aeroplanes. Passengers' pockets are usually deeper than the Mariana Trench and their understanding of aviation matters is usually in inverse proportion!
What a shame!
Mistrust in Management
JohnR
I see your view in respect of experience when problems arise.
However in essence this area comes under the umbrella of risk management. No activity is entirely risk free as you know and it is the regulator (CAA) and then the operator (airline) that decides what level of risk is acceptable. The CAA and this airline (as well as many others) have decided that putting low houred Pilots into the RH seat on commercial flights for the purposes of line training is an acceptable risk. I agree with that risk assessment but I can see why you and others do not.
You must be aware that all Pilots (Commanders, F/O's and F/E's) are put through a stringent set of checks each year to ensure they are competent. We can carry on with the 'what if's' for ever and a day in order to make a point. What if both engines fail, the Skipper has a heart attack and all airports in Europe close due fog?
In this case it would seem that the training department may not have carried out their duties correctly. If that is the case then that particular situation must be addressed by the airline and/or the regulator.
We seem to have waited for decades so far so you tell me.
I agree entirely. Perhaps he was having a bad day for some reason or another. Could fatigue have been a factor? Now the risk analysis of current FTL's is something that is worth a look at in my opinion. If the SLF's would voluntarily start paying another 50% for their tickets we could enjoy FTL's that pose far less risk to the operation.
Apologies for thread drift.
Regards
Exeng
However in essence this area comes under the umbrella of risk management. No activity is entirely risk free as you know and it is the regulator (CAA) and then the operator (airline) that decides what level of risk is acceptable. The CAA and this airline (as well as many others) have decided that putting low houred Pilots into the RH seat on commercial flights for the purposes of line training is an acceptable risk. I agree with that risk assessment but I can see why you and others do not.
All well and good, provided the pilot in the LHS is fit to do his job, surely?
I think passengers would be a bit unnerved if more realised that these pilots who haven't even completed all their assessments are being trained in loaded A319s.
How long do we wait for a real problem?
Everyone's human, and according to the AAIB report the training captain on this flight did not realise there was an unusually high rate of descent until it was too late.
Apologies for thread drift.
Regards
Exeng
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Manchester
Age: 45
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Surely the crux of this is that some people do not have the ability to fly aircraft, whether that be cognitive skills, communication, or even hand eye co-ordination.
Unfortunately aviation is heading down the licensing road that car-users have, in that having a license is a basic human right, regardless of ability. The number of appalling drivers WITH licenses is incredible, including those with licenses granted from other countries
It's going to get far worse before it gets better. I remember having an argument a few years back with a Dash 8 driver about the carriage of tropical fish, he was an F/O with not great experience, but had paid his way in. His argument was that you can't carry AVI in an unpressurised hold as they would die from lack of O2
Unfortunately aviation is heading down the licensing road that car-users have, in that having a license is a basic human right, regardless of ability. The number of appalling drivers WITH licenses is incredible, including those with licenses granted from other countries
It's going to get far worse before it gets better. I remember having an argument a few years back with a Dash 8 driver about the carriage of tropical fish, he was an F/O with not great experience, but had paid his way in. His argument was that you can't carry AVI in an unpressurised hold as they would die from lack of O2
Guest
Posts: n/a
His argument was that you can't carry AVI in an unpressurised hold as they would die from lack of O2
He was right. Depending of course on how high you were going to fly and for how long. Ever wonder why (good) petshops pressurise the polythene bag when they sell you fish?
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: FUBAR
Posts: 3,348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's ask the fish. . . . . . . . . "because the fish knows. . . .everything "
Come on guys, bit of Christmas humour, I'll name it in 1 ? 2 ? artiste or album, in fact both please.
Come on guys, bit of Christmas humour, I'll name it in 1 ? 2 ? artiste or album, in fact both please.
what goes around comes around (or down !)
A sign of the times I fear;
commercial pressure = stress = high demands = lowering of standards.
Nuff said I feel.
IN CASE OF MIS-INTERPRETATION;
I'M DEFINATELY NOT KNOCKING UP & COMING CREW, THEY MUST & SHOULD BE ENCOURAGED, I'M JUST KNOCKING THE UNREASONABLE COMMERCIAL DEMANDS PLACED UPON THEM & CREWS IN GENERAL.
HAPPY XMAS FOLKS, FLY SAFE :-)
commercial pressure = stress = high demands = lowering of standards.
Nuff said I feel.
IN CASE OF MIS-INTERPRETATION;
I'M DEFINATELY NOT KNOCKING UP & COMING CREW, THEY MUST & SHOULD BE ENCOURAGED, I'M JUST KNOCKING THE UNREASONABLE COMMERCIAL DEMANDS PLACED UPON THEM & CREWS IN GENERAL.
HAPPY XMAS FOLKS, FLY SAFE :-)
Just another number
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Age: 76
Posts: 1,077
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FCTN 04/09 published by the CAA in response to this incident.
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/FCTN200904.pdf
Dave
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/FCTN200904.pdf
Dave
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: W of 30W
Posts: 1,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Recommendation
Trainers should develop a modified scan that should include changes to attitude, idle power selection and, ideally, sidestick movement.
Trainers should develop a modified scan that should include changes to attitude, idle power selection and, ideally, sidestick movement.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: 45 yards from a tropical beach
Posts: 1,103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Training
According to the AAIB Report...
1. The incompetence of the FO in flare and landing phase was identified early during the FO's sim training.
2. The FO's incompetence in these areas continued throughout his sim training.
3. The FO's incompetence was identified again during flight training on the aircraft required for licence endorsement.
4. The FO's incompetence was identified during line training in which of 28 landing attempts, the captain had to intervene on 9 occasions.
IMHO a major point has been overlooked. Hands up now, how many of you have ever had a Training Captain or other Instructor actually demonstrate a landing in the Sim? Damn few, I'll be bound. All most of them do is criticise mistakes after the event.
"Demonstrate; direct; monitor." What happened to that basic training dictum? Not even a few extra circuits in the sim would be required; in most cases, merely a 'freeze' at 500 feet on finals and several subsequent landings to get the techniques nailed would be enough. One problem is that the trainers are reluctant to demonstrate, in fear of making a mistake. No sweat, analyse the mistake and make it a training point. The student will respect you for that.
The answer to the low-time F/O is not more hours, it is more honest training.
1. The incompetence of the FO in flare and landing phase was identified early during the FO's sim training.
2. The FO's incompetence in these areas continued throughout his sim training.
3. The FO's incompetence was identified again during flight training on the aircraft required for licence endorsement.
4. The FO's incompetence was identified during line training in which of 28 landing attempts, the captain had to intervene on 9 occasions.
IMHO a major point has been overlooked. Hands up now, how many of you have ever had a Training Captain or other Instructor actually demonstrate a landing in the Sim? Damn few, I'll be bound. All most of them do is criticise mistakes after the event.
"Demonstrate; direct; monitor." What happened to that basic training dictum? Not even a few extra circuits in the sim would be required; in most cases, merely a 'freeze' at 500 feet on finals and several subsequent landings to get the techniques nailed would be enough. One problem is that the trainers are reluctant to demonstrate, in fear of making a mistake. No sweat, analyse the mistake and make it a training point. The student will respect you for that.
The answer to the low-time F/O is not more hours, it is more honest training.
Dog Tired
IMHO a major point has been overlooked. Hands up now, how many of you have ever had a Training Captain or other Instructor actually demonstrate a landing in the Sim? Damn few, I'll be bound. All most of them do is criticise mistakes after the event.
Moreover, on their very first revenue flight, I usually flew the first sector and they auto-landed theirs. Best demo you could offer.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: the balmy beautiful south
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1500 hours of air taxi operation in a single crew twin wouldn't have gone amiss either.
+1 Basic hands and feet should not be an issue at the point in one's career where they are allowed to handle a large jet...FLAME AWAY