Florida's pilot factory

[Jet_A_Knight]

Flying privatly Cessna/whatever piston for a prolonged period (over 5 years let's say) often makes pilot no longer suitable for airline environment, because along with raw flying skills (good) he also getting adopted to single pilot, light aircraft, VFR etc.

That is absolute horse****.

Where I come from, many, many airline pilots have successfully transitioned from extensive single pilot IFR operations in high performance piston and turbine twins into multicrew jet airliner operations - it is not rocket science.

It is far easier for a pilot with extensive single pilot experience to transition to jet multicrew ops, than it is for a magenta wunderkind to revert back to raw data/ basic instrument flying sans automation when things go off the rails.

Experience, eh! Who needs it?

[Will Fraser]

Jet A Knight- adamantly agree and you frame the basic issue for me.

Transition from 5k hours in singles, light twin is a type change.

One could argue that a sim child is making a transition into aviation itself, from a separate world without sufficient handling/weather experience.

If that's accurate, the argument becomes "what is more important", CRM, rosters, and fuel burn, or flying the a/c.

[Re-Heat]

Perhaps a few of our European/UK management types in the airline industry there might like to reconsider the modus operande regarding very low time First Officers, and their use on passenger carrying revenue flights.

Well, he would be shocked to find quality airlines such as BA, BOAC, Air France, Lufthansa, KLM and Iberia have all trained cadet pilots safely for many years.

He might also be more shocked to find that junior fast jet pilots carrying live weapons may frequently have fewer than 500 hours total flying experience.

Quality, not quantity is the name of the game.

Problem with today's environment is that every single operator thinks they are quality and treats regulation limits as an operational goals rather than limits that should be well-avoided - ranging from flight time limitations to minimum training time.

Of course, the real carriers who use cadet pilots allow their training teams discretion to fly more circuits on base training / more sim sessions etc. When you pay to fly, you don't have that luxury...

It is far easier for a pilot with extensive single pilot experience to transition to jet multicrew ops, than it is for a magenta wunderkind to revert back to raw data/ basic instrument flying sans automation when things go off the rails.

There are many exceptions to that broad statement...

[Rednex]

Very different in Europe than America. Have trained several 200 hour cadets fresh from there type rating and they are excellent, much easier to train and almost always do much better compared to someone who has flown turbo props, high hour instructor etc. Maybe the FAA should make it difficult for people to gain comm licences, or start a type of qualification for pilots who are aimming to be airline pilots ( Commercial licence on steroids). Also why don't airlines make new joins do a full typerating? Not a SIC rating.
Just out of intrest, why do US airlines allow crew to live all over the place?? Long haul would be an issue but if your a shorthaul pilot why not make crew live within 60 minutes of there base?
It seems that maybe the FAA should look at other countries procedures with regards to low hour FOs.

[Colla]

And have you maby thought about there are maby 5 times more pilot training going on in just the state of Florida than any part in Europe.. Only that makes the odds of an accident even bigger in FL

FAA concentrates on flying and orals and maby not so much on the written parts.

JAA requires alot more theoretical studying, but the checkrides is a piece of cake.

And yes I have licenses from both authorities.

[MoodyBlue]

Re-Heat, very well said, and well done to counter some of the oversimplified views on the matter.

I was a 250-hour wonder myself 27 years ago (actually, 235 hours and 17 minutes), have flown with many hundreds of them since on medium and heavy jets, trained scores of them. As you say, it's about quality (of both selection and training!), and about providing the amount of training that is needed i.s.o. the amount that the individual or the company is willing to pay for.

I want to tread carefully here, but the one's I've seen getting in trouble in training were often not the 250-hour wonders.

[Stop Stop Stop]

I wonder if he knows about many European airlines that have 250 hour 'wonders' in the RHS, with revenue passengers?

I think this is often the norm these days in Europe. However, some certain European airlines have jet captains operating with only just over six times this amount and possibly less real experience if you don't count hours built and logged as a cruise relief pilot. Some of these captains only have six months' experience as a first officer before being given 'the ship!'

Would 411A be horrified by that?

[Carnage Matey!]

Originally Posted by kwachon

Regarding the time frame difference for getting typed by JAA and FAA, they are quite frankly, that the Europeans are still working on 50 year old knowledge and testing. Since when do you have to do a landing performance problem based on an L1011 landing on grass which is wet and greater than 2 inches long!

All that 'Performance A' BS occurs during the ATPL ground school, long before anybody gets a type rating, so it doesn't answer the question of why does a FAA type rating take half the time of a JAA one. The FAA may be working on more modern testing for their ATPLs but given that the questions are all available to buy in advance under freedom of information rules it's not really much of a test.

[DA50driver]

FAA vs. JAA

Please keep in mind that most pilots in the US have university degrees as well as the flying experience(not all, but a good chunk). It makes for a better rounded individual in the long run, and I don't know of anyone in my circle of friends that studied the answers only to pass the written tests.

I think a big part of the problem is the quickie schools. I spent a good chunk of my life at the airport learning to fly over a span of approximately 5 years. I learned more listening to the old timers than any textbook or King video could ever teach. I spent a year flying freight in icy conditions single pilot. Without the old guys advice I would be dead.

I also spent some time at one of the big Aviation Universities in the northern US. It was the blind leading the blind, 300 hour pilots imparting their wisdom to other students and instructors.

I would suggest that we set a higher standard for our profession. Require a 4 year university degree in something besides basket-weaving. In addition there should be a minimum time spent in training that will allow people to actually absorb the knowledge required, as opposed to rote memorization.

Finally I think we should do away with the uniforms. That would eliminate all the attention seekers that enter our business just because they like the glory walk through the terminal. (They haven't realized that most people snicker at them behind their backs. The public has figured out that teenagers at McDonalds makes more than you. Not much glory left).

[MarkerInbound]

Most of the type rating programs I've seen run 80-100 class room hours with 6-7 sims and some fixed base training time thown in. For a long time, type rating courses had you "build" the airplane. The FAA has come to realize that if you can't do anything about it, there's no reason to worry about it. For example, there are 3 temp sensors that will cause a pack trip in a 727. You can read two of those temperatures on the F/E's panel. Do you really need to know what temperature sets off the third sensor? I spent 15 minutes one day with a FAA inspector discussing which bus powered a warning light, even the other two Feds in the room were shaking their heads. Light comes on, it's telling you X, the checklist will have you do Y, next question.

[MarkerInbound]

Rednex,

The ground school training for a SIC is the same as a PIC at US airlines. The checkride is about the same, SIC don't have to do steep turns, no flap landings and if it is a 3 or 4 engine, they don't have to perform a landing with 2 engines inop. They don't have to schedule a FAA/ADE person for the checkride if it's just at the SIC level which makes it simplier for the airline.

As to living within 60 minutes of your base, I've known pilots who've had their base change 5 times in a years.

[stilton]

In case your college education did not allow you to understand DA50 there are some very good reasons for uniforms. It needs to be clear who are crewmembers and who are not, especially in an emergency when passengers are looking for guidance in an evacuation for example (never understood how SWA get's away with out a clearly recognisable one for their FA'S)




Don't know about snickering, I would be interested to meet a teenage Mcdonalds employee making more than any Airline Pilot.



You seem to have a small chip on your shoulder old chap, turned down by the Airlines were you ?

[GlueBall]

I have found most new pilots to have an aversion for manual flying, afraid to disconnect A/T and A/P in a timely manner.

The classic upset occurs when the automatics has an anomaly and when the new pilot then attempts to correct it by introducing more automatics. Often I have to tell the new pilot: "If the airplane is not doing what you want it to do, go manual momentarily and stabilize the flight path, put the airplane where you want it, then reengage the automatics. Don't wait until you're 300 feet over, or 20 knots slow, or 1 mile off your SID/STAR track, grab the wheel now and correct."

[radial090]

glueball

its unfair to blame the new pilots, it depends on the training they have recieved, two completely different schools. One stresses the manual flying and raw data skills are necessary in case everything goes wrong on a dark a stormy night in a bad place, the other one thinks that the the autopilot is more accurate and allows for a less stressful "management", of the flight deck and the chances of you having a failure in modern aircraft that you are without a autopilot are virtually non existent.

So blame the instructors

[Tee Emm]

I make full use of all the time for the oral, I have been known to go for 4 hours on more than one occasion mainly because I do not want to rush the process

Four hours for an oral!!! You must get paid by the hour? If you cannot tell how good a candidate is in under an hour of intelligent and reasonable questions then time you went into retirement. No candidate should ever have to put up with that sort of bulls...

[Tee Emm]

Require a 4 year university degree in something besides basket-weaving.

We would never had time to win the Second World War if a degree in aviation was a pre-requisite to be a pilot. A Degree means exactly nothing apart from getting a job ahead of the great unwashed. It certainly does not guarantee you will make a good pilot.
One of my colleagues graduated from the military in 15 months and first flew the P51 Mustang when he was 20 years old with 210 flying hours. He was a captain on four engine heavy bombers at age 22 and a check and training captain at age 24.

[DA50driver]

Turned down by airlines?

I was offered a job with the airlines after going through the selection process. I was then offered a job on a privately owned airplane prior to the start of training at the airline. I realized I could make a better living on this side of the fence and have never looked back. I fly an airplane with all the latest bells and whistles and have 6500nm range.

The copilot at Colgan Air was making 16k US a year. Mickey D's will pay you more than that. As to uniformed crew members your cabin attendants will pretty much take care of that, how come they don't wear stripes and such? What you think of as a uniform is just an outfit if they are by themselves. Maybe you should wear High Visibility vests?

Regarding the unwashed comment I used to drive a truck for my dad's little trucking company. Still have a commercial drivers license and love to drive when I can.

[Dan Winterland]

I think the problem first mentioned here relates to the schools who try to guarentee a qualification at a minimum price. This often means a minimum standard as well. My airline employs 200 hour cadets and puts them on widebodies. But these cadets are employed by the company from the onset, they go to one of the best schools in the world, their progress is monitored by the airline throughout the course and when they arrive back in the home country to start flying, they get extra sim training and are not out on line unless everyone is satisfied they are up to the required standard. And several do fall by the wayside if they aren't.

Contrast this to an individual who gets their ATPL at he cheapest school, scrapes through their ratings, pays for their own type rating and gets employed by an operator who wants pilots at the lowest cost, pays poorly and doesn't expect their pilots to hang around after they have accumulated enough experience to on to a better job.

The industry is it's own worse enemy in this respect. The lower airlines cut ticket prices to be competative and the net result is they have to employ the lowest common denominator, the pilot who just makes the minimum standards. The regulators have a part to play in this. They set standards which are a minimum requirement, but as in Flight Time Limitations, these become the target and little is done about it.

The manifestation of this problem is the airlines who allow pay for ratings and line training pilots fly their aircraft on revenue flights. Recently, one British registered A320 was very badly damaged by one of these pilots - with fare paying passengers on board. This guy wasn't the sharpest tool in the box, but the airline still allowed him to fly thier aircraft even though they probably wouldn't have employed him based on his experience and prior performance.

[Two's in]

As my first Military flight instructor put it, "I could teach your Granny to fly this airplane given the time, but you've got exactly 90 minutes to demonstrate you have assimilated every lesson I teach you - competently and safely".

That approach is pretty standard for non-paying students, the problems start when people can just throw more money at the problem. Starting a training program with aptitude and flying grading tests certainly weeds out those who simply don't have the aptitude, then manage to get lucky (or unlucky) on exams and check rides until it's dark, icy, and everything has gone wrong.

Before castigating these training orgainizations though, you might want to ask yourself what kind of regulatory and test authority is allowing this level of inexperience and skill loose in a commercial airplane in the first place. These training organizations simply train students to pass the test, it's the FAA/JAA rules that set the test standards in the first place.

[Will Fraser]

All involved know exactly what is going on, any one doubt that? It is not mysterious, and hence there are no real surprises, right?

What kind of predictable 'accident' will foment the change, and by whom?