Flying an Airbus with 140hrs
Hi,
Not critical of the crew's actions here (I haven't even read the report), but something in the summary stood out Commander’s Flying Experience: 4,412 hours (of which 4,272 were on type) |
Well, doing an MPL course cadets can begin flying Airbus or similar aircraft with less than 100 hours experience in real aircraft. They will have substantial simulator experience though and are trained on the SOPs from the sponsoring airline from day one. In fact the line training on their first commercial type is part of their initial license training.
I have flown with quite a few of those MPL cadets and generally they were quite good. |
I would guess that there is an error in the hours summary. My own airline takes pride in the fact that I have 7,000 hours total, but 21,000 on type.
|
It's entirely plausible. Plenty of cadet pilots in Europe get their first jet job in Europe with less than 200 hours.
|
I don't see how you get there with 140 hours even with sim
70 Hours dual total for PPL, CPL and MEIR? 200 is believable, I know plenty of Chinese cadets flying everything from A320s to 777s and A350s who only have 200 hours not on type. |
That'll be 140 hours SEP/MEP plus SIM hours. There will be a regulatory minimum number of 'real' flight hours, but the focus of the training will be in two crew operations, and the licence limited as such.
Someone trained an licenced this way will not be allowed to fly a Cessna (or anything) single pilot, unless/until they also meet the CPL requirements and take the CPL flight test. |
Really not a good idea.
|
Add Sim time onto that. They are not powering down the runway at Luton with 140hrs, just yet.
Really not a good idea. |
Originally Posted by olster
(Post 11171993)
Really not a good idea.
|
I flew with cadets with around 300 hours total time in the A330, most did very well, they could fly the magenta line, program the box and recite the FCOM line and verse with very limited understanding of it's meaning. If it was not on ECAM or in the QRH, we are screwed. So technology has replaced experience, it works up to a point.
I recall at 300 hours I was only just allowed to take the club's Cherokee 6 for a burn. |
Why? If you can barely solo a Cessna 150 without trepidation I fail to see how sitting in the rhs of a Boeing or Airbus is a good idea. Call me a bluff old traditionalist if you will but I prefer a pilot even of the airline variety to have a modicum of flying skill or experience. Reading part B and quoting sops is not really a substitute. It’s probably just me...
|
Easyjet MPL has been around since 2009 to 2012, so it stands that early MPLs could easily have made command by now.
The Easyjet MPL course has only has about 70 to 85 hours of real flying content. So if you ignore sim time you could even have some one with only 70 hours of actual flight time flying as a First Officer at Easyjet. |
Originally Posted by olster
(Post 11172060)
Why? If you can barely solo a Cessna 150 without trepidation I fail to see how sitting in the rhs of a Boeing or Airbus is a good idea. Call me a bluff old traditionalist if you will but I prefer a pilot even of the airline variety to have a modicum of flying skill or experience. Reading part B and quoting sops is not really a substitute. It’s probably just me...
|
I flew with an MPL F/O who had 160 hours total time and the bus was his first twin. They're fine as long as everything stays on the rails and nothing happens that they haven't been trained for in the sim.
Once things go outside the box, there is no previous experience to fall back on and they are stuffed. |
Originally Posted by Check Airman
(Post 11171910)
Hi,
Not critical of the crew's actions here (I haven't even read the report), but something in the summary stood out I thought you needed to have ~200-250 hrs to get a CPL. Have things been relaxed to the extent that pilots with 140 hrs are able to get into an Airbus? At 140 hrs, I hadn't quite figured out crosswind landings yet. (Some would argue that I still haven't but that's for another day :)) |
The flying club where I got my PPL had restrictions on pilots with less than 200 hours total time. They couldn't fly the Mooney as it was a complex single with retractable gear.
Back then, with a CPL and 200 hours you were instructing or doing single engine charter if you were lucky. 1000 hours and an instrument rating got you into a Baron. With 2000 hours, the airlines would look at you. The system wasn't perfect but generally the silly mistakes were made and learned from at piston engine level before you got onto the serious stuff. |
Originally Posted by krismiler
(Post 11172134)
The flying club where I got my PPL had restrictions on pilots with less than 200 hours total time. They couldn't fly the Mooney as it was a complex single with retractable gear.
Back then, with a CPL and 200 hours you were instructing or doing single engine charter if you were lucky. 1000 hours and an instrument rating got you into a Baron. With 2000 hours, the airlines would look at you. The system wasn't perfect but generally the silly mistakes were made and learned from at piston engine level before you got onto the serious stuff. |
Easyjet MPL has been around since 2009 to 2012, so it stands that early MPLs could easily have made command by now. |
Originally Posted by 601
(Post 11172149)
So we could now have two pilots on the fight deck with no real world experience?
|
I can’t think of one time in my 6000 hours flying four different Boeing types that I thought “phew, thank god I did those touch and go’s in the C-172 or I’d really have been in the sh*t”.
Seriously, MPL schemes have been around for almost 15 years. Cadet schemes with 170-200 hour kids straight out of flight school even longer. Flying is safer than it ever has been. Some people need to get over the fact that things have changed from the days of their heroic flight instruction or “single engine charter” hour building, and they’re not going back any time soon. |
Flying is safer than ever? Very recently EK at TO flying at night 75 ft above the buildings…A very young Captain…Then EK Again taking off with no clearance , stopped by the tower, runway was still occupied….QR TO from intersection on 09R in MIA….and there are others…Is that safe ? No…Actually the safety level is not improving…
|
LH landing on the wrong airport runway, BA taking a intersection tkof inappropriately, SU killing people in a Sukhoi, PA no-gear landing, various airlines wrong turns after take-off HKG, yet another N-registered 737 overrun...
|
I was something of an MPL skeptic but having flown with several holders I find them very well trained and capable pilots.
Bear in mind in the large parts of the planet with little GA and small air forces then there is no alternative to the MPL or fATPL route to large aircraft. Where exactly are you going to get 2000 hours on Cessnas and Beeches? |
I have said it elsewhere on this forum. Instructor SEP/MEP or bashing the circuit doesn’t necessarily make a good airline pilot.
We had a 10 year SEP/MEP instructor join my last outfit. Lovely guy and could fly the aircraft fine but operating on the line apparently he was down right dangerous. He got given 3 chances at final line check and failed. Bye bye. His landings etc were all ok but just couldn’t grasp airline flying. I never flew with him but spoke in crew room and all the line trainers said they tried so hard but the penny wasn’t dropping. |
There is ample of opportunity to learn "airline stick and rudder" on the line. But that's also often frowned upon by many...
In my opinion it all depends on what we want to be, button pushers or aviators. Because we're sternly heading for the former. Amplified by MPL licenses, thinner and thinner FCOMs, less and less sim-training. |
Originally Posted by 601
(Post 11172149)
So we could now have two pilots on the fight deck with no real world experience?
Thousands of hours on type within the airline's network in all-weather ops are useless. They should be replaced by drilling holes in a CAVOK sky with a C150. |
Originally Posted by FBW390
(Post 11172194)
Flying is safer than ever? Very recently EK at TO flying at night 75 ft above the buildings…A very young Captain…Then EK Again taking off with no clearance , stopped by the tower, runway was still occupied….QR TO from intersection on 09R in MIA….and there are others…Is that safe ? No…Actually the safety level is not improving…
https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....539af32b4c.png And that doesn’t take into account the massive increase in flights over that time. But hey, stick to your bitter delusional assumption that those who flew a PA28 for 2000 hours are somehow more experienced. I think most people who actually fly commercial aircraft will tell you they gained most of their “experience” through flying commercial aircraft. |
If they can fly the aircraft in a safe manner, I say why not let them?
|
Originally Posted by metalboi69
(Post 11172268)
If they can fly the aircraft in a safe manner, I say why not let them?
|
Originally Posted by tubby linton
(Post 11172306)
A number of reasons including that they do not have the ability to fly the aircraft to its full capability , in particular up to the max crosswind and they have no knowledge of the airfields and airspace they are operating in.
|
One of my previous employers allowed FOs and of course Captains to land the aircraft up to the max crosswind. Can you call yourself a pilot if you cannot do that?
|
Originally Posted by tubby linton
(Post 11172306)
they have no knowledge of the airfields and airspace they are operating in.
|
Originally Posted by FlyingStone
(Post 11172323)
How does one get knowledge of LHR, FRA, CDG etc. and its sorrounding airspace? By flying there with a C172?
Air Europe sent all of their low hour co-pilots to a turboprop operator for a number of years. |
Originally Posted by Vokes55
(Post 11172257)
https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....539af32b4c.png
And that doesn’t take into account the massive increase in flights over that time. But hey, stick to your bitter delusional assumption that those who flew a PA28 for 2000 hours are somehow more experienced. I think most people who actually fly commercial aircraft will tell you they gained most of their “experience” through flying commercial aircraft. Let's take the crash of the Asiana 777 in SFO in July 2013; there has been 3 casualties "only", but was it a safe flight? Not at all, of course; it's different...The pilots showed very poor skills, in fact no skill at all, because they couldn't adapt to a new situation... |
Back in the day, 1994/1995 my CPL, some of us started flying the L-1011 with +/- 160 hrs on the right seat, directly from the lil'school ;)
No EASA, no JAA, only the european CAA acc.each country in EU. In 2001 we did the upgrade to ATPL and then came JAA, EASA, and all those lovely aviation fairytales. |
Yeah flying is safer today thanks to the advanced and robust aircraft we fly nowadays. Definitely not thanks to the pilots. In the last 20/30 years, how many of these accidents or serious incidents could have been avoided if real aviators were in the front?
|
Originally Posted by rudestuff
(Post 11172024)
Why? They've passed a type rating test to the authorities' satisfaction. They're flying multi-crew, they've had their safety pilot released and it's the only type they know so there's no bad/old habits to revert to.
|
Originally Posted by FlyingStone
(Post 11172323)
How does one get knowledge of LHR, FRA, CDG etc. and its sorrounding airspace? By flying there with a C172?
|
Thanks to all who responded. It still seems bizarre that someone so inexperienced can be given that level of responsibility. (Again, not referencing this captain in particular, just the system in general).
|
Originally Posted by tubby linton
(Post 11172321)
One of my previous employers allowed FOs and of course Captains to land the aircraft up to the max crosswind. Can you call yourself a pilot if you cannot do that?
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 10:11. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.