Ultra Cautious Pilots

[SpaceBetweenThoughts]

It may be me showing advancing years but I notice that some of the newly trained pilots appear to be over cautious:-

Comments such as "It's windy today" when the max wind is 25kts. They should really fly when it is "windy"

"There were some massive thunderstorms around yesterday" - yes but theres nothing on the sig weather today and we have got radar - if you want to see big thunderstorms then cross the ITCZ or go into Singapore when the duty CB is around.

"It's bumpy today" - when you are in light chop - how would they cope with severe turbulence?

"Do you want to go round that weather?" when it's a small Cumulus and there's nothing showing on the radar!

Now I know it could be argued that erring on the side of caution is better than the opposite but I feel that Ultra Caution shows a lack of confidence and indeed a lack of knowledge.

But this got me thinking - is this a culture change? Are the newbies being taught to think this way? Is this the right way to go?

[Bealzebub]

It may be me showing advancing years but I notice that some of the newly trained pilots appear to be over cautious

Yes and this surprises you, why ? Wouldn't you expect anybody "newly trained" to a role to be very cautious ? These are people with very little or virtually no practical experience. As time passes they will acquire practical experience and a greater exposure to differing and more difficult scenarios. That is part of the learning process. Most companies will set stricter limits on new pilots with regards to such things as crosswinds. They will also expect their commanders to apply high levels of discretion and monitoring when deciding on the allocation of roles and tasks on any given day. For the newly trained First Officer, confidence will develop as part of a planned strategy where communication between the commander and him/herself together with exposure to a much greater variety of weather conditions, and technical scenarios will allow them to learn and expand their own comfort zones.

Comments such as "Its windy today" or "do you want to go around that weather", or "there were massive thunderstorms around yesterday", may well be part of the normal interaction process between a new pilot and his more experienced senior counterpart. On the other hand it may well be a subtle hint to you as the senior pilot, that this pilot is aware of his own inexperience and limitations and naturally restricted levels of confidence. In other words it is a reminder to you, of what you should be expecting ?

I don't think this is any different to the way it has always been, however the difference that may exist is that many more "very low hour pilots" are now being fed onto the line, who lack the levels of experience and general flying exposure than was once the norm. However many of them tend to have higher levels of CRM awareness (particularly self awareness) than was always historically the case.

As a Captain you should be aware of, and alert to these subtle clues and use them to help develop the new pilot from an inexperienced "ultra cautious" individual, into a more experienced but still cautious individual. Hopefully they will never become a very experienced pilot who throws caution to the wind. Their learning process didn't stop when they were released to the line, in fact in many ways it only just began.

Now I know it could be argued that erring on the side of caution is better than the opposite but I feel that Ultra Caution shows a lack of confidence and indeed a lack of knowledge.

Again yes, but add to that a lack of experience and a lack of mentoring and you have what pretty much every such low hour pilot is seeking. They want experience, they want to learn by guidance and example, they want to become confident. It is part of your job to satisfy those requirements.

[point8six]

Why not give them the confidence and knowledge you feel they lack, through your experience? Every pilot has to accumulate these skills and you could be a valuable role-model to them.

[silversaab]

Agree with much of what has been mooted, and the reality is that airlines are run differently now. Where once airlines were managed in a more "holistic" way, everything is directed solely by the mighty $$ now.

Bottom line is that with the combination of a shortage of pilots and airlines reluctant to "spend" any more time or money on training than the bare minimum, the result is a "rush-rush" mentality where, naturally, newbies don't get to chew the fat, get reasonable time for rest, review and reflection, and enjoy being able to settle into a job with that "old-fashioned" feeling of confidence about their knowledge and ability being in step with the demands of the job.

And it isn't much different in other challenging areas of aviation....

[SNS3Guppy]

Now I know it could be argued that erring on the side of caution is better than the opposite but I feel that Ultra Caution shows a lack of confidence and indeed a lack of knowledge.

What it shows is a lack of experience. As you're the one guiding them through the experience forthe first time, the law of primacy in learning says that you may very well set the stage for how they deal with each of these things in the future.

[Dream Land]

Just answered a post in TECH about an A320 pilot not familiar with operating at night with landing lights U/S, yes agree with posters about experience levels changing, statements I've heard recently:

1. "Wow, I've never been to FL390 before."

2. (While balancing fuel) "What are you doing, I haven't seen anyone do this before?"

[jolly girl]

SBT –
I’ve begun to notice this with the flight students as well. A few years ago I was running some students through a regime in the (simulator) lab and running through the data there was a confound that was stronger than any of the effects we were measuring. What we found was that in this particular scenario, flight school was the biggest predictor of behavior; students who had received their primary training at a small flight school with flexible training plans were (surprise) flexible in their problem solving, while students who had trained at a formal, structured program navigated the scenario using the school’s pre-determined criteria. The students from small schools came up with a wide variety of solutions while the students from one of the local schools all had the same solution.
This project was looking at the influence of one of Hofstede’s cultural dimensions; I attribute what was observed to the dimension he labeled “uncertainty avoidance.” (Unfortunately this wasn’t the one I was looking at.) Cultures strong in uncertainty avoidance look to authority to guide their behavior while cultures low in uncertainty trust the individuals to make decisions at the local level. It got me wondering whether the formal structure of some flight schools (instituted to reduce risk of their operations) is actually costing us in the form of decision-making skills.
Thoughts?

[BOAC]

The modern tendency to 'caution' is easily understood. It now devolves more heavily on operators to institute a programme of 'enhancement' and 'progression' for these newbies over the early part of their careers so they are ready for life's curved balls. Sadly a few operators turn a convenient blind eye to this and we finish up with a number of 'extra autopilots' in the RHS. Perfectly capable of routine operations - FMC programming, LNAVing and 20 mile ILS's etc, but.......................

[Sepi]

I'm currently a trainee who has recently got CPL and can see what SpaceBetweenThoughts is getting at. More than that, I fear that when I'm thrown into a jet on very low hours I will be the inexperienced pilot you describe!

A lot of it MUST come down to the low hours pilots entering the business have these days. I'll be lucky to have 200hours to my name when I'm job hunting! Just chatting to some instructors shows me how much GA experience I'll be missing out on and how character building that experience would be. You certainly wouldn't hear someone who has been night flying a twin between CBs on an NDB nav on newspaper runs complaining during light chop! My worst turbulence experience on the other hand has been as a passenger in the back of an airliner, so could someone in my position really be at fault for making the comments you have brought up?!

Additionally, when flying with experienced pilots, I will often comment on cloud/turbulence etc just as a point of conversation! You normally even get a story about an experience they had once, which makes for good listening.

On the other hand so far on my training we are strongly encouraged to stay on the safe side even down to hazard avoiding forests so you are always over fields to land in if it all starts going wrong. Seemed a little over the top to me!

[SNS3Guppy]

A lot of it MUST come down to the low hours pilots entering the business have these days. I'll be lucky to have 200hours to my name when I'm job hunting! Just chatting to some instructors shows me how much GA experience I'll be missing out on and how character building that experience would be. You certainly wouldn't hear someone who has been night flying a twin between CBs on an NDB nav on newspaper runs complaining during light chop! My worst turbulence experience on the other hand has been as a passenger in the back of an airliner, so could someone in my position really be at fault for making the comments you have brought up?!

Be sure to let us know which airline a sub-200 hour pilot is flying for, so we can keep our families clear. While I'm sure it's a wonderful experience for you, you have no business being there, and the company has no business putting you there. You really ought to have some experience under your belt first.

More than that, I fear that when I'm thrown into a jet on very low hours I will be the inexperienced pilot you describe!

Everyone starts somewhere, but there really is such a thing as walking before you crawl and crawling before you walk.

Over the years I've had an occasional extremely inexperienced pilot handed me with whom I'm scheduled to fly. In many cases, it's worked out fine, but on two occasions I've written letters to the chief pilot recommending their termination...as did every other captain with whom they flew. On one occasion I was assigned to fly with a captain so new that as we taxied out, he surveyed the low overcast and whistled, then said "Wow. This is just like the simulator."

He turned out quite well as time went on. I'd let my family fly with him. But for that one, single, inexperienced comment coming from the captain's seat, I wanted to reach over and cuff him upside the back of the head.

[Sepi]

That's fair enough, I'll let you know! Might be working those night newspaper running flights if a few more captains think like you though!

Do you not see some of the comments quoted on this thread as something an excited new FO would say? It doesn't necessarily mean they are naive and not worthy of being in the right hand seat! Don't you find it more refreshing than flying with just another FO?

"Wow. This is just like the simulator."

Couldn't that be..."wow its so good to see what I've practiced for in reality"?!

"Wow, I've never been to FL390 before."

How about..."It's so exciting to see new things and gain new experiences"

Just because it's someone's first doesn't mean they shouldn't be doing it and it sure as hell shouldn't mean they can't voice their excitement!

I agree with the general trend of the thread but if you want flexible thinking from FOs I think there needs to be flexible thinking Captains... Lead by example, his forum is about CRM after all...

[OnePercenter]

To be fair, I have over ten thousand hours, and seem to still learn things every time I go up...might be not an 'oh wow' type of thing anymore...but something..Once you've experienced it all, or feel like you have, maybe it's time to try something else...I took a break, best thing I could do..Everybody should be learning, should have the mind of a student...always trying to be better, not bring shame to the game as they say..I can't comment on airline hiring practices, but for sure, the airlines are getting a ton of resumes from high time pilots that they pass on...which is a crime....hiring for culture, and getting along might make for a harmonius cockpit environment but I don't think I want some guy sitting up front trying to figure out if the captain is flying the ILS right or wrong...honestly, he doesn't have enough time to know...If you get a shot at airline with super low hours, I can't complain...your getting your shot, many would love to be in your shoes....just try to get up to speed fast...lives are on the line....

[SNS3Guppy]

Just because it's someone's first doesn't mean they shouldn't be doing it and it sure as hell shouldn't mean they can't voice their excitement!

Of course one can enjoy one's job, be excited, and experience new things. We all experience everything for the first time, at some point. However, there's a big difference between incompetence and youthful enthusiasm. There's also a point at which one simply needs more experience. One doesn't put a student pilot in a 747 or a Lear 24, or an ag airplane where one's got to know one's business. One must walk before one runs, and crawl before walking. Skipping steps leaves dangerous gaps in one's experience and understanding, and there is NO substitute for experience. None.

I've had first officers before, for one particular operator, who shouldn't have been hired, but were. These individuals couldn't locate or keep track of their position when flying IFR...one of them with a multi function display in front of him with moving map, in color, to point the way...even with me giving him headings and vectors. He got lost five times in a traffic pattern once, I kid you not. He was eventually fired, with a big stack of letters from every single captain with whom he flew, recommending his termination. Mine was at the top of the stack.

I, like most others, will bend over to help the new guy out. I've been the new guy, and have frequently found myself back in the "new guy" position. I fully understand what it's like. However, when babysitting a brand new captain, for example, one doesn't want to hear youthful statements of inexperience...when that individual making the statements is slated to be the final authority regarding the safe outcome of the flight. Moreover, the sim replicates the airplane, not the other way around. Far too often I hear "well, in the sim we did this, or learned that..." or "but that's what I was taught."

If one has been taught to jump off a cliff, does that mean one should? When someone tells me "that's what I was taught," I want to find out "but what have you learned?" and "what do you know." Not what someone else told that student, that professional, that aviator...but what do they know for themselves without having to parrot another?

The cockpit is not a democracy. It's a crew environment, but it's no democracy.

[Wings Of Fury]

SpaceBetweenThoughts,

I agree with you totally, I think there is such a thing as overcautious, especially the part about - "Do you want to go round that weather?" when it's a small Cumulus and there's nothing showing on the radar!

Are they cadets that are overcautious? One thing the worlds airlines are forgetting about is the big value of a solid GA/charter/single pilot background has, like finding your own limits. But not all are be able to gain that experience or take that path.

[Mercenary Pilot]

SNS3Guppy, it is VERY common in Europe (especially in the UK) for pilots, straight out of flight schools with 150TT, to jump into a 737/A320/757 etc. It is also becoming more common for pilots with 1500TT (min for ATPL issue) to move into the LHS.

[SNS3Guppy]

SNS3Guppy, it is VERY common in Europe (especially in the UK) for pilots, straight out of flight schools with 150TT, to jump into a 737/A320/757 etc. It is also becoming more common for pilots with 1500TT (min for ATPL issue) to move into the LHS.

I know that. I fly internationally.

It's also very pathetic.

In the US, typically one needs about 4,000 hours to apply for such positions, often more. Then plan on a ten year upgrade.

[Wings Of Fury]

I also agree with Guppy,

How can it be allowed for it to be common for pilots with 1500TT to move into the LHS?

Pathetic.

[Mercenary Pilot]

How can it be allowed for it to be common for pilots with 1500TT to move into the LHS?

Because passengers aren't prepared to pay for realistic fares, so airlines aren't willing to pay for experience.

[Notso Fantastic]

Interesting thoughts raised this thread. I am having trouble right now with young pilots totally unable to ever accept flight plan fuel on days when there are no problems with weather and no anticipated delays. Deciding flight plan fuel seems to provoke panic attacks! Yet sometimes they let you down with total lack of caution. I was watching one this week on descent gaily steering us under radar vectors straight towards the strongest Cbs around. I was watching and waiting for a request to vector a different heading or even warn the cabin crew to be seated- it didn't come...therefore press on straight into the cloud without suggesting that an alternative heading would be a good idea. This from a pilot chaffing at the bit with impatience to get his own command!

There's a lot of pilots at the moment with little long term experience regarding the lhs as their 'right', like NOW! They are fine until the operation starts going crooked when their lack of depth starts showing.

[733driver]

Interesting discussion indeed.

I also suspect that the observations of the original posters are related to limited real life exposure of relatively inexperienced first officers.

Even the best training can only do so much and, has has been said before, there is no substitute for experience.

However, I just have to comment on the old U.S. vs Europe debate regarding low time pilots flying airliners (as F/Os).

Well, I have trained in both Europe and the States and I think I understand the differences between typical career paths here and there.

While there is something to be said for a "step by step" approach (flight instructing, commuter pilot, regional pilot etc) I also msut say that it is all about the quality of training and the relevance of the experienc gained.

Somebody spending 1000 hours in the pattern instructing on a 152 certainl doesn't gain a lot of relevant experiance for that first airine job. Those hours of night flying in clapped out old airplanes, hauling checks, newspapers or whatever around the country, maybe single pilot, maybe bending the rules (MEL etc) more often than not, possibly under a lot of comercial presure, without proper training, could well be an experience that has a rather negtive impact on ones approach to flying.

As has been said before, airline acadamys in Europe have trained 200 hour pilots for decades to start their career in a 737 or similar. Lufthansa, BA, Air France all do it. The important point here is: The selection is tough, training is top notch, the flight school is run like an airline from day one, The training often goes beyond the legal requirements, and the cadets start their career in an extremely professional, highly regulated (very specific manuals etc.) safety consious environment of a major airline. Plus, it will be many years before those guys upgrade to captain and when they do they have likely seen the world, having flown both short and laung haul for quite some time with experienced captains. It does work and I therefore disagree with statements such as "a 200 hour pilot has no business in a jet" etc.

Myself I joined an airline as an F/O on the 737 with only a few hundred hours on a turboprop. Two of the four guys on my course came straight from school. None of us had any problem making it through training. That's because it wasn't some quick "tickin' the boxes" crash course, but a proper type rating followed by more than the legally required time under supervision (IOE) etc.

I too found myself being quite cautious initially. I'd rather start descending a bit early, rather than ending up high. I would reduce speed early rather than being too fast etc. With time, confidence grows and we get better at what we do. But I would like to think that I have always been a safe F/O. I was always flying with experienced captains though, and I do agree that 1500 hours is not much experience for a captain. I think 3000 hours is propably more like it, preferably more.