Training of low hour pilots in airlines
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes wilco77, flying is fun and all that...but you must indeed remember that not all guys/gals have your talent.
Having trained quite a few low hour guys onto heavy jets, sometimes it ain't easy, as IHD indicates.
As you seem to have it all down quite nicely, perhaps you would care to enlighten us.
Also edited - see above
Having trained quite a few low hour guys onto heavy jets, sometimes it ain't easy, as IHD indicates.
As you seem to have it all down quite nicely, perhaps you would care to enlighten us.
Also edited - see above
Last edited by Captain Stable; 16th Oct 2003 at 16:00.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IHD
I think patience and empathy are two important factors in training low time cadtes, occasionally strong nerves are also required. They do not lack enthusiasm which is a big plus. Yes they are at times difficult to teach especially on a busy day when the operation is turning to worms but it is rewarding.
One or two can get a bit big for their boots once they get on-line but that gets knocked out of them over time. A concern for me is that they are missing some valuable experience by moving straight to the right seat of a jet not to mention fun. Overall I think they miss out but I am sure they don't see it that way. The only real problem I can see is when you get a disproportionate number comming through an airline as it does dilute the experince levels.
I think patience and empathy are two important factors in training low time cadtes, occasionally strong nerves are also required. They do not lack enthusiasm which is a big plus. Yes they are at times difficult to teach especially on a busy day when the operation is turning to worms but it is rewarding.
One or two can get a bit big for their boots once they get on-line but that gets knocked out of them over time. A concern for me is that they are missing some valuable experience by moving straight to the right seat of a jet not to mention fun. Overall I think they miss out but I am sure they don't see it that way. The only real problem I can see is when you get a disproportionate number comming through an airline as it does dilute the experince levels.
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aircraft today are so reliable and so automated,that airlines can get away with hiring 250 hour guys/gals in the RHS of a jetliner.Ryanair and Easyjet would have a very hard time if they didnt have this option.A fair proportion of experienced guys wouldnt accept their working practices.But the young guys dont mind...they'll sign up for the bond,take the half pay and still be happy because they're flying.And there's nothing wrong with that I guess.Except that if something were to happen to the Captain,you are left with a very junior guy/gal who only knows how to program the autopilot and fmc and not much else.Oh yes,and SOP's.Not much use when the situation is critical.If the passengers only knew.
There are many examples to illustrate my point but the FEDEX hijack incident some years back will do nicely.These guys were fighting for their lives when a disgruntled employee decided to bring the DC-10 down on the Fedex building in a suicide mission.The Captain at one stage was in the back grappling with this guy who was armed with a hammer.The F/O,a high-time pilot,as are all Fedex co-pilots,knew a thing or two about flying and was able to manoeuvre the aircraft in such a way that the Captain was able to gain a small advantage on the attacker.The very fact that he felt he could safely leave the flt-deck to take on this maniac,speaks volumes for the practice of having TWO EXPERIENCED pilots on the flt-deck of any commercial jetliner.I wonder how many Ryanair Captains are afraid to even take a leak during a flight.Be honest now.
IMHO,a pilot should have about 3000 hours total time,with about 500 hours command in a turboprop,before he/she gets anywhere near the RHS of a jetliner.Thats how it works in the States and I dont see it changing anytime soon.
There are many examples to illustrate my point but the FEDEX hijack incident some years back will do nicely.These guys were fighting for their lives when a disgruntled employee decided to bring the DC-10 down on the Fedex building in a suicide mission.The Captain at one stage was in the back grappling with this guy who was armed with a hammer.The F/O,a high-time pilot,as are all Fedex co-pilots,knew a thing or two about flying and was able to manoeuvre the aircraft in such a way that the Captain was able to gain a small advantage on the attacker.The very fact that he felt he could safely leave the flt-deck to take on this maniac,speaks volumes for the practice of having TWO EXPERIENCED pilots on the flt-deck of any commercial jetliner.I wonder how many Ryanair Captains are afraid to even take a leak during a flight.Be honest now.
IMHO,a pilot should have about 3000 hours total time,with about 500 hours command in a turboprop,before he/she gets anywhere near the RHS of a jetliner.Thats how it works in the States and I dont see it changing anytime soon.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And I suppose you don't recommend anyone fly as a passenger on a regional aircraft, be it turbo prop or jet, because the copilot on that would have less experience and it would be very unsafe.
In your world turbo props don't get hijacked? Nothing ever goes wrong?
I think you will need a better example than that to prove your point!
In your world turbo props don't get hijacked? Nothing ever goes wrong?
I think you will need a better example than that to prove your point!
Last edited by Boeing 7E7; 19th Oct 2003 at 00:37.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: The Roman Empire
Posts: 831
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airplane is airplane, and I don't see any difference in bringing a jet or a prop back on the ground safely.
I have seen copilots unable to bring back a turboprop in the sim on the ground if left alone!
As Rananim says, if the passengers only knew!
This is just one of the shameful aspects of aviation.
Safety first? Bull****!
Money first, and safety only if unsafe means the risk of losing money.
My opinion on the original matter is that rookies should first build some "stature" on smaller airplanes as bush pilots, as I did in Zaire, as captain with 400 hrs.
They would also enjoy a lot more flying before the airline routine.
Anyways, when it comes to their skills, I have always focused on their instructor's skills.
I'm disgusted when I see so much focusing on their filling papers and other frills, when what a rookie needs is the basics of flying: hand flying, IFR crosscheck, situational awareness and decision making.
In other words, a really good instructor (one of the old school, maybe....) will make of a rookie a good copilot, one which can really guarantee safety, even if left alone.
Copilots unable to reasonably safely bring the aircraft on the runway should simply not be released until able to do so.
I have seen copilots unable to bring back a turboprop in the sim on the ground if left alone!
As Rananim says, if the passengers only knew!
This is just one of the shameful aspects of aviation.
Safety first? Bull****!
Money first, and safety only if unsafe means the risk of losing money.
My opinion on the original matter is that rookies should first build some "stature" on smaller airplanes as bush pilots, as I did in Zaire, as captain with 400 hrs.
They would also enjoy a lot more flying before the airline routine.
Anyways, when it comes to their skills, I have always focused on their instructor's skills.
I'm disgusted when I see so much focusing on their filling papers and other frills, when what a rookie needs is the basics of flying: hand flying, IFR crosscheck, situational awareness and decision making.
In other words, a really good instructor (one of the old school, maybe....) will make of a rookie a good copilot, one which can really guarantee safety, even if left alone.
Copilots unable to reasonably safely bring the aircraft on the runway should simply not be released until able to do so.
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote
100% correct.Excellent post.
Boeing 7E7,
This has to be learnt somewhere.Lets make it in the right seat of a small turboprop/piston doing night freight...not a 737 with 187 passengers.Dont you think?
I'm disgusted when I see so much focusing on their filling papers and other frills, when what a rookie needs is the basics of flying: hand flying, IFR crosscheck, situational awareness and decision making.
Boeing 7E7,
This has to be learnt somewhere.Lets make it in the right seat of a small turboprop/piston doing night freight...not a 737 with 187 passengers.Dont you think?
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In one carrier where very low time First Officers were trained onto heavy jets directly, we were told by the Chief Pilot that..."I don't care how long it takes, the new guys will be trained to proficiency."
And so we did, train to proficiency.This included 36 hours in the sim, a minimum of forty circuits in the aircraft.
The new guys were not sent to line training until they could consistantly demonstrate and successfully handle an outboard engine failure at rotation, followed by a three engine ILS/missed approach, VOR/NDB approach, circling to land.
ALL maneuvers hand flown, absolutely no autopilt allowed.
Line training followed, with a safety F/O for the first forty hours.
Two hundred line training hours were initially scheduled, and more if needed. Again, ALL approaches were required to be hand flown.
In the end, a very proficient pilot emerged.
And so we did, train to proficiency.This included 36 hours in the sim, a minimum of forty circuits in the aircraft.
The new guys were not sent to line training until they could consistantly demonstrate and successfully handle an outboard engine failure at rotation, followed by a three engine ILS/missed approach, VOR/NDB approach, circling to land.
ALL maneuvers hand flown, absolutely no autopilt allowed.
Line training followed, with a safety F/O for the first forty hours.
Two hundred line training hours were initially scheduled, and more if needed. Again, ALL approaches were required to be hand flown.
In the end, a very proficient pilot emerged.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: UK
Age: 46
Posts: 642
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Next year I will be another 250h fATPL wannabee. This thread makes very interesting reading.
I emphasise with those who are Training Captains and have fears about the competence of low hours guys. I know how you feel - I was a Bridge Watchkeeping Officer in the RN for six years and had the pleasure of helping to train new guys to be an Officer of the Watch. It is a "pleasure" because despite the hours of pain and the heart stopping moments when the "new guy" does something totally unexpected and sometimes dangerous, when it all comes together and they are allowed to keep watch by themselves it gave me a great deal of satisfaction to have helped them achieve that.
The problem for us new guys is in getting that experience to be in a position to get into the RHS, certainly in the UK. Even those companies operating the smallest twin turboprop are not interested in recruiting anybody unless they have 1500+ hours, 500 multi engine, multi crew etc.
In an ideal world we would want a structured career progression where people can get their license with 250hrs, get an instructors job doing 1000 hours or so single engine. Then move to a small turboprop outfit and then be able to move to the jets once they have about 3000hrs. We dont however live in an ideal world. The money in the airline industry, certainly in europe, now lies in two areas only, IMHO. Firstly long haul work with the majors, then short haul low cost operations. Both of those mean jets.
So certainly in those first few sectors the Line Training Captain should assume the new FO knows nothing and watch every move made. But after a few sectors the Captain should have found out a bit more about the FO competency levels and be asking himself "what can this guy contribute to the operation" instead of thinking "here is another day operating in the limits of the MEL, single pilot IFR, in ****e weather on non-precision approaches in and old aircraft with somebody who knows nothing".
I look forward to my line training, with whoever it maybe, with however many hours, on whatever aircraft.
I emphasise with those who are Training Captains and have fears about the competence of low hours guys. I know how you feel - I was a Bridge Watchkeeping Officer in the RN for six years and had the pleasure of helping to train new guys to be an Officer of the Watch. It is a "pleasure" because despite the hours of pain and the heart stopping moments when the "new guy" does something totally unexpected and sometimes dangerous, when it all comes together and they are allowed to keep watch by themselves it gave me a great deal of satisfaction to have helped them achieve that.
The problem for us new guys is in getting that experience to be in a position to get into the RHS, certainly in the UK. Even those companies operating the smallest twin turboprop are not interested in recruiting anybody unless they have 1500+ hours, 500 multi engine, multi crew etc.
In an ideal world we would want a structured career progression where people can get their license with 250hrs, get an instructors job doing 1000 hours or so single engine. Then move to a small turboprop outfit and then be able to move to the jets once they have about 3000hrs. We dont however live in an ideal world. The money in the airline industry, certainly in europe, now lies in two areas only, IMHO. Firstly long haul work with the majors, then short haul low cost operations. Both of those mean jets.
So certainly in those first few sectors the Line Training Captain should assume the new FO knows nothing and watch every move made. But after a few sectors the Captain should have found out a bit more about the FO competency levels and be asking himself "what can this guy contribute to the operation" instead of thinking "here is another day operating in the limits of the MEL, single pilot IFR, in ****e weather on non-precision approaches in and old aircraft with somebody who knows nothing".
I look forward to my line training, with whoever it maybe, with however many hours, on whatever aircraft.
Join Date: Jan 1997
Location: UK
Posts: 7,737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
timzsta,
Well thought through but there's one logic bomb in it that won't fully tally with your watch keeping experiences.
In all liklehood each time the trainee flies it will be the first time the line training captain has clapped eyes on them. That's the way of the world in airline rostering outside the US trip pairing system or small companies - it's not for want of trainers wishing to give consistent guidance of several days of operating.
Rob
Well thought through but there's one logic bomb in it that won't fully tally with your watch keeping experiences.
In all liklehood each time the trainee flies it will be the first time the line training captain has clapped eyes on them. That's the way of the world in airline rostering outside the US trip pairing system or small companies - it's not for want of trainers wishing to give consistent guidance of several days of operating.
Rob
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Global
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to give you an update of the past few days.
One local crew went IMC 4000ft below MSA. No instrument procedures at airfield.
A trainee with a fresh skipper landed short, no significant damage.
All expats have suspend Line Training for local Captains, as it is simply getting ridiculous.
Watch this space………
IHD
One local crew went IMC 4000ft below MSA. No instrument procedures at airfield.
A trainee with a fresh skipper landed short, no significant damage.
All expats have suspend Line Training for local Captains, as it is simply getting ridiculous.
Watch this space………
IHD
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Canada
Posts: 268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2700 hrs, just spent the last 2 years flying air taxi and freight in the C208. Now I'm on a PA-31 doing the same thing. One thing I know I'll miss when I move on to the bigs is the fun that can be had on the beloved EMPTY LEG! Too bad for those who never got to experience one in something other than a C150.
Dockjock
When you make it to your next step, your Captain will be thankful of your background and experience. Especially the later as that allows you to bring much more to the cockpit than a 250 hour pilot. Its the difference between being legal to sit there and being an asset. Good luck to you.
When you make it to your next step, your Captain will be thankful of your background and experience. Especially the later as that allows you to bring much more to the cockpit than a 250 hour pilot. Its the difference between being legal to sit there and being an asset. Good luck to you.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: The Roman Empire
Posts: 831
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One thing I know I'll miss when I move on to the bigs is the fun that can be had on the beloved EMPTY LEG!
you make me recall my two hours at three feet height trips over the Congo basin in absolute freedom years ago, making fishermen jump into the water, children running in all directions in villages forgotten by God, and eventually washing the airplane in a big rainy cloud to remove all the bugs on the windshield...
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: min rest
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yep...All good fun and a lot of us oldies did that sort of thing in DC3 and light aircraft, we got away with it.
I suggest you do not mention these exploits to your DLR doctors assesing your mental fitness for employment with the bigger airlines. Testrone character today seems mainly unwanted in airlines.
Gf expat pilots who buzzed the crew hotel pool in a 737 were soon fired.
Modern airline flying I found can give a different type of buzz. When a series of long and difficult trip over many years are made safely without incident or any AIDS tape violations with or without the variable input skills of the other crew members it gives a certain satisfaction and keeps your job.
Expat pilots IMHO should if humanly possible steer well clear of formally training local pilots if they do not plan to soon move onto another more normal airline.
The threat to a trainers work permit is not worth the risk of training if you plan on staying.
I found it much nicer to help any FO informally by plenty of chats off the aircraft who asked questions rather than have a Duty to get someone through in minimum time on the aircraft who basically was only there for a laugh and to chase the girls and had my work permit by the testicles.
I suggest you do not mention these exploits to your DLR doctors assesing your mental fitness for employment with the bigger airlines. Testrone character today seems mainly unwanted in airlines.
Gf expat pilots who buzzed the crew hotel pool in a 737 were soon fired.
Modern airline flying I found can give a different type of buzz. When a series of long and difficult trip over many years are made safely without incident or any AIDS tape violations with or without the variable input skills of the other crew members it gives a certain satisfaction and keeps your job.
Expat pilots IMHO should if humanly possible steer well clear of formally training local pilots if they do not plan to soon move onto another more normal airline.
The threat to a trainers work permit is not worth the risk of training if you plan on staying.
I found it much nicer to help any FO informally by plenty of chats off the aircraft who asked questions rather than have a Duty to get someone through in minimum time on the aircraft who basically was only there for a laugh and to chase the girls and had my work permit by the testicles.
Grandpa Aerotart
Timzsta,
Which path you take is entirely up to you. Note the requirements of the turboprop operators and wonder why? Because it's tough flying in smaller turboprops where you are generally 'off the beaten path' a lot more and without the automatics and general support you get in large aircraft.
Why not head out to the bush and fly a few thousand hours? I guarantee you'll never regret it.
I had 6600 hours when I joined my first airline and over 7000 when I transitioned to a jet from a 4 engined turboprop. In that 6600 hours was 5500+ multi command of which 3500+ was turbine, single pilot, in Twin Otters and Banderantes.
Firstly it was all GREAT FUN and secondly a (airline) jet is no place to learn how to fly an aeroplane.
Ever wonder why so much of modern endorsement training in things like airbus and even some of Seattle's product is done on autopilot? Because so many of todays younger pilots and even some not so young can't handfly for ****e!!!
What you don't learn before you fly a 737 you certainly won't learn in a 737.
Chuck.
Which path you take is entirely up to you. Note the requirements of the turboprop operators and wonder why? Because it's tough flying in smaller turboprops where you are generally 'off the beaten path' a lot more and without the automatics and general support you get in large aircraft.
Why not head out to the bush and fly a few thousand hours? I guarantee you'll never regret it.
I had 6600 hours when I joined my first airline and over 7000 when I transitioned to a jet from a 4 engined turboprop. In that 6600 hours was 5500+ multi command of which 3500+ was turbine, single pilot, in Twin Otters and Banderantes.
Firstly it was all GREAT FUN and secondly a (airline) jet is no place to learn how to fly an aeroplane.
Ever wonder why so much of modern endorsement training in things like airbus and even some of Seattle's product is done on autopilot? Because so many of todays younger pilots and even some not so young can't handfly for ****e!!!
What you don't learn before you fly a 737 you certainly won't learn in a 737.
Chuck.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ever wonder why so much of modern endorsement training in things like airbus and even some of Seattle's product is done on autopilot? Because so many of todays younger pilots and even some not so young can't handfly for ****e!!!
What you don't learn before you fly a 737 you certainly won't learn in a 737
You also have to remember in the UK and Europe the kind of bush flying experience you're talking about is virtually non-existent, so it's a non-starter in that part of the world. Doesn't produce any less competent airline pilots though. Horses for courses.
Grandpa Aerotart
I don't think it's about chest thumping at the bar, I think it's about being a well rounded aviator.
Way to much time in Simulators is spent on auto...they don't want to see handflying beyond a minimum required by some rule or other. Certainly autoflight guidance is a huge boon to situational awareness and task management in high workload environments but when we spend so much of our working lives driving an a/p and then don't even get a chance to handfly much in sims, particularly assymetric, then the trend is heading in the wrong direction.
I too have trained young blokes to fly in aircraft as diverse as C185 in bush flying and a mid sized corporate jet . It is absolutely true to say that some 200 hour guys I have had the pleasure of training shat all over some 1500-2000 hr guys but the overall trend seems to me to be heading down....big time!
How many times do you here from jet training captains "well they can answer any question and programme the FMC better than I but ask em to land in a crosswind at night!!!"
Young people today place little, if any, value in experience. Beancounter run airlines have no concept either it seems. People are ending up in jet cockpit left seats with big holes in their 'bag of experience' and, it seems to me, airlines, various regulatory bodies and the aircraft manufacturers are all relying on technology to reduce the required size of the 'bag of luck'.
I think it's reasonable to suggest that the latest wonder jets are actually a little harder to fly, in an overall sense, because the automation tends to distance the crew to much from what's going on...hence the old joke about "what's it doing now?"
Mix in with this some of the less rigorous 'affirmative action' policies at some airlines in the developing (aviation wise at least) world and I think aviation in general is heading in an entirely sad and dangerous direction.
My first jet was an F28 in a very mountainous, Tropical, 3rd world country. Lots of short sectors and lot's of handflying and lots of brain work because the aircraft was so basic...no FMC/autothrottle blah, blah. Combined with a very excellent check and training department that made damn sure you were taught properly and checked to a high standard..well the expats anyway. God it was a great way to learn jet flying and has stood me and my peers in good sted where ever we have ended up.
Chuck.
Way to much time in Simulators is spent on auto...they don't want to see handflying beyond a minimum required by some rule or other. Certainly autoflight guidance is a huge boon to situational awareness and task management in high workload environments but when we spend so much of our working lives driving an a/p and then don't even get a chance to handfly much in sims, particularly assymetric, then the trend is heading in the wrong direction.
I too have trained young blokes to fly in aircraft as diverse as C185 in bush flying and a mid sized corporate jet . It is absolutely true to say that some 200 hour guys I have had the pleasure of training shat all over some 1500-2000 hr guys but the overall trend seems to me to be heading down....big time!
How many times do you here from jet training captains "well they can answer any question and programme the FMC better than I but ask em to land in a crosswind at night!!!"
Young people today place little, if any, value in experience. Beancounter run airlines have no concept either it seems. People are ending up in jet cockpit left seats with big holes in their 'bag of experience' and, it seems to me, airlines, various regulatory bodies and the aircraft manufacturers are all relying on technology to reduce the required size of the 'bag of luck'.
I think it's reasonable to suggest that the latest wonder jets are actually a little harder to fly, in an overall sense, because the automation tends to distance the crew to much from what's going on...hence the old joke about "what's it doing now?"
Mix in with this some of the less rigorous 'affirmative action' policies at some airlines in the developing (aviation wise at least) world and I think aviation in general is heading in an entirely sad and dangerous direction.
My first jet was an F28 in a very mountainous, Tropical, 3rd world country. Lots of short sectors and lot's of handflying and lots of brain work because the aircraft was so basic...no FMC/autothrottle blah, blah. Combined with a very excellent check and training department that made damn sure you were taught properly and checked to a high standard..well the expats anyway
. God it was a great way to learn jet flying and has stood me and my peers in good sted where ever we have ended up.Chuck.
Last edited by Chimbu chuckles; 27th Oct 2003 at 08:33.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: The Roman Empire
Posts: 831
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sheep Guts,
let me quote this from "Crew resource management" by Brian McAllister:
Training is much more than the effort to improve our system's knowledge and hone our physical flying skills. Training adds to our bank of experience.
Yes, training is also experience.
It is said that no pilot can make all the mistakes that can be made in a lifetime, and none can make all the experiences that can be made throughout a carreer.
So it's imperative to learn from the mistakes and experiences of others.
Experience can be transmitted.
How?
By good books, by many accident reports, by a good instructor.
And here again I point out the quality of the instructor problem.
Most of them are kind of "cold" and "detached": they will tell you how you have to do a certain thing, but without "entering" your brain and your heart.
I can tell you how to do it, but only if I know your mental process, your weaknesses and way of thinking and tell you how to think it in order to achieve the desired result, because I've not forgotten the time when I was a rookie, only then I'm a good instructor.
It's always amazing to me (and rewarding) to see how I can solve a copilot's problem in a second, in areas where the "official" instructors were unable to shed any light.
Regarding the "bush" versus "airline" experiences diatribe, I'd like to add a few words.
I personally started as a bush pilot in Africa, and that was very formative, before joining an airline in Europe.
That gave me a good initial calibre, however I realized after a while that, maybe surprisingly, I was not good at all at raw data hand flying instrument approaches .
Simply because bush pilots build a stong character but never get the opportunity to fly real IFR approaches.
So I decided to train myself everytime it was safely feasible - that basically means in good weather poor traffic.
And when I bacame captain I was able to do that everytime I wished so.
So I flew hundreds of raw data approaches, and my skills became renowned.
Morale to all this: what we need is training, and training is valuable experience.
A bush pilot who never trains at IFR will be a good bush pilot, but not a good IFR pilot.
A 737 pilot who never trains raw data, will be a good IFR pilot (hopefully), but unable to revert to raw data when necessary.
It's as simple as that: do you want to be a complete pilot, a "well rounded aviator"?
You have to train ALL skills.
It's bad to see pilots screwing up the automation, and it's bad to see pilots not confident with hand flying.
let me quote this from "Crew resource management" by Brian McAllister:
Training is much more than the effort to improve our system's knowledge and hone our physical flying skills. Training adds to our bank of experience.
Yes, training is also experience.
It is said that no pilot can make all the mistakes that can be made in a lifetime, and none can make all the experiences that can be made throughout a carreer.
So it's imperative to learn from the mistakes and experiences of others.
Experience can be transmitted.
How?
By good books, by many accident reports, by a good instructor.
And here again I point out the quality of the instructor problem.
Most of them are kind of "cold" and "detached": they will tell you how you have to do a certain thing, but without "entering" your brain and your heart.
I can tell you how to do it, but only if I know your mental process, your weaknesses and way of thinking and tell you how to think it in order to achieve the desired result, because I've not forgotten the time when I was a rookie, only then I'm a good instructor.
It's always amazing to me (and rewarding) to see how I can solve a copilot's problem in a second, in areas where the "official" instructors were unable to shed any light.
Regarding the "bush" versus "airline" experiences diatribe, I'd like to add a few words.
I personally started as a bush pilot in Africa, and that was very formative, before joining an airline in Europe.
That gave me a good initial calibre, however I realized after a while that, maybe surprisingly, I was not good at all at raw data hand flying instrument approaches .
Simply because bush pilots build a stong character but never get the opportunity to fly real IFR approaches.
So I decided to train myself everytime it was safely feasible - that basically means in good weather poor traffic.
And when I bacame captain I was able to do that everytime I wished so.
So I flew hundreds of raw data approaches, and my skills became renowned.
Morale to all this: what we need is training, and training is valuable experience.
A bush pilot who never trains at IFR will be a good bush pilot, but not a good IFR pilot.
A 737 pilot who never trains raw data, will be a good IFR pilot (hopefully), but unable to revert to raw data when necessary.
It's as simple as that: do you want to be a complete pilot, a "well rounded aviator"?
You have to train ALL skills.
It's bad to see pilots screwing up the automation, and it's bad to see pilots not confident with hand flying.
Props are for boats!
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: An Asian Hub
Age: 56
Posts: 994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well LEM if all instructors were Brian Mc Callisters, then we would have no problem would we? But sadly they arent
Experience can be transmitted by good instructors, very true.
But the discipline of instrument flying is maintained by practise. Hey who said Bush pilots cant fly IFR, tell that to an RFDS Royal Flying Doctors Pilot next time you meet one.
The ability to react under pressure also cant be taught through books, and thats the type of experience Im talking about, that" Bush Pilots" , can acquire through there day to day operations.
We all learn from books and teachers all our lives LEM, but have we really learned from them. Alot of the stuff is pumped in and then memory dumped once weve passed the critical exam etc. This is where I believe theorists hit a wall, and that wall is " hard earned experience".
Those who have problems with Automation need more sim time and those with poor basic Instrument skills need more sim time. Operating a sim at $450/hr, the Poor Automation guy should get first usage with the Poor IFR guy sent back to a Flying School. Thats my opinion.
Sheep
Experience can be transmitted by good instructors, very true.
But the discipline of instrument flying is maintained by practise. Hey who said Bush pilots cant fly IFR, tell that to an RFDS Royal Flying Doctors Pilot next time you meet one.
The ability to react under pressure also cant be taught through books, and thats the type of experience Im talking about, that" Bush Pilots" , can acquire through there day to day operations.
We all learn from books and teachers all our lives LEM, but have we really learned from them. Alot of the stuff is pumped in and then memory dumped once weve passed the critical exam etc. This is where I believe theorists hit a wall, and that wall is " hard earned experience".
Those who have problems with Automation need more sim time and those with poor basic Instrument skills need more sim time. Operating a sim at $450/hr, the Poor Automation guy should get first usage with the Poor IFR guy sent back to a Flying School. Thats my opinion.
Sheep