Have around 300 pilots left RYR lately?
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Cloud Cookoo Land
Posts: 1,270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What seems to be the norm, though, is to base cadets for their first two years anywhere, then give them the base they wanted. Then, on promotion, send them out again to their least preferred base, even though their preferred, current base is short of Captains, and bring them back another two years down the line, even though that invariably means bringing in other people to the base in question that want to be somewhere else too. And swaps are flatly refused.
This of course may not be the policy or indeed may not actually be happening? Bad rumours and all that goes with them :-)
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 683
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any chance that they will start looking more favourably at guys with >250h and over 30 years old any time soon?
If they are looking for some kind of stability in their workforce, or people who they could fast-track to command, then this would be the obvious thing to do. But then again, the last I heard (and I heard it on VERY good authority) was that this approach is contrary to their business plan.
If they are looking for some kind of stability in their workforce, or people who they could fast-track to command, then this would be the obvious thing to do. But then again, the last I heard (and I heard it on VERY good authority) was that this approach is contrary to their business plan.
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Dubai
Age: 43
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WX man- I totally support you. The sad fact is that even on these threads, the idea that you should replace experience with MPL courses and a couple of good sim's is being so strongly propogated by the vested interests that it is very hard to fight against. It is a foolhardy and unsafe way to go but this is where we are.
As a youngster it is clear the only path is an MPL then go to virtual aviation, practice a little in the sim. Then you can con people into believing you are talented, "bobs your uncle" you'll be a 22 year old Captain with 2500 hours. you'll be Considered ahead of guys with 25 years experience and a consistent record of passing Sim. checks.
It's very unfortunate and very unsafe but the reliability of modern Aircraft allow those vested interests to get away with this situation over a long term.
As a youngster it is clear the only path is an MPL then go to virtual aviation, practice a little in the sim. Then you can con people into believing you are talented, "bobs your uncle" you'll be a 22 year old Captain with 2500 hours. you'll be Considered ahead of guys with 25 years experience and a consistent record of passing Sim. checks.
It's very unfortunate and very unsafe but the reliability of modern Aircraft allow those vested interests to get away with this situation over a long term.
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Dubai
Age: 43
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry JS but in my view it is unsafe, so I will just have to accept that you'll disagree with me. The reliability of these aircraft lulls foolhardy managements into believing that this philosophy is safe. It is not.
Maybe I'll get fed up with fighting the losing corner but for the time being, if you are going to read these threads, then there'll be me banging on.
The thing that really got me was Bealzebub saying effectively that the simulator is everything, that to me Flying in China rings of being very foolish.
In China every simulator you go to you are observed by keen Young first officers, your 4 hour session finishes after 2 hours and the Young first officers jump in and take the rest of the period to practice. Strangely enough these first officers are excellent, they can fly the sim so much better than the foreign Captains. You are fooled into believing these guys have ability and when you fly with them and give them a Landing you are entirely confident that they are safe. Then you realise as the aicraft passes 100' and descends rapidly towards the grass at an awkward crab angle that your initial judgment was wrong.
I am not saying that this happens in Europe but you have to be very careful of judging the real ability of inexperienced people.
Maybe I'll get fed up with fighting the losing corner but for the time being, if you are going to read these threads, then there'll be me banging on.
The thing that really got me was Bealzebub saying effectively that the simulator is everything, that to me Flying in China rings of being very foolish.
In China every simulator you go to you are observed by keen Young first officers, your 4 hour session finishes after 2 hours and the Young first officers jump in and take the rest of the period to practice. Strangely enough these first officers are excellent, they can fly the sim so much better than the foreign Captains. You are fooled into believing these guys have ability and when you fly with them and give them a Landing you are entirely confident that they are safe. Then you realise as the aicraft passes 100' and descends rapidly towards the grass at an awkward crab angle that your initial judgment was wrong.
I am not saying that this happens in Europe but you have to be very careful of judging the real ability of inexperienced people.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 302
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nicely put, KP.
To be honest I can see both sides of this, but having been round the block a few times, I can draw on a few experiences where a sharp, clever, well trained but newish FO has turned into a passenger when the s**t hits.
William Langewiesche's excellent "Fly by Wire" is a good read in relation to modern automation, training and the phenomenon of "Making it look too easy" which is engendered in part by having such reliable aircraft.
There's no easy way, and no magic bullet, but it's why there will be at least some passengers willing to pay more to ride with the airlines prepared to do it the hard (expensive) way.
To be honest I can see both sides of this, but having been round the block a few times, I can draw on a few experiences where a sharp, clever, well trained but newish FO has turned into a passenger when the s**t hits.
William Langewiesche's excellent "Fly by Wire" is a good read in relation to modern automation, training and the phenomenon of "Making it look too easy" which is engendered in part by having such reliable aircraft.
There's no easy way, and no magic bullet, but it's why there will be at least some passengers willing to pay more to ride with the airlines prepared to do it the hard (expensive) way.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: FUBAR
Posts: 3,348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
kungfu panda,
the truth is somewhere between. I remember well an ex-colleague in a certain well known loco, who knew the manuals back to front, could recite SOP's to the nth degree with metronomic precision, & could perform an immaculate "double brief" /"circle to land procedure".
This is well & good, but if you asked him to perform a visual circuit/approach, with no use of his tried & tested "circle to land" procedure (which in any case usually resulted in turning final far too high. . .& then the REAL fun began !) his ineptitude beggared belief . . .and he was approaching Command. He became one of the youngest Capts in the Company, one of the youngest LTC's, one of the youngest TRE's, and eventually joined a "well known Middle East long haul carrier during the brief period they were accepting TRE's.
I would wager that even now if you put him downwind at some airport somewhere, & asked him to do a visual without any of his "toys", he would still be out of his depth.
As you say, lack of experience, and just as importantly, a very common culture, all too prevalent these days, that getting the job done using SOP's & automatics is all that matters. There is very little encouragement/incentive it seems for people to expand their skill set, indeed, things like visuals are considered risky from an OFDM point of view & avoided by a large percentage of drivers, particularly the 250hr Cadets, who have been indoctrinated since their early line training to do it the automated robotic way.
Sad, but Oh too true, SOP monkeys are too common, as they find out if their intended next company gives a Sim assessment based on basic handling.
the truth is somewhere between. I remember well an ex-colleague in a certain well known loco, who knew the manuals back to front, could recite SOP's to the nth degree with metronomic precision, & could perform an immaculate "double brief" /"circle to land procedure".
This is well & good, but if you asked him to perform a visual circuit/approach, with no use of his tried & tested "circle to land" procedure (which in any case usually resulted in turning final far too high. . .& then the REAL fun began !) his ineptitude beggared belief . . .and he was approaching Command. He became one of the youngest Capts in the Company, one of the youngest LTC's, one of the youngest TRE's, and eventually joined a "well known Middle East long haul carrier during the brief period they were accepting TRE's.
I would wager that even now if you put him downwind at some airport somewhere, & asked him to do a visual without any of his "toys", he would still be out of his depth.
As you say, lack of experience, and just as importantly, a very common culture, all too prevalent these days, that getting the job done using SOP's & automatics is all that matters. There is very little encouragement/incentive it seems for people to expand their skill set, indeed, things like visuals are considered risky from an OFDM point of view & avoided by a large percentage of drivers, particularly the 250hr Cadets, who have been indoctrinated since their early line training to do it the automated robotic way.
Sad, but Oh too true, SOP monkeys are too common, as they find out if their intended next company gives a Sim assessment based on basic handling.
Join Date: May 2011
Location: FL400
Posts: 398
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There's no easy way, and no magic bullet, but it's why there will be at least some passengers willing to pay more to ride with the airlines prepared to do it the hard (expensive) way.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To keep claiming that it is "unsafe" to put cadets in an airliner, despite the evidence to the contrary, just makes you appear like a bitter idiot.
The statistics prove this to be correct. However, that has also been true of many events in various industries. Then one day the manure hits the air conditioning; the boss is away from the job = incapacitated, and the juniors, trained though they might be, have to carry on and sort it out. Things go from bad to worse and people start asking questions; such as "how could this happen, how could this be allowed to happen." etc. etc. To date this has not yet hit the front pages; oh wait. AF 447. And I am in no doubt that many other near miss are under the carpet. Luck should not be the guiding factor here. Proactive prevention is the name of our game. Oh wait. It costs money.
The statistics prove this to be correct. However, that has also been true of many events in various industries. Then one day the manure hits the air conditioning; the boss is away from the job = incapacitated, and the juniors, trained though they might be, have to carry on and sort it out. Things go from bad to worse and people start asking questions; such as "how could this happen, how could this be allowed to happen." etc. etc. To date this has not yet hit the front pages; oh wait. AF 447. And I am in no doubt that many other near miss are under the carpet. Luck should not be the guiding factor here. Proactive prevention is the name of our game. Oh wait. It costs money.
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 730
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Panda, you do talk nonsense. To claim that hours are the magic bullet to safety issues is incredibly naive, and the insistence that cadets are unsafe is idiotic. I and others have repeatedly said that the majority of the best FOs I have seen are cadets with a couple of years under their belts, and that the "experienced" FOs tend to be worse, especially their airmanship.
It is not hours in a logbook that count, but the aptitude, attitude, quality of training (which is mostly comparable in the EU) and the experience gained by Captains encouraging manual and raw data flying, monitored decision making by FOs and so on. The training department only have hold of FOs for a short time - it's up to captains to bring them up to scratch on the line, and most aren't doing so out of laziness or fear of OFDM. But cadets are not intrinsically unsafe.
It is not hours in a logbook that count, but the aptitude, attitude, quality of training (which is mostly comparable in the EU) and the experience gained by Captains encouraging manual and raw data flying, monitored decision making by FOs and so on. The training department only have hold of FOs for a short time - it's up to captains to bring them up to scratch on the line, and most aren't doing so out of laziness or fear of OFDM. But cadets are not intrinsically unsafe.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: The IMF.
Posts: 537
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aluminium Chouxfleur.
"The training department only have hold of FOs for a short time - it's up to captains to bring them up to scratch on the line, and most aren't doing so out of laziness or fear of OFDM."
What?
It has never, ever said in any contract that I've signed that I'm employed as a line captain to do what you state above.
Where do you get such naive thinking from?
What?
It has never, ever said in any contract that I've signed that I'm employed as a line captain to do what you state above.
Where do you get such naive thinking from?
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 730
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, you don't think part of your job as a Captain is to help FOs learn and develop their skill set? Narrow minded, more like...
So many Captains these days insist on being SOP monitors and only allowing FOs to fly though the automatics in fair weather, not letting them make any decisions on their own sectors. It's nervous control-freak Captains who are too scared of their jobs that are preventing FOs from growing into capable commanders, and then we end up with a bunch of woolly minded young Captains with no common sense or airmanship who hide behind manuals and make the most outrageous cock-ups when presented with something a little non-standard. If all Captains let FOs of the leash a little more, then the FOs would pick up all sorts of hints and tips and would develop a wide and deep level of operating experience.
So many Captains these days insist on being SOP monitors and only allowing FOs to fly though the automatics in fair weather, not letting them make any decisions on their own sectors. It's nervous control-freak Captains who are too scared of their jobs that are preventing FOs from growing into capable commanders, and then we end up with a bunch of woolly minded young Captains with no common sense or airmanship who hide behind manuals and make the most outrageous cock-ups when presented with something a little non-standard. If all Captains let FOs of the leash a little more, then the FOs would pick up all sorts of hints and tips and would develop a wide and deep level of operating experience.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In my seat
Posts: 822
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aluminium Shuffler,
VERY well said!
An FO is a Captain in spe, meaning that every flight should be a learning experience, guided by his or her Captain.
Those unwilling to share their knowledge and experience are either too incompetent to be Commander of a Jet or too lazy to be Commander of a Jet.
VERY well said!
An FO is a Captain in spe, meaning that every flight should be a learning experience, guided by his or her Captain.
Those unwilling to share their knowledge and experience are either too incompetent to be Commander of a Jet or too lazy to be Commander of a Jet.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: in my country
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An FO is a Captain in spe, meaning that every flight should be a learning experience, guided by his or her Captain.
Those unwilling to share their knowledge and experience are either too incompetent to be Commander of a Jet or too lazy to be Commander of a Jet.
to the Southwest Airlines FOs with 6-8000 hours and a previous experience as CRJ or Dash8 captains. An FO is not here to learn, he is here to work efficiently within a team as safe as possible. He needs knowledge and skills.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guys; before this thread runs off the rails. The above quote from SWA is not apples & apples with what is being discussed a couple of posts previously. A cadet F/O is an apprentice. Many don't see it that way, and that is their problem which will restrict their progress and promotion eventually. The 6000hr F/O is either a permanent F/O or unlucky enough to be in a slow promotion airline. Indeed they should be fully cognisant with flying,operating and command thinking. The cadet or low hour F/O is still learning for a few years. It takes many flights to learn how to think and react, or even hopefully, be proactive. That is where the ordinary captain has a professional duty to lead by example and also explain their decisions. It is very sad to hear in an airline that the F/O's just do what they are told, even when PF. Very sad and such a wasted opportunity. It's nothing to do with the formal line training under LTC guidance. We all have a duty to the newbies. It's how we learnt. We didn't suddenly have a brain transplant during the command course. It was a steady progression over time. When I was PF I always asked the F/O's opinion first and either disagreed or not. If the former I explained why and then we proceeded as a crew in agreement. It was often the comment that they wished all captains acted in the same manner.
Indeed in my first airline this was the company culture. Sadly, in the many start-up airlines I've been with since, the culture was not on the front burner; financial survival and SOP's were. With many DEC's and low time F/O's it was a case of get the job done safely and efficiently. Those same airlines have continued to expand so fast that still the daily professional passing of knowledge has not been indued in the captains. Training is a formal role for LTC's. Indeed, it can be argued, and it has on here many times, that the new generation of 3000hr captains may not have that much outside the SOP's to pass on. But surely the passage of knowledge down the ranks is a given?
Indeed in my first airline this was the company culture. Sadly, in the many start-up airlines I've been with since, the culture was not on the front burner; financial survival and SOP's were. With many DEC's and low time F/O's it was a case of get the job done safely and efficiently. Those same airlines have continued to expand so fast that still the daily professional passing of knowledge has not been indued in the captains. Training is a formal role for LTC's. Indeed, it can be argued, and it has on here many times, that the new generation of 3000hr captains may not have that much outside the SOP's to pass on. But surely the passage of knowledge down the ranks is a given?
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: England
Posts: 908
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"So, you don't think part of your job as a Captain is to help FOs learn and develop their skill set? Narrow minded, more like...
So many Captains these days insist on being SOP monitors and only allowing FOs to fly though the automatics in fair weather, not letting them make any decisions on their own sectors. It's nervous control-freak Captains who are too scared of their jobs that are preventing FOs from growing into capable commanders, and then we end up with a bunch of woolly minded young Captains with no common sense or airmanship who hide behind manuals and make the most outrageous cock-ups when presented with something a little non-standard. If all Captains let FOs of the leash a little more, then the FOs would pick up all sorts of hints and tips and would develop a wide and deep level of operating experience."
There is a lot of truth in why you say, but as a commander of only two years experience i'll do my best to let the chap next to me progress and experiment as much as i can, but in this day and age i'm just covering my arse at every corner.
Is isn't your sector either. They are both the Captains. He/She is allowing you to operate one of theirs. Not trying to be a picky knob but having been in front of "The board" you have to have these legalities nailed!
Regards
So many Captains these days insist on being SOP monitors and only allowing FOs to fly though the automatics in fair weather, not letting them make any decisions on their own sectors. It's nervous control-freak Captains who are too scared of their jobs that are preventing FOs from growing into capable commanders, and then we end up with a bunch of woolly minded young Captains with no common sense or airmanship who hide behind manuals and make the most outrageous cock-ups when presented with something a little non-standard. If all Captains let FOs of the leash a little more, then the FOs would pick up all sorts of hints and tips and would develop a wide and deep level of operating experience."
There is a lot of truth in why you say, but as a commander of only two years experience i'll do my best to let the chap next to me progress and experiment as much as i can, but in this day and age i'm just covering my arse at every corner.
Is isn't your sector either. They are both the Captains. He/She is allowing you to operate one of theirs. Not trying to be a picky knob but having been in front of "The board" you have to have these legalities nailed!
Regards
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: in the mud
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gentleman,
Fair point of letting the Fo 'mess around' and learn by actually flying the aircraft, but sorry to say, this is how it used to be.
We are focussing all our attention(too much) to have all the parametres correct the moment the yellow bar shows up, instead of the general big picture that this is safe approach to continue, only because a few nutters decided to continue an approach with vref+50 and terrain warnings,because of that we all suffer.
We are not 'nervous control freak captains' as alu-shufler dares to say, but fed up flying into challenging ops with no experience on the right side. Cadets are released on line but far from capable and load up even on a sunny day.
I need a collegue, to support me, not a student, and now my job is on the line I indeed will not allow any more visuals, the Autopilot stays on until 500 ft and if have any doubt(and believe me, or just ask the cabin crew, the number of 'impacts' instead of landings are on the rise) i do the landing.
As usual, my humble opinion
Fair point of letting the Fo 'mess around' and learn by actually flying the aircraft, but sorry to say, this is how it used to be.
We are focussing all our attention(too much) to have all the parametres correct the moment the yellow bar shows up, instead of the general big picture that this is safe approach to continue, only because a few nutters decided to continue an approach with vref+50 and terrain warnings,because of that we all suffer.
We are not 'nervous control freak captains' as alu-shufler dares to say, but fed up flying into challenging ops with no experience on the right side. Cadets are released on line but far from capable and load up even on a sunny day.
I need a collegue, to support me, not a student, and now my job is on the line I indeed will not allow any more visuals, the Autopilot stays on until 500 ft and if have any doubt(and believe me, or just ask the cabin crew, the number of 'impacts' instead of landings are on the rise) i do the landing.
As usual, my humble opinion
Last edited by space pig; 6th Jun 2014 at 20:32.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: SV Marie Celeste
Posts: 655
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Then one day the manure hits the air conditioning; the boss is away from the job = incapacitated, and the juniors, trained though they might be, have to carry on and sort it out. Things go from bad to worse and people start asking questions; such as "how could this happen, how could this be allowed to happen." etc. etc. To date this has not yet hit the front pages; oh wait. AF 447. And I am in no doubt that many other near miss are under the carpet. Luck should not be the guiding factor here. Proactive prevention is the name of our game. Oh wait. It costs money.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: last time I looked I was still here.
Posts: 4,507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
space pig, one of the best postings I have read for many a day!
Can't quite agree. It is easy to counter a generalism, as is the topic of this discussion, by quoting rather extreme scenarios and situations. While I commiserate with the changes in the working environment up front I make the comment that we need to keep it to apples & apples. There will always be times & places where the captain needs to be 'the boss' and others where they can be more mentoral. Deciding which is appropriate is perhaps part of captainship.
Can't quite agree. It is easy to counter a generalism, as is the topic of this discussion, by quoting rather extreme scenarios and situations. While I commiserate with the changes in the working environment up front I make the comment that we need to keep it to apples & apples. There will always be times & places where the captain needs to be 'the boss' and others where they can be more mentoral. Deciding which is appropriate is perhaps part of captainship.