|
Time to Command...
We all know that a short time to Command doesn't equal a good airline. A generalisation but its undoubtedly still valid. No point in having a quick Command thats not worth the agro:
What is the time to Command in your airline? Both Long Haul and Short Haul ballpark? Any country, any airline... TUI Airways UK B787 = 16 Years B737 = 6 Years |
|
That’s not a great thread.. it should be very relevant a figure at the moment. And easy to ballpark for LH & SH |
Originally Posted by Dogma
(Post 10180966)
TUI Airways UK B787 = 16 Years B737 = 6 Years |
Its highly relevant. Pilots really don't understand the technical relevance of these metrics. TUI was 16 years for any command and thats now firmly under 10 years for the foreseeable
|
I suggest the current ‘quick’ commands are a blip and normal service will be resumed. |
Originally Posted by Dogma
(Post 10180966)
We all know that a short time to Command doesn't equal a good airline. A generalisation but its undoubtedly still valid. No point in having a quick Command thats not worth the agro:
What is the time to Command in your airline? Both Long Haul and Short Haul ballpark? Any country, any airline... TUI Airways UK B787 = 16 Years B737 = 6 Years |
Asia - from not flying a plane ever to command is possible in 5 years, that’s tight but possible. More the norm I would say 7 ish.... that’s 18 months for initial, then a type rating, then 3-5 years as an FO and then Captain. Its becoming more the norm than anything else. Then I’m told there are places it’s even less. Ahhhh lucky is a Bus Bus in relatively benign environments. Don’t get me wrong I’m not having a go at any of these guys, it’s just the way it’s become. Do I agree? If done correctly I don’t have an issue problem is it’s not, it’s all a box ticking excercise these days. This is why guys go on LWOP, furlough etc to get the chance to have a play in the left seat, albeit it a low cost bus... |
Flybe
Dash 8 - If you have a pulse and you have a license you'll be eligible for upgrade. Embraer - down to 3.5 years in one particular base. |
Its an interesting global statistic - zero to Captain could be doable with military style training of the right candidates but the industry doesn't train like that.
The overal theme in most airlines is the inexperience in the Co-Pilot seat is compensated for by competence and experience in the LHS.. would be an interesting Insurance Company assessment for premiums. Its going to get ugly out there |
Originally Posted by Global Aviator
(Post 10182168)
Asia - from not flying a plane ever to command is possible in 5 years, that’s tight but possible. Make it 2.5 years. I've seen it. |
@Iggy - 2.5 years from 0 hours? Surely that can't be right? If we assume initial training is 1.5 years, you're saying theres people in the LHS with 1 years line flying experience? How does the ATPL licence work over there? In EASAland, you couldn't physically get the hours to 'unfreeze' your ATPL to be eligible for command.
|
@am111 I think he meant 0 hours on type... So once you finished your type rating, in 2.5 years you'll get at least 2000 hours (assuming 900h per annum), pretty enough to unfreeze the atpl and get hours towards command.
|
I figured thats what Iggy meant but Global Aviator mentioned 5 years "from not flying a plane ever". Ryanair are boasting 3 years to command so that's not significantly different...
|
As aircraft become closer to DRONES the less the experience level will become. I think scary as you cannot buy experience, problem is that sh@t hits the fan so little these days so many get away with it. Still many runway excursions etc, however imagine if we were still driving without glass. It would be mayhem. Yes the world is changing, technology improving, however without - Sully, Mr Gimli Glider (apologies for being lazy looking up name), and a few others......... ouch. Oh it’s ok then you have a brand new 737 swim next to a runway in Bali for pushing limits, an A320 end up...... then there is still the Air France 330...... plus many more. I love flying glass, even in GA beasts now, however those initial years of a six pack have allowed me to earn the keg I now wear..... I actually think that would be a great aviation quote! |
I meant 2.5 years as in elapsed time since starting the TR fresh outta high school :E with minimal hours and that deer in the headlights look until barking orders wearing a adolf moustache from the left seat of a 320.
|
I did some interviewing last year for an airline advertising that rare thing .. a sponsored medium jet type rating. The candidates were all approximately 200 hrs TT , and had just completed an MCC/JOC course.
One candidate did well in the group exercise, and came across as competent, qualified, and personable. In short, a good prospect. At the "have you any questions for us ? " stage of the interview he asked : "what's the time to command ?". This resulted in sideways glances between the interviewers. The airline binned his application. He didn't get any further. |
Originally Posted by SID PLATE
(Post 10182862)
The airline binned his application. He didn't get any further.
|
Is there something wrong with having career aspirations?. |
Nope. However, there is a lot to say about being oneself judge. There is a system for progression, mainly based in people with greater experience and knowledge getting payed to judge who is and who is not ready to take the next step. It has been like this for decades, this thing of having cadets with upgrade course dates is new.
And curiously enough, most of the times involves money. |
BA generally as follows: SH LGW 6-8 years. SH LHR 8-10 years LH LHR 18+ years There can be variations on occasion. SH LHR commands were available to anyone qualified with a pulse a few years ago (under two years) but have since adjusted back upwards. I believe LGW may currently be less than above. LH has been pretty constant for the past few years, varying only by a year or so. In BA, the seniority/age demographic effectively controls the LH commands (currently about 1600/4100). |
Originally Posted by Tay Cough
(Post 10182983)
BA generally as follows: SH LGW 6-8 years. SH LHR 8-10 years LH LHR 18+ years There can be variations on occasion. SH LHR commands were available to anyone qualified with a pulse a few years ago (under two years) but have since adjusted back upwards. I believe LGW may currently be less than above. LH has been pretty constant for the past few years, varying only by a year or so. In BA, the seniority/age demographic effectively controls the LH commands (currently about 1600/4100). Big variation.. always a worrying sign in terms of lifestyle etc... guys and girls hanging on in RHS to wait for LH Command |
Way back in the very early days of the B747 with BA I remember having a beer with a young B747 FO who told me that for lifestyle reasons he planned to stay RHS until he qualified for consideration for LHS long haul and expected to wait at least seventeen years since leaving Hamble(spl?) before he got his opportunity. |
Originally Posted by Dogma
(Post 10183597)
Big variation.. always a worrying sign in terms of lifestyle etc... guys and girls hanging on in RHS to wait for LH Command
BA also has different pay scales for long haul and short haul. So the pay differential at 10 years would be circa £18k, but a difference in allowances. So say £15k. After tax (at 40%, ignoring the 100k issue) £173 per week, before factoring in possible increases in childcare costs, petrol, etc etc. |
Originally Posted by SID PLATE
(Post 10182862)
I did some interviewing last year for an airline advertising that rare thing .. a sponsored medium jet type rating. The candidates were all approximately 200 hrs TT , and had just completed an MCC/JOC course.
One candidate did well in the group exercise, and came across as competent, qualified, and personable. In short, a good prospect. At the "have you any questions for us ? " stage of the interview he asked : "what's the time to command ?". This resulted in sideways glances between the interviewers. The airline binned his application. He didn't get any further. |
Originally Posted by Mister Geezer
(Post 10184188)
I personally would put that application close to the top after hearing that. If a new fresh faced F/O is motivated and focused on achieving their command from day one, then they should be light years ahead of their peers when it comes to preparation, once a potential command course is on the horizon.
|
I met a 73 skipper who got his command at 1600tt
|
Originally Posted by Mister Geezer
(Post 10184188)
I personally would put that application close to the top after hearing that. If a new fresh faced F/O is motivated and focused on achieving their command from day one, then they should be light years ahead of their peers when it comes to preparation, once a potential command course is on the horizon.
A 200 hour F/O aiming to be the best bloody F/O in the airline is a completely different beast, and would be most welcome in any airline worth their salt. One need to know the place to be and how to do the assigned job before progressing. The job of a F/O and the job of a Cpt is different. |
Is there such a thing as a 200hr F/O who doesn't want to be a captain? Surely, if such a person exists, they should be encouraged to see their potential.
The old fashioned dinosaur who is suggesting that it's wrong to want a command are exactly the sort of person who caused TFN for KLM, or any other situation where the grumpy old captain has oppressed the F/O because he didn't deem them to be worthy. They ought to be ashamed. |
Originally Posted by Cmon-PullUP
(Post 10184697)
Wrong. If you had ever flown with 200 hr F/O's who from day one aspire to be Cpt's, you would know why.
A 200 hour F/O aiming to be the best bloody F/O in the airline is a completely different beast, and would be most welcome in any airline worth their salt. One need to know the place to be and how to do the assigned job before progressing. The job of a F/O and the job of a Cpt is different. |
Originally Posted by SID PLATE
(Post 10182862)
I did some interviewing last year for an airline advertising that rare thing .. a sponsored medium jet type rating. The candidates were all approximately 200 hrs TT , and had just completed an MCC/JOC course.
One candidate did well in the group exercise, and came across as competent, qualified, and personable. In short, a good prospect. At the "have you any questions for us ? " stage of the interview he asked : "what's the time to command ?". This resulted in sideways glances between the interviewers. The airline binned his application. He didn't get any further. |
completely agree, massive shame. When I joined my first airline it was discussed also. Sets clear career progression and was told during the process they were looking for people who would make command one day. Cant believe someone would be rejected for being keen and asking those sort of questions. May be best he didn't get in, surely wouldn't be able to handle the sky god mentality
|
Originally Posted by TurningFinalRWY36
(Post 10185001)
completely agree, massive shame. When I joined my first airline it was discussed also. Sets clear career progression and was told during the process they were looking for people who would make command one day. Cant believe someone would be rejected for being keen and asking those sort of questions. May be best he didn't get in, surely wouldn't be able to handle the sky god mentality
It may have something to do with the eagerness with which this candidate asked his first and only question. Successful candidates asked about salary, basing, time spent away from base etc, before asking the time to command question. He was perceived as having the wrong priorities. From several hundred original applicants, they were looking for a small final number. The airline could afford to be choosy. My own airline promoted low hour FO's to the LHS. Three hours after completing his final command check, one was seen wandering around Tescos in full Captain's uniform. Might have been worse I suppose, could have been Poundland ... or Weatherspoons.. |
The captain held responsible for the TFN crash was one of the new generation and a training manager I believe, Falcon20, far from a dinosaur. |
Originally Posted by Mister Geezer
(Post 10184733)
I think it is worth differentiating between a F/O who thinks they are ready for the LHS when they are not and a F/O who wants to be ready for the LHS and is keen to develop. Managing the former is naturally challenging but it's certainly not impossible to help influence a change of mindset, from the former to the latter. I used to be a trainer in a couple of previous companies and I always enjoyed non training flights with young new F/Os, who were already released to the line but were still keen to learn and push themselves further, rather than simply doing what was expected, despite still being a competant F/O.
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 10:34. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.