|
Originally Posted by Tankengine
(Post 8849903)
These days anyone with the money and a pulse can get a job.:hmm:
|
C195 in air baltic is 8 months contract not 6
|
Point of order Mr D & F,
Agreed, BA have had cadets and all was well. But BA have an excellent training department and also the cadets were of small numbers mixed in with DEP from civil and military. The current trend is to solely recruit cadets. |
Bengerman, maybe English isn't your first language or you have drinking, but point of order, I never said BA exclusively took cadets. Only that they have taken cadets.
I know many who have gone there. Got to love forums.....not |
D and F
You said Agreed, BA have had cadets and all was well. But BA have an excellent training department and also the cadets were of small numbers mixed in with DEP from civil and military. The current trend is to solely recruit cadets. Bengerman, maybe English isn't your first language or you have drinking, but point of order, I never said BA exclusively took cadets. Only that they have taken cadets.* If we agree that it is ok for cadets to be recruited by organisations with high standards then presumably we are in agreement that the likes of lion air do not meet the same standards? The Indonesian authorities dont think so either as they now ( I belive) insist on 1500 hours experience. The Air Baltic scheme certainly ticks all the boxes for p2f in my book. |
Agreed, BA have had cadets and all was well. But BA have an excellent training department and also the cadets were of small numbers mixed in with DEP from civil and military. The current trend is to solely recruit cadets. As I said, any statement regarding them as safe can only be made when a full,audit of ASR and QAR safety data confirms this. How many issues/incidents are put into the ongoing training to final line check or flight ops errors that are headed off by the experienced captains. |
Operational use of flight path management system
http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/...mendations.pdf
Other factors relating to design process considerations involve the changing pilot force. For example, operators and manufacturers believe that pilot experience and proficiency are declining globally. Worldwide, ab initio pilots are being introduced into transport category flight decks more frequently and operators report increased training loads and dropout rates. Operators report that the pilots entering the workforce have high levels of computer skills but some may not have the robust aviation background and aeronautical experience that current pilots have from actual flight experience. The manufacturers understand the changes in the pilot workforce but may not yet assess their flight deck designs to address these changes. In the interim, some of the proposed mitigations include proceduralization (by some operators or manufacturers) and increased automation of tasks and functions (by some manufacturers). Each of these mitigations has potential for unintended consequences. Changes in new-hire pilot flight experience and training background from military and civil aviation to collegiate level programs that overall has reduced the average flight time but has increased the number of new entry pilots that have completed comprehensive, highly structured programs that often includes experience in the advanced flight deck technology. Global aviation expansion and growth have resulted in a high demand worldwide for pilots, producing a perception that overall aeronautical flight experience12 levels for entry-level pilots may be decreasing in some high growth regions. Modern aircraft system capability and reliability have contributed to a significant reduction in commercial aircraft accidents. Commercial aviation is the safest it has ever been The demographics and experience of the aviation workforce will also change considerably. Retirements and attrition in some regions and growth in others will strain the available talent pool and challenge normal recruiting practices. In addition, concern was expressed that aviation as a career field is not as appealing as in years past. These factors are leading to a concern that a significant pilot shortage is imminent. When entering their aviation career, the new generation of personnel is expected to bring high levels of computer skills but some may not have the robust aviation background and aeronautical experience that current pilots have from actual flight experience. However, great improvements have been made in collegiate and academy training programs which include comprehensive, high quality, and structured training that help develop aeronautical experience. Future pilots will require improved computer aptitude suited for many advanced operations and automation tools, as well as a broad aviation experience and fundamental knowledge and skills, including manual flying, spatial awareness, decision making, and understanding of aircraft performance. When these complex procedures are combined with policies that encourage use of automated systems over manual operations and monitoring of pilots to ensure that they comply with those policies, it may encourage pilots to over-rely on those systems. When there is insufficient training, experience, or judgment, this reliance on the automated systems can aggravate and adversely affect the situation. One important potential consequence is that pilots may not be prepared to handle non-routine situations, such as malfunctions or off-nominal conditions. There are open questions about the appropriate level of proceduralization, including how prescriptive and detailed the procedures are, and how comprehensive they should be. Sometimes procedures are used as mitigation for insufficient pilot experience, knowledge and skills. As a result, vulnerabilities may occur because procedures cannot cover all possible operational situations and circumstances. If the operation is excessively reliant on procedures, the pilots may not be prepared for unexpected or non-routine situations. In addition, the LOSA data and interview feedback suggest that overly prescriptive SOPs may be less likely to be followed. |
No, I said that they have taken cadets. Where did I say they only took or have only taken cadets in the past? To make things simple for you, for instance, take the statement "I have drunk wine"
But this doesn't mean I've never had, don't currently and never will drink beer. God knows you two are enough to drive anyone to drink! To put my original statement back in context as it was made, the discussion was about the risk of 200hrs pilots and I made that statement as a point of balance that its not just the low cost companies that take low hour pilots. And it can be done in a way to mitigate risk factors Maybe he owes me an apologee. If your still unsure there is some bedtime reading below for you. Definition of have have - Wiktionary Bealzebub, I have never criticised BA cadet training. If anything it was a model to be followed. But not exclusively. Choose the best and give them a career in return. The curent low co model is see who can pay and offer them a sub standard contract and see who is left. |
PT6 Driver, thanks for trying!
D & F. We'll take it one step at a time so that my English is not too difficult for you. All from the same paragraph.. Agreed, BA have had cadets and all was well. But BA have an excellent training department and also the cadets were of small numbers mixed in with DEP from civil and military. However, The current trend is to solely recruit cadets. FYI English is my first language, unfortunately I had not been drinking and your manners are appalling. |
BA Take a proportion of their intake as cadets. I understand the selection and screening procedures to be such that the attrition rate is very high. In a similar vein to the cadet schemes successfully run by Aer Lingus for decades both the BA and the Aer Lingus schemes have been the bedrock of these airlines recruitment for years. These are the cadet schemes that any right minded youngster should have on the top of their priority list
Lets not start to pretend that the loco en masse path of over paying and starting on reduced wages is the same. Its not. Plus BA and Aer Lingus havent shoved droves of low hour guys into the mix on low pay. They tend to act with more responsibility with respect to the wider industry. |
Incorrect. My reply was to pt6 post regarding low hours pilots in the industry and the fact that BA took low you hours cadets.
For utter clarity I could have put "industry" in that sentence, but even then some one could have taken the super literal meaning that BA are in the industry, they are doing this as well. Info find it highly amusing that the industry, terms and conditions and lifestyle of pilots are disappearing down the drain at Mach .95 and people want to have an argument about how a post is written. Company CEOs if they read this will be laughing all the way to the bank. Definition of Point of order A point of order is a matter raised during consideration of a motion concerning the rules of parliamentary procedure. In organizations other than legislative bodies, the ruling of the chair may be appealed to the assembly in most cases. Unless the chair's ruling is overturned by tie or majority vote in the negative, it stands. (The vote that is taken is a vote on whether or not to uphold the decision of the chair, so if the motion fails the decision is overturned. |
The cadet scheme run by many major airlines for decades has nothing to do with anything. These are people who pass many stages of rigorous selections, and are checked closely during all phases of training. They are not comparable at all to pay to fly, the same way as a 300 hrs pilot flying a Tornado isn't.
|
D and F
Lets put this to bed The context in which you put The current trend is to solely recruit cadets. You have clarified that you meant the industry in general and barring a few good airlines I agree with you. How a post is written has a big impact on what the reader understands you meant as opposed to what you meant, as we have all just re learned:hmm: Safe to say pt6, b,d and f are in agreement about p2f being undesirable to say the least. Regarding attitude agreed I have come across a number of new fo who firmly believe the threat is the captain! This being on day 1 released to the line:ugh: |
Agreed.
My manner may have been taken as rude, but I am passionate about this industry and although I doubt PTF or airline aircraft type ratings will be a part of my remaining career, I don't want this industry to become a mediocre existence for my industry colleagues cabin or flight deck. Low cost airline have saturated short haul and it is only a matter of time before they get longer range aspirations and companies such as BA have seen a reduction of profits on short haul which could and I believe will impact long. Easy took the bmi Moscow slots, already do sharm and tel aviv. A321 would I guess give them access to the sort of range flights bmed did or even a330 without a huge training cost. but I guess if you work for orange and have served your penance, then you may see this as a good thing. |
Why not we reverse the table and see the picture on the other side.
Airline used to sponsor pilots for the entire training in return hoping that they will stay and finish their contract and finish paying their bond. But guess what and especially the expats/foreigners, once they have the hours and experience, grab their passport and leave the country and go back to thier own country or other airline. Airlines end up losing millions and end up becoming a free scholarship training school for those who think the world owes them a job and everything should be free of charge. So reverse role, imagine you are the boss of an airline, are you setting up an airline to make money or love burning cash just to train pilots who run away? That is why it is less risky to hire local pilots and not get them upset for having foreigners stealing their jobs. So who is the culprit for pay to fly? It's the senior pilot who are most of the time critical of p2f and could not care less those new CPL 200 hour pilots whether they get a job or not. Who is there to protect the airline? Has to be a win win situation. Airline don't risk training fee training runaway pilots, while foreigners get hours and experience plus grabbing slots from locals. But of course, there are huge success for those who got the hours/experience and are currently flying for major airlines in the world. |
Herb Kelleher did ok, lots of the pilots made a million also.
Treat em well and employ those who will be based where they want to be on good terms and conditions and I think you would see very few leave. The bond system was fair and let's face it, Most airliner type ratings are not that expensive. A gulfstream G650 is $100000 apparently. Corporate greed and mis management has caused most of these problems I am sitting in a hotel surrounded by 12 MPL students from Lufthansa, all had their training paid for and even though there are no positions for them at the moment, they are being seconded to a partner airline while they wait. All nice guys and girls with solid educational backgrounds. Mostly engineering/science. So it can be done properly if you take greed out of the equation. |
Are there any other comparible industries where basic company introduction training costs are similar and where the trainee shoulders the costs: as bond or pay up front?
|
Can't think of many off hand, however many parallels can be drawn against competitive motor racing - namely F1.
The similarities are huge. Genuine well respected drivers in the top teams making the big bucks, however, down the grid many drivers actually paying to drive! P2D! Huge private investment required to make it to the top level, many never make it. Sometimes (but not always) better drivers being pipped to the job by those with the ability to pay/bring sponsorship money to the team. Sound familiar? |
P2F has nothing to do with replacing bonds.
Airlineexec companies that found expats leaving had quite often other reasons why pilots would leave "utopia". European companies found that some pilots would renege on bonds. They therefore introduced upfront payments, which were REPAID over say 2 of 3 years. All the time the pilots would be on full time employment and paid a full salary. This is completely different to P2F schemes such as: Getting v low hour pilots (including locals) to pay up front for a selection procedure, if successful to pay for the type rating and line training, with reduced salary for 6 months. At the end of which the pilot has 500 or less hours on type no job and is virtually unemployable! Oh and still has € 200, 000 debt after paying for initial training plus all the above. Reducing the risk for airlines has changed into a revenue stream! |
David Coulthard's dad paid for, if not the full cost a proportion of it, almost every race prior to F1.
So yes it does sound familiar! |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 11:35. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.