3407 Strikes a Cord Redux/Whatever you guys are arguing abou

Re: 3407 Strikes a Cord Redux/Whatever you guys are arguing

Gonzo said:
Interviews cost a lot of money. Most companies only hire 5%-15% of people they interview now you want the companies to spend more money coming up with 4 or 5 different sim evals.

I think you miss the point of the sim eval. They are looking for two things are you trainable and CRM.



I think your lack of 121/135 experience is showing. Nice questions for a PPL or CSEL checkride, but no place in a 121/135 world.




Like I said interviewing and training cost a lot of money. If the company likes pilot A they more then likely going to like pilot B who has the same back round and is a friend of pilot A. In the companies eye it is less of a risk.
Click to expand...
Accidents are expensive too. It doesn't seem like they are concerned with anything beyond how easy it will be to train the applicant. Airline CRM is a good thing to look at also but it's something that's brand new to a GA pilot I wouldn't expect anything you see them do to be represenetive of what they will do on the line.


I don't see why interview questions don't have to go into any detail. How would asking a question with a 2 word answer give you a better feel for the applicants knowledge and attention to detail? I don't think these things become unimportant when you fly commercially.


It doesn't seem to follow that if you are a good pilot your friend probably is too. Even if it was true to an extent it seems like it's way to big a consideration.
 
Re: 3407 Strikes a Cord Redux/Whatever you guys are arguing

:deadhorse:


Yes! My first time use. Now I'm wondering what happens when this emoticon is over used, will someone have to do this...:deadhorse:>:deadhorse:?
 
Re: 3407 Strikes a Cord Redux/Whatever you guys are arguing

ctab5060X said:
Sometimes the truth hurts.



Why not give them the same exact sim and situation as everyone else. That way there is a level playing field when it comes time to review the candidates and select people you want to hire. Otherwise, how are you going to decide between two similar individuals with different backgrounds when you can only hire one of them?



I was asked this question before:

Explain, in detail, how the electrical system works ons the most recent multi engine airplane you flew.

No need to start getting obscure. Pilots are there for an interview, not a checkride with the FAA.



Or they can search the internet for a gouge and memorize the answer.
Click to expand...
Yeah it does sometimes that's why I think a lot of people would find it easier to just sign a letter and hope for the best then to tell a friend of theirs they suck.


It's not a level playing field if there is some people who have bought simulator time and others haven't.


An "explain this" type question is one that is harder to memorize a canned answer for without actually understanding what you are talking about. And if you make questions for almost every topic a pilot is expected to know than it's even harder to just study a gouge.
 
Re: 3407 Strikes a Cord Redux/Whatever you guys are arguing

ppragman said:
I don't think those are particularly pertinent questions for an interview. That tells the interviewer nothing of the applicants most important attribute (imo) for the cockpit: judgment. Something more like, "have you ever broken an FAR?" or "Describe to me an emergency situation you've been involved in, or barring involvement in an emergency, a situation that put you out of your comfort zone. How did you react?"

Asking questions about "how a rectifier turns AC into DC" (a question which I don't know the answer to, though I am gainfully employed at a 135 carrier) doesn't tell you anything at all about the quality of your applicant. 99% of aviation decision making is past experience, the other 1% is technical knowledge. Really, a pilot doesn't even need to know how an alternator works or how a hall-effect device takes a generator offline, the "how" of the matter means absolutely nothing to us. Hell, even the ubiquitous "how does an altimeter work? wellllll, see there are these aneroid wafers..." doesn't mean a damn thing after the instrument checkride, because knowing how something works may not allow us to do anything about it.

For us it is strictly application. So what if I can identify airplanes from the ply of the tires and can mentally calculate the formula for hydroplaning? Those things can be taught, and the pilot can learn the more obscure details on his or her own if they see fit, what really matters to the interviewer is how you're going to react when your ass, and their shiny (or rusty for you freight dawgs) airplane is in a sling. They'd also like to know if they can bear working with you on a daily basis. Pass those two points, and the rest can be trained. An internal rec pretty much covers one of those points because "hey, we know he's friends with at least one of the guys around here." The other point can be figured out by looking through the logbook, and a quick interview.
Click to expand...
I don't buy the argument that pilots don't need to understand technical knowledge areas. I also think I stated quite clearly that the alternator question was just an example. I don't think you could make the same argument regarding for example the weather or FARs.
 
Re: 3407 Strikes a Cord Redux/Whatever you guys are arguing

tonyw said:
How the hell is an interviewee at say, Colgan, supposed to know about the electrical systems of a Q400 when the closest they've come to flying it is looking at the thing on their walk in for the interview?
Click to expand...
Killtron2000 said:
Just to pre-emp a couple things I am not saying it would all hinge on this one series of questions about the alternator IT IS JUST AN EXAMPLE of something I came up with on the spur of the moment.

Also it wouldn't have to be all about aircraft systems there are plenty of topics you can go in depth into.

You can also ask as many scenario question or HR questions as you want.
Click to expand...

Reading for comprehension must not be your strong suit. I hope that doesn't come up at any of your job interviews. Apparently you think the Q400 is the only plane with an alternator. (for all I know it doesn't even have one)
 
Re: 3407 Strikes a Cord Redux/Whatever you guys are arguing

Firebird2XC said:
Interesting questions concerning technical aspects of airplane components.. BUT...

In my last recurrent ground, I found myself sitting in the front row.

The check airman giving ground school started quizzing us on system concepts.

The first: "How many chemical oxygen generators are there in the ceiling of the passenger cabin?"

I mused for a moment, and decided to be a smart ass:

"Who cares?"

He smiled. In his thick Austrian accent, he said,

"That's right! Who cares? You can't do anything to them and their operation requires no input from you once the masks drop. Maintenance might need to know something about this, but you don't. We're trying to stop asking questions like this- there's no point in them."

He then proceeded to ask several stump-the-chump style questions which I was not allowed to answer, as I already had the stock, correct answer to all of them.

"Who cares?"

While technological understanding of your equipment is required and certainly lends to aviator confidence, there comes a point where we just go too far sometimes. If you're looking to apply deep science and an esoteric level of knowledge to a situation on an aircraft, you're playing McGuyver and are WAY outside the definition requirements of memory items and check list use. At that point, if you really need things that bad, landing, and quickly, should be your immediate priority.
Click to expand...
Where in my post did I say systems knowledge was super important? I didn't. I was using a question like that as AN EXAMPLE.
 
Re: 3407 Strikes a Cord Redux/Whatever you guys are arguing

Killtron2000 said:
You are perfectly capable of not clicking on this thread. Right?
Click to expand...

Well, my JC addict side says no. My rational side says yes.

After the replies I've read in this thread I realize you're the guy who would rather have any sort of attention, positive or negative. Definitely attention seeking behavior, but it's not so much narcissism as it is an unhealthy desire to negate.
 
Re: 3407 Strikes a Cord Redux/Whatever you guys are arguing

SpiraMirabilis said:
Why would I care how a rectifier turns AC to DC? I guess the question to ask is what does a TRU (or just a rectifier) do? All pilots SHOULD care about on most items is what it does, how it operates, any limitations of operation.

I do know that a rectifier uses diodes and anodes to change the waveform of the electrical signal, but that is minutia. As far as a pilot is concerned that is magic.
Click to expand...
I tried to head it off by stating in the post in capital letters IT'S JUST AND EXAMPLE but apparently that wasn't enough I still get responses to a point I didn't even make about systems knowledge.
 
Re: 3407 Strikes a Cord Redux/Whatever you guys are arguing

jynxyjoe said:
Well, my JC addict side says no. My rational side says yes.

After the replies I've read in this thread I realize you're the guy who would rather have any sort of attention, positive or negative. Definitely attention seeking behavior, but it's not so much narcissism as it is an unhealthy desire to negate.
Click to expand...
Christopher Hitchens is my hero.
 
Re: 3407 Strikes a Cord Redux/Whatever you guys are arguing

Killtron2000 said:
Where in my post did I say systems knowledge was super important? I didn't. I was using a question like that as AN EXAMPLE.
Click to expand...


Then you used a poor example, and have poorly backed your argument.

Anything else you care to fail at today?
 
Re: 3407 Strikes a Cord Redux/Whatever you guys are arguing

Killtron2000 said:
Christopher Hitchens is my hero.
Click to expand...

His '03 piece on Mother Teresa was especially despicable. Especially the part where he misquotes her and puts in what he needs to create his delusion.

It's still on Slate. Apparently they left the original article intact and simply spelled out the correction at the end.

Quite the hero, and quite a disturbing pathology.
 
Re: 3407 Strikes a Cord Redux/Whatever you guys are arguing

Killtron2000 said:
CRM is a good thing to look at also but it's something that's brand new to a GA pilot I wouldn't expect anything you see them do to be represenetive of what they will do on the line.
Click to expand...

You're joking, right?

So, there is no CRM in a training environment. Do students and instructors not interact in the cockpit these days? What about instrument students flying with a safety pilot?

Killtron2000 said:
Yeah it does sometimes that's why I think a lot of people would find it easier to just sign a letter and hope for the best then to tell a friend of theirs they suck.
Click to expand...

You must have missed the posts where several people pointed out that the one who is making the recommendation is also at risk, probably more so than the person interviewing.

Killtron2000 said:
It's not a level playing field if there is some people who have bought simulator time and others haven't.
Click to expand...

So, are now you are talking about them being in a transport category sim... I thought the whole time you were for a simple "what they have flown before" sim, something along the lines of a simple Frasca... please, can you clarify which you want?

Killtron2000 said:
An "explain this" type question is one that is harder to memorize a canned answer for without actually understanding what you are talking about.
Click to expand...

And all it takes is one or two simple follow-up questions to know if the person truly knows their stuff or if they are giving a canned answer.
 
Re: 3407 Strikes a Cord Redux/Whatever you guys are arguing

ctab5060X said:
You're joking, right?

So, there is no CRM in a training environment. Do students and instructors not interact in the cockpit these days? What about instrument students flying with a safety pilot?



You must have missed the posts where several people pointed out that the one who is making the recommendation is also at risk, probably more so than the person interviewing.



So, are now you are talking about them being in a transport category sim... I thought the whole time you were for a simple "what they have flown before" sim, something along the lines of a simple Frasca... please, can you clarify which you want?



And all it takes is one or two simple follow-up questions to know if the person truly knows their stuff or if they are giving a canned answer.
Click to expand...
This is the entire quote I think you left off a key word.

Killtron2000 said:
Airline CRM is a good thing to look at also but it's something that's brand new to a GA pilot.
Click to expand...

What CFI's and students do does not really totally prepare someone to use CRM the way airline pilots do. You wouldn't need a class for it if it did.


Are you going to get fired if your buddy washes out of training? Did the guy who recommended Renslow or Shaw get fired?


ctab5060X said:
Why not give them the same exact sim and situation as everyone else. That way there is a level playing field when it comes time to review the candidates and select people you want to hire. Otherwise, how are you going to decide between two similar individuals with different backgrounds when you can only hire one of them?
Click to expand...
I was responding to this and I thought you were saying they should be in a sim of a transport category airplane.


Than you're asking for details which would be the same thing as what I'm asking.
 
Re: 3407 Strikes a Cord Redux/Whatever you guys are arguing

Heres how my interview went...

Showed up in the morning and watched the kool aid video about how great the company is and how it values its employees. HAHAHAHA :cwm27:

Then all 15 or so of us took the cognitive reasoning test, very similar to an IQ test. Alot of weight was put on that test because 5 guys weren't there after we met back up after the break.

Then we took a simple 50 or so question ATP/IFR type test. This test was on the internet word for word so it wasn't an issue.

Then we sat in the break room and drank coffee and waited to either be called for the interview or the sim. I got the sim first and it was just a PC training device setup to be a baron or some light twin. I took off into IMC, flew a full procedure ILS to a missed approach with an engine failure and an NDB hold. Overall it was very simple and the guy administering it was a Purdue intern. I don't really think you could have failed the sim part to be honest. Also guys with 121/135 and military flying experience didn't have to do the sim portion.

Then the HR one on one part was very easy going. Mostly just shooting the breeze with the pilot and the HR lady trying to get in the basic do you have a DUI, do you have a record, or do you want to let us know about anything that may show up on a backround check type questions. I had a pretty strong recomendation from the owner of the flight school I instructed at that knew one of the higher ups at the airline. Other people said their one on one interview was much more difficult. I didn't have one system question or anything that had to do with flying. Others did but many of those guys still ended up getting hired.

What I took from it was that if someone was willing to give you a recomendation then your one on one interview was much easier however you could still get the job if you weren't a moron (Cog Test), and the pilot thought you were a fun enough guy. Its impossible to study for an IQ test as they are all slightly different and the HR lady running the show said that she knew about all the gouge and that she even had a membership to airlineinterviews.com or whatever it is.

Also if someone wanted me to give them a recomendation and I didn't think they were good enough I would probably just say sure and not give em one. How are they gonna know? Also I have found that if you have to ask for a recomendation you are doing it wrong. Every rec I ever got was offered.

What do you think KillTron, how would you have done it better?
 
Re: 3407 Strikes a Cord Redux/Whatever you guys are arguing

Killtron2000 said:
Apparently you think the Q400 is the only plane with an alternator. (for all I know it doesn't even have one)
Click to expand...

I don't know if a Q400 has an alternator or not. Nor do I care.

You provided an example, which was completely irrelevant to the ability to fly the goddamn plane.

If you can't figure out that your hypothetical is just plain stupid, I can't help you.

Again, what the hell do ANY of your hypothetical questions have to do with flying the plane?
 
Re: 3407 Strikes a Cord Redux/Whatever you guys are arguing

Killtron2000 said:
Reading for comprehension must not be your strong suit. I hope that doesn't come up at any of your job interviews. Apparently you think the Q400 is the only plane with an alternator. (for all I know it doesn't even have one)
Click to expand...
Actually it has 2. 2 dc gens 2 ac gens and 2 pma's ( permanent magnet alternators.


For the record.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top