Deep Thoughts: Pre-employment simulator checks
- Thread starter derg
- Start date
ClearedForOption
Psychiatric Help 5¢
It's both a great and an awful idea.
Let's go to the instant replay... my 1st job interview. Colgan. Aced the HR part... got into the full motion 1900 sim and I stunk up that check so hard that they should have done a full COVID-decontam of the thing afterwards.
Couple of months later got hired by Skyway and aced training. In a 1900 no less.
Flash forward to St. George and a Frasca sim. Now... this is after I was hand flying a 1900 for months. Flying Part 121. Got a downcheck. Because the screen flashed white for a sec or so and the instructor said I should have gone around because I went IFR on a visual clearance. I saw it for literally one second. If that. I was scanning my instruments, dead to rights on the LOC/GS and saw a flash and everything came back in and I landed normally. I honestly thought it was a glitch or something... but no. TBNT. Have a good flight home.
A few years later. A PC based DC-9 sim. Did fine, got that job. That 'ride' told the examiner nothing except that I knew how to play video games.
Finally, a job I didn't take, flew a 737/FTD type thing. Did fine. Couldn't see the point.
And, at my current shop... it was all TMAAT questions. And for the record, had a perfect training record. No repeats, nothing.
I have nothing to do with pilot hiring, but if I was king for a day, I would sit down and try to design a system that does the best job to find the candidates with the best cultural fit. Which means nothing in the end. Because no matter what you do, there will be a cottage industry of people who teach pilots to beat the house because we are talking about multi-million dollar careers here. So, in the end... is the person a good pilot? Would you like to spend a 4-day with them consisting of a couple of red eyes and day sleeps without wanting to strangle them? Are they are professional? Can they be molded into the professional that the organization wants?
So, the question is... what does a ride around the pattern in a unfamiliar aircraft with a nervous candidate tell you about a pilot that you can extrapolate out 15-35 years as a future captain at your airline? Is there observational data that you can get from that experience - good or bad - that can be used in a decision to hire? Is it worth the time/effort vs. other interviewing exercises?
I mean, you probably could gather the same type of data on pilots by watching them play Among Us as having them fly a Frasca around a pattern. Although, for a true character test, it would have to be a series of video games. Maybe a puzzle game like BOTW? (Problem solving skills, resource management, moral judgements...)
RORO
Well-Known Member
To my understanding, the CUT-E type assessments some airlines use now accomplishes exactly that. I've been told it can predict with surprisingly high accuracy how much additional training (if any) a candidate would need. Don't really need a simulator anymore if these puzzle games can determine your ability (or better yet, trainability) without the cost or effort.
Purple does, well did a situation based interview. Sit in front of a FTD and run through a 8 minute scenario that loosely mimics the framework of a LOE. The stress is there, decision making, CRM, and introspection/debrief skills.
You can kinda study for that but i think it's a better idea of how someone acts under stress in a cockpit vs. flying a sim.
You can kinda study for that but i think it's a better idea of how someone acts under stress in a cockpit vs. flying a sim.
Crockrocket94
Well-Known Member
I remember during a meet and greet years back some head of hiring made a quote -" We can teach anyone to fly the 737... But how people react under stress... something something something... " Gist was - flying the plane isn't going to be the issue. Its everything else.
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
Waste of time. I mean, it’s better than TMAAT questions, which are insanely worthless, but that’s not saying much. The focus should be on personality testing and technical knowledge.
ZapBrannigan
If it ain’t a Boeing, I’m not going. No choice.
Well, you already know my opinion on needle, ball, and airspeed. So I see the value in determining whether someone has an instrument scan and can manage the flight path and energy state of the airplane.
Back in the day I showed up for an interview and they were doing sim evals in the 727 and DC9. They had us climb at 500 fpm, then descend at 500 fpm. Then turn 90 degrees while climbing at 1000 fpm, folllwed by a turn in the other direction descending at 1000 fpm. Then they vectored us for an ILS to minimums, hand flown, no flight director.
Tough ride in an airplane you've never flown, but you could see if they had a scan and how they reacted under pressure. Nobody expected you to be the ace of the base, but if you couldn't manage that it was a good indicator that you might struggle in training.
Later when I was interviewing at Walmart they had us fly a Learjet 35 sim. Couple of turns, slow flight, and an ILS WITH a flight director - which is a waste of time. Any teenager with an XBox can fly an ILS with a flight director.
But again, that was back in the day when airplanes had six round dial gauges and scan was important. Today there's one screen, a pink line, trend indicators, scan no longer required.
So maybe the LOE type interview tests similar decision making and stress management without the expense and time of a sim eval.
Lots have changed in the last couple of decades. Some for the better, some for the worse. Personally I liked it when pilots were pilots as opposed to computer operators. Would be interesting to see how young pilots trained in Garmin 1000 equipped trainers would do in a Jetstream or a Metro or a DC9. I'm guessing not that well. But the reality is that doesn't reflect the job they do today where a better indicator of their proficiency might be whether they can eat an ice cream sundae and get the tray table closed before the airplane yells "retard" at minimums.
Back in the day I showed up for an interview and they were doing sim evals in the 727 and DC9. They had us climb at 500 fpm, then descend at 500 fpm. Then turn 90 degrees while climbing at 1000 fpm, folllwed by a turn in the other direction descending at 1000 fpm. Then they vectored us for an ILS to minimums, hand flown, no flight director.
Tough ride in an airplane you've never flown, but you could see if they had a scan and how they reacted under pressure. Nobody expected you to be the ace of the base, but if you couldn't manage that it was a good indicator that you might struggle in training.
Later when I was interviewing at Walmart they had us fly a Learjet 35 sim. Couple of turns, slow flight, and an ILS WITH a flight director - which is a waste of time. Any teenager with an XBox can fly an ILS with a flight director.
But again, that was back in the day when airplanes had six round dial gauges and scan was important. Today there's one screen, a pink line, trend indicators, scan no longer required.
So maybe the LOE type interview tests similar decision making and stress management without the expense and time of a sim eval.
Lots have changed in the last couple of decades. Some for the better, some for the worse. Personally I liked it when pilots were pilots as opposed to computer operators. Would be interesting to see how young pilots trained in Garmin 1000 equipped trainers would do in a Jetstream or a Metro or a DC9. I'm guessing not that well. But the reality is that doesn't reflect the job they do today where a better indicator of their proficiency might be whether they can eat an ice cream sundae and get the tray table closed before the airplane yells "retard" at minimums.
roundout
VNAV monitor
I would trade the psych exam for doing a VFR traffic pattern in an A320 sim any day of the week.
roundout
VNAV monitor
When I interviewed there they gave us the sheet that day and we had about an hour to memorize it.
BravoHotel
Well-Known Member
I have had a sim ride for the past 2/3 employers, the other one we went up in an actual King Air 350.
EIR
It's 5 o'clock somewhere
At Omni they used a clapped out 732 in MIA, which barely worked and not many of the instructors actually knew how to operate it. The guy giving my interview didn't know how to remove ice from the runway, which made for an interesting landing. All they were looking for was power management in the climb/descent.
At Brown they got rid of the sim during the pandemic. I'm not sure this was a great idea as quite a few folks squeezed through the cracks and eventually washed out - in my class.
At Brown they got rid of the sim during the pandemic. I'm not sure this was a great idea as quite a few folks squeezed through the cracks and eventually washed out - in my class.
Last edited:
SurferLucas
Southern Gentleman
EIR
It's 5 o'clock somewhere
At OAI? I don't recall a QX capt doing training. Things may have changed since I departed.
Last edited:
SurferLucas
Southern Gentleman
EIR
It's 5 o'clock somewhere
Ah, that wasn't my class. My sim partner washed out for various reasons. He was an LCA for an overseas carrier with 10k TT in the Bus.
CoffeeIcePapers
Well-Hung Member
Maybe at entry level jobs, but not for a major, imo. I think Eagle used to do a sim ride in a Baron Frasca. I had to fly a 404 during my interview for a Metro job. It was fun.
roundout
VNAV monitor
We had a “special” QX lady captain in my new hire class at [redacted]. That was when they were Q only though, I think. 2015. She got through training but not through probation.
A
