United has some splainin to do…

In the last decade or so, plenty of programs and assistance put maintenance grunts in the cockpit. With that slowing down, staying in maintenance is a hard sell, sure you don’t sleep in a tent listening to AAA anymore, but coming home and starting a family with indefinite night shifts is a non-starter for many. Especially when you look around at other industries that will scoop up a veteran with a clean record and good work ethic.

For sure, my point was more that the talent pool is out there. They would just need to make it a worthwhile endeavor ($$$, QOL, benefits)
 
But are they? :)

They tell a story.

But like the SAT, is it a useful story for filtering candidates for that specific job, or just something that some data scientists and psychologists thought was cool 40 to 80 years ago, and had the foresight to hire a good marketing team to push the test as a gold standard?
 
I have no idea.

I am, however, hugely supportive of some level of psychological screening, but I haven't a clue what is the best method of doing it.

I'd love to compare the results of a soon-to-retire largely self-actualized 64 year old with one of the "more notable people" as of recent that can pass a checkride but whose professional and private life is a anthropomorphic Hanna-Barbera cartoon.
 
one of the "more notable people" as of recent that can pass a checkride but whose professional and private life is a anthropomorphic Hanna-Barbera cartoon.

454987_A young man airline pilot sitting in the cockpit o_xl-1024-v1-0.png
 
No one is asking that, trust me.

Plus, total hours aren't directly related to better training performance as there are a litany of other qualitative factors.



Oh come on, that was the rage in 2014-2019.


Even you said in those days, along the lines of, “everyone has an ATP, Jet time, PIC time, etc, but what makes YOU stand out?”

And that’s where all the BS came in about habitat for humanity, soup kitchen volunteer, all the extra crap you can do to stand out.





You’re right total time doesn’t mean much. Esp in widebody cruise / relief FOs when you don’t do any real flying. But domestic RJs, 737, 320 flying? The more total time in that, even if you suck, it means you’ve survived that long from whatever mistakes you made. And hopefully learned from. There’s a reason the Colgan CA and the Atlas FO weren’t high timers.
 
I took one of those tests in high school, and it said that I would be a troll on the internet.

I found that particularly impressive since the internet wasn’t even a thing then.


Sort of life finding out you’ll be killed by being eaten by a Bronteroc.


A what?



A Bronteroc. We don’t know what that means.



Oh. Huh.
 
Oh come on, that was the rage in 2014-2019.


Even you said in those days, along the lines of, “everyone has an ATP, Jet time, PIC time, etc, but what makes YOU stand out?”

And that’s where all the BS came in about habitat for humanity, soup kitchen volunteer, all the extra crap you can do to stand out.





You’re right total time doesn’t mean much. Esp in widebody cruise / relief FOs when you don’t do any real flying. But domestic RJs, 737, 320 flying? The more total time in that, even if you suck, it means you’ve survived that long from whatever mistakes you made. And hopefully learned from. There’s a reason the Colgan CA and the Atlas FO weren’t high timers.

That’s not what I said.

There are qualitative and quantitative aspects of evaluating a pilot.

Chuck Yeager had a lot of flight time and fantastic flying skills. Quantitatively superior. Qualitatively inferior because of his interpersonal skills.

Keanu Reeves is probably the most empathetic, nicest person on earth, judging from his interactions with the public. Let’s just call him Qualitatively superior because of his social skills, reasoning and personality. Quantitatively inferior because he has little, if any, flying experience.

Both have zero business in the cockpit of an A320 in an airline operation. Put them both together and it’s even worse from a human factors standpoint.
 

But then, on the other hand, good people DO fall through the cracks. That’s the residual effects of strangers talking to strangers using another strangers method of evaluating…. Strangers
 
Last edited:
That’s not what I said.

There are qualitative and quantitative aspects of evaluating a pilot.

Chuck Yeager had a lot of flight time and fantastic flying skills. Quantitatively superior. Qualitatively inferior because of his interpersonal skills.

Keanu Reeves is probably the most empathetic, nicest person on earth, judging from his interactions with the public. Let’s just call him Qualitatively superior because of his social skills, reasoning and personality. Quantitatively inferior because he has little, if any, flying experience.

Both have zero business in the cockpit of an A320 in an airline operation. Put them both together and it’s even worse from a human factors standpoint.



I’ll take Baba Yaga in the flight deck before some 24 yr old GoPro bro who suffers from visions of grandeur.
 
Any truth to this? Saw it on another forum
View attachment 77085

One friend spoke with some UAL friends and they says it's accurate. I spoke with a UAL lead LCA and he says it isn't BUT they're under a lot of scrutiny, as are we all.

The entire industry's "bus" has wobbly tires so please don't think UAL is the alpha-to-the-omega of incidents. Some of us (ahem) are better at keeping things under wraps.

Here are some facts.

United will undergo a Certificate Holder and Evaluation Program (CHEP Audit).

CHEP audits occur for every airline routinely every few years.

United’s last audit was in 2018.

United will still train and conduct type rides.

A pause of LCP/Instructor training may occur to focus on the audit.
 
Oh come on, that was the rage in 2014-2019.


Even you said in those days, along the lines of, “everyone has an ATP, Jet time, PIC time, etc, but what makes YOU stand out?”

And that’s where all the BS came in about habitat for humanity, soup kitchen volunteer, all the extra crap you can do to stand out.

is this no longer the case?

The more total time in that, even if you suck, it means you’ve survived that long from whatever mistakes you made. And hopefully learned from. There’s a reason the Colgan CA and the Atlas FO weren’t high timers.
bet you $5 the industry is closer to another Colgan than you think it is.
 
Back
Top