PCL hires 8 of 11 from ATP

Status
Not open for further replies.
kellwolf said:
That seems a little closer to what I've been hearing. I'll know on Monday for sure if those ATP guys are in the class or if by "hired," they're swimming in a pool.

777, you've got numerous guys that have "been there, done that" telling you one thing, but you're still clinging to something else. When/if you wind up in our position, I'd almost bet you'll change your mind. I still say that if you need a $7K primer for 121 ground school to pass, you don't belong there.
Click to expand...

Fortunately you've also have numerous guys that have said "been there, didnt have to do that(extra instructing time)" and are humming along just fine at their respective regional airline. If I was alone in my opinion, then I would bow to you guys, but im not. BTW, didn't you have under 1000 hrs when you were hired? According to those who share your view, you don't belong in a jet cockpit yet. Just curious what you think about that.
 
That would not be those that share his view, that would be ME. Do not confuse ME with the rest of the world. Further, Steve knows how I feel about the issue. I lived with him, trained with him and worked with him. He's got a pretty clear view of how I think.

BTW Steve was hired right at 1,000 hours.
 
777forever said:
Fortunately you've also have numerous guys that have said "been there, didnt have to do that(extra instructing time)" and are humming along just fine at their respective regional airline. BTW, didn't you have under 1000 hrs when you were hired? According to those who share your view, you don't belong in a jet cockpit yet. Just curious what you think about that.
Click to expand...

I don't know what Kellwolf thinks about that, but I think you're a goon.:yar:
 
SteveC said:
Time for me to pull up one of my old posts. Haven't posted this in probably six months, so it's due:

There is also some misunderstanding about why some of the fast track programs are sometimes not well thought of in the experienced guys views. It is not about "paying dues" simply for the purpose of paying dues. Few people would begrudge someone finding better, smarter, and faster ways to do something. It is not about "I had to do it the hard way, so you do too." The problem with the fast track programs is not that it is easier than the old way. The problem is that there is something missing when a person does not do all of that flying - and that something is "experience".

Experience comes from being in literally hundreds and thousands of different situations and learning from both the good and bad things that happen.

"Experience" is why the freight dog is often highly regarded. Their situations (often single pilot, night, IFR, in all weather) require them to gain lots of street smarts (air smarts?) in a relatively short amount of time. 500 to 1000 hours of 135 freight time gets a person a ton of experience and (hopefully) skills and tricks of the trade that are needed in all types of flying, including the airlines.

Experience comes from spending time in an airplane, and there is no short cut. Even the guys that spend 1000 hours as CFI are gaining valuable experience, even though they often don't realize it. Some of the experience is in how to work with other people, what different personalities respond to (or not), and how miscommunication happens both inside the cockpit and over the radio. Some of it has to do with equipment and failures and learning how you react when bad crap happens. CFI's even get experience while they are just droning around the pattern hour after hour after hour. They experience what happens when the Net Jets Citation X comes honking into the area, and how to coordinate with different speed traffic. They get a (vicarious) feel for jet and turboprop speeds and the need to be on the ball and ahead of the aircraft. They learn to "feel" what the aircraft is doing through the seat of their pants and the noises that they hear. They learn which aircraft can slow down and join the flow better than others. They experience close calls with other aircraft and learn techniques for spotting and anticipating traffic. Literally hundreds of things are learned through experience, and all of those things make for a better pilot.

Don't misunderstand me. There are crappy high time pilots as well as low time. All things being equal, though, an experienced top notch pilot is more of an asset in the cockpit than an inexperienced top notch pilot. An experienced so-so pilot is more of an asset in the cockpit than his inexperienced counterpart. And in my opinion (here is the controversial part) an experienced so-so pilot is usually more of an asset than an inexperienced top gun when the crap hits the fan, simply because he has been there, done that.

The 250 or 500 hour guys may have the training and the book smarts and the skill sets to pass the oral and the check ride. That does not mean they have the skills to be a true asset in the cockpit, especially when there is a problem.

The low time guy is not a bad person for wanting to get to the jet as soon as he can. The high time guys don't dislike the low timers because they are there, either. In fact they really don't dislike the low timers at all. What the high time guys don't like is that they may have to rely on someone in the right seat who may or may not have the "right stuff" when the time comes that it is really needed. Then on top of that is all of the little things that an experienced copilot can bring to the cockpit to make life easier for the PIC. One small example - an experienced copilot working the radios on his non-flying leg probably has a ton of experience in working with ATC. He understands what ATC needs in different situations, and how to leverage what ATC needs against what the pilots want and can make a request that wins for both. The experienced copilot knows that what works in Chicago Approach's airspace does not work in New York's, and why. And all of those things help make the PIC's life just a little bit easier.
Click to expand...

Yup Steve I read this and I agree with your point that experience counts. But everyone has different levels of experience during their flight career. There can be no set time like 1000hrs before the light comes on and an inexperienced pilot is automatically an experienced pilot. Someone with 1500 hrs of mostly pipeline flying in a 182RG with 100multi they paid for in a time building program pales in comparision to a 6-month ATP instructor with 300+ hrs of multi PIC time. This is what the guys doing the hiring at the airlines are looking for. Top business schools have a reputation of producing excellent MBAs, thats why fortune 500 companies snatch up those new grads. Top Flight schools have a reputation of producing excellent pilots, and thats is why regional airlines snatch up ATP instructors! If they are going to spend 30k on a new-hire's training, they do not want them to wash out, so they hire some from a school where the wash out rate is low. What is this called, a good reputation. This is what I want to experience. This is why I am going to ATP CFI program and will put forth my best effort so I can become an instructor there, and have my flying skills grow even more through my EXPERIENCE instructing at ATP. When I finally get the call for a class date, I am gone no matter if I have 400, 500, 600 etc hrs. I guess that is when I will see what you guys are talking about, that the view is a whole lot better at 35,000 than 5,000
 
777forever said:
http://forums.jetcareers.com/showthread.php?t=31911
another post well said.

When the planes start falling out of the sky because of 500hr pilots you guys can talk to me about experience. Until then, your theories are based only on numbers in your logbook and your past experiences, not facts. Once again if you missed it the first time, talk to me when a 500 hr pilot crashes the plane!
Click to expand...

The reason that you don't hear about RJ's falling outa the sky with 500 hr. co-pilots in them is because those planes are commanded by captians with more hours,experience and type in the plane...duh!
 
"Top business schools have a reputation of producing excellent MBAs, thats why fortune 500 companies snatch up those new grads. Top Flight schools have a reputation of producing excellent pilots, and thats is why regional airlines snatch up ATP instructors!"

ATP..."the Harvard of the Skies"
 
ATP..."the Harvard of the Skies"
Click to expand...

DE, Yeah, Right.

777, I went to ATP 90 days program. I got most of my ratings. However, one conclusion I have from that program - "There are always pilots who have better flying skills than I am." At 500 hours, from my experiences, I have so much to learn about flying than sitting right seats of RJ. :)

adreamer
 
777forever said:
Yup Steve I read this and I agree with your point that experience counts. But everyone has different levels of experience during their flight career. There can be no set time like 1000hrs before the light comes on and an inexperienced pilot is automatically an experienced pilot. Someone with 1500 hrs of mostly pipeline flying in a 182RG with 100multi they paid for in a time building program pales in comparision to a 6-month ATP instructor with 300+ hrs of multi PIC time. This is what the guys doing the hiring at the airlines are looking for. Top business schools have a reputation of producing excellent MBAs, thats why fortune 500 companies snatch up those new grads. Top Flight schools have a reputation of producing excellent pilots, and thats is why regional airlines snatch up ATP instructors! If they are going to spend 30k on a new-hire's training, they do not want them to wash out, so they hire some from a school where the wash out rate is low. What is this called, a good reputation. This is what I want to experience. This is why I am going to ATP CFI program and will put forth my best effort so I can become an instructor there, and have my flying skills grow even more through my EXPERIENCE instructing at ATP. When I finally get the call for a class date, I am gone no matter if I have 400, 500, 600 etc hrs. I guess that is when I will see what you guys are talking about, that the view is a whole lot better at 35,000 than 5,000
Click to expand...

Again, how do you know that the ATP CFI program is top notch? You've never done it, nor have you ever tried to pass a CFI ride with a FSDO. Now this is the one place I'm going to bag on ATP; they only do their CFI program where you will take your ride with a DE. That's BS. I took my CFII (as initial) ride at a FSDO where there's a 90% failure rate on the first, second and third attempts.

Now I'm not saying that ATP produces crappy pilots, I AM saying that you CAN NOT learn enough in 14 days to cover everything for your CFI, II and MEI rides. It's impossible. That's why ATP uses places where you have to use a DE. I was busting balls for 30 days, 8 hours a day to study enough to pass my CFII initial ride, and I like to think I'm a halfway decent pilot. I just can't believe that somebody can gain enough knowledge in 14 days to pass all three rides. I think 6 weeks for all three rides is about as fast as it goes.
 
jtrain609 said:
Now this is the one place I'm going to bag on ATP; they only do their CFI program where you will take your ride with a DE. That's BS. I took my CFII (as initial) ride at a FSDO where there's a 90% failure rate on the first, second and third attempts.
Click to expand...

Not to sound like the other bob (:insane:) but about 50% of the ATP LAS CFI initials were going with the FSDO. I think their pass rate was around 80% (compared to the 95% that were passing with the two DEs up there. Does that mean much? Not really, but just FWIW there are FSDOs involved. Also, out of JAX the ride is assigned by the FSDO but generally with a DE. Sort of 50% 50% split on that one.
 
Yeah I know that the FSDO grabs random guys to ride with them. I also know I'm going to catch hell for my opinions on ATP's CFI program. It's just how I feel about the issue and I've seen some really, really, really great pilots get shut down by the Fort Worth FSDO. I know if they had walked in to do their CFI ride with a DE at ATP they would have destroyed their ride, but because they went to a FSDO that wants to bust your balls until you get the ride perfect I feel that ATP's program is trying to cheat the system.
 
jtrain609 said:
Again, how do you know that the ATP CFI program is top notch? You've never done it, nor have you ever tried to pass a CFI ride with a FSDO. Now this is the one place I'm going to bag on ATP; they only do their CFI program where you will take your ride with a DE. That's BS. I took my CFII (as initial) ride at a FSDO where there's a 90% failure rate on the first, second and third attempts.

Now I'm not saying that ATP produces crappy pilots, I AM saying that you CAN NOT learn enough in 14 days to cover everything for your CFI, II and MEI rides. It's impossible. That's why ATP uses places where you have to use a DE. I was busting balls for 30 days, 8 hours a day to study enough to pass my CFII initial ride, and I like to think I'm a halfway decent pilot. I just can't believe that somebody can gain enough knowledge in 14 days to pass all three rides. I think 6 weeks for all three rides is about as fast as it goes.
Click to expand...

You are absolutely right, know way to learn all that information in 14 days and if you try to in the program you just wasted money because you will flunk out. Most of the CFIs here at my school says it took them 6 months of studying, so Im taking their advice and hitting the books early! ATP expects you to know your stuff before you get there. I plan on signing up in January and attending the program in June.
 
jtrain609 said:
Again, how do you know that the ATP CFI program is top notch? You've never done it, nor have you ever tried to pass a CFI ride with a FSDO. Now this is the one place I'm going to bag on ATP; they only do their CFI program where you will take your ride with a DE. That's BS. I took my CFII (as initial) ride at a FSDO where there's a 90% failure rate on the first, second and third attempts.
Click to expand...

Its mainly because it takes weeks or months to get the FSDO to do a CFI ride (in fort worth anyway), and its faster to just go to where they allow DEs to do it.
 
jtrain609 said:
I AM saying that you CAN NOT learn enough in 14 days to cover everything for your CFI, II and MEI rides. It's impossible. That's why ATP uses places where you have to use a DE. I was busting balls for 30 days, 8 hours a day to study enough to pass my CFII initial ride, and I like to think I'm a halfway decent pilot. I just can't believe that somebody can gain enough knowledge in 14 days to pass all three rides. I think 6 weeks for all three rides is about as fast as it goes.
Click to expand...
777forever said:
You are absolutely right, know way to learn all that information in 14 days and if you try to in the program you just wasted money because you will flunk out. Most of the CFIs here at my school says it took them 6 months of studying, so Im taking their advice and hitting the books early! ATP expects you to know your stuff before you get there. I plan on signing up in January and attending the program in June.
Click to expand...
That is correct... you are both right in my opinion.

John... you are absolutely right in that there's no way to learn that information in 14 days and be relatively decent. As you know... there is a lot of self study with ATP and I'd only recommend the 14 day CFI program for the truly self motivated. Once you sign up... ATP sends you all the study materials and a very large prep/pre-test notebook that is required to be completed prior to day one. ATP simply provides the legal amount of Ground Instruction to get you the sign off.

If someone doesn't have a full month to study "balls to the wall" like you did... but they can take time over several weeks or months and do the self study portion while still working... then take a bit of vacation time to come complete the short course... that's the benefit. The time given back to the individual by not having to sit in GS for months at a time to learn stuff that they can learn on their own.

It's not a shortcut... I've seen people show up at the 14 day course without having done their pre-work... it wasn't pretty... many dropped out by day 2.

DE vs. FSDO? They both operate under the same rules and regulations... the difference? A DE can lose his "Designation" and thereby lose a great source of additional income by not adhereing to the PTS Standards* and criteria set forth by the FAA... who audits the DE on a regular basis while in the performance of his duties. DE's are far from "cheating" the system.

Regardless... ATP uses both FSDO examiners and DE's.

PS: I've heard rumors... you are "a halfway decent pilot"! ;) Still there at Skymates or are you done?

Bob

*Sidenote... So is it "PTS Standards"? Isn't that like saying "Practical Test Standards... Standards"? :)
 
I'm too lazy to look up the links, but I recall a discussion some months ago where the general consensus was that the Fort Worth FSDO was a little too strict and that they needed to lighten up a little bit. Maybe I'm remembering it incorrectly, but I recall the key players in this thread were involved in that one, too. <shrug>

I'm surprised that there is a disparity between FSDOs and DEs for checkrides. If they test pilots to all of the same standards, why is there such a wide statistical (albeit anecdotal - is there hard data anywhere?) gap between passrates at different locations and with different types of checkride instructors?
 
killbilly said:
I'm surprised that there is a disparity between FSDOs and DEs for checkrides. If they test pilots to all of the same standards, why is there such a wide statistical (albeit anecdotal - is there hard data anywhere?) gap between passrates at different locations and with different types of checkride instructors?
Click to expand...

You can actually look up the info on the FAA website. Here's a link to a guy who did just that and found that there really isn't as much of a disparity between FSDO and DE Rides as we would all like to think... and certainly no where's near the 90% number we all hear in the horror stories.

http://www.rapp.org/wp-print.php?p=293

Here are the actual 2005 Stats from the FAA: http://www.faa.gov/data_statistics/..._airmen_statistics/2005/media/air19&20-05.xls

Short version:

FAA Examiners = 64.7% approved first time for Initial CFI's
DE's = 73.7% approved for first time Initial CFI's

The 90% FSDO Fail vs. 50% DE Fail Myth = "Busted"! ;)

Bob
 
That's an overall breakdown eh? Our POI told us they're failing 90% of applicants that come through. There was one poor guy over at Grand Prarie that made 5 attemps with TS (if you're fimilar with that guy) until he finally gave up. We've had a few of our guys busted for things outside the PTS, also.
 
I would hazzard to guess that there are some "hardball" FSDO offices out there... and if not... then certainly some "hardball" Examiners that work in the FSDO's. Recent situations with the Ft. Worth FSDO woud certainly lead me to believe that.

After all... the stats are averages... which means that the line between hardas* FSDO's and Examiners and fair ones, smooths out across the US. Same for DE's... Some are hardas*'s as well... but in both arenas nationwide... the higher percentage amount don't seem to be.

My additional thoughts may be that FSDO's want CFI's and CFI candidates to "think" that folks are going to fail the first time so that might motivate the CFI's to send well prepared candidates to the checkride as well as motivate Initial Candidates to study their butts off.

Maybe not... I don't think any government official or organization would ever lie to us for their own benefit... would they? ;)

Bob
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top