Blowing an Interview (Pinnacle example)

Cherokee_Cruiser

Cherokee_Cruiser

Bronteroc
Ok, so here is a recent gouge:

Interview experience:
First off, Pinnacle is looking for people that want to be there for the long term. Just because you tell them that you want to be does not mean they believe you. I did the Sim first, Takeoff runway 18L at MEM climb to 3000 then intercept a radial off the MEM VOR. Vectors for the ILS 36R go missed, vectors for a hold. He asked what type of entry I would use and I said parallel. It would of worked but he wanted me to do a teardrop. All you have to do is fly the sim. No props, mixtures, checklists, or flaps. It is pitch sensitive though. The written was next. Real straight forward. Much like other gouges. 121 regs, weather, IFR procedures, and aerodynamics. Then came the Tech/HR part. Lots of IFR procedures in addition to HR questions. I did not get 1 single question on an airplane I fly. The question they said I "failed" on was how much ice accumulates in severe icing. I said that it didnt matter, and that if I was in severe icing it would be time to get out of it immediatly. They didnt like that apparently. Everyone was nice, but they know what they want. If you dont make it, dont take it personal, they just make up an excuse not to hire you. I dont know if I will re-apply in 6 months.
Click to expand...


Clearly, no wonder this person didn't get hired. It was the attitude and the way the answer was given... not what the interviewer wanted to hear, for sure.

My questions,

1. Even with this kind of 'blowing the interview' , would you still stand a chance to interview 6 months later?

2. So what is the answer to how much ice accumlates in severe icing?

I heard one pilot say up to one inch per minute, but that seems really extreme.


Anyone?
 
Cherokee_Cruiser said:
Clearly, no wonder this person didn't get hired. It was the attitude and the way the answer was given... not what the interviewer wanted to hear, for sure.

My questions,

1. Even with this kind of 'blowing the interview' , would you still stand a chance to interview 6 months later?

2. So what is the answer to how much ice accumlates in severe icing?

I heard one pilot say up to one inch per minute, but that seems really extreme.


Anyone?
Click to expand...
I don't sit on interview boards, but I don't really see a big problem with that answer. Most candidates are probably not going to know the answer to every single question they are asked. Even if the pilot is unable to quote some definition verbatim from some book, he knows that 'severe icing' is not a good thing and he knows what to do to rectify the situation. I would rather have an prospective candidate say that he would not fly through a thunderstorm and know how much distance he should avoid it by, than be able to name the 3 stages of thunderstorm formation from the aviation weather book.

I would think that this is probably not the real reason they did not hire him. Maybe he smelled bad, who knows? Since they were recently hiring a bunch of gear monkeys from Gulfstream, how picky could they be?
 
I can't remember the definition off hand, but I would've said something like the ice is accumulating beyond the rate at which deice can get rid of it or it is really negating the anti ice.

If they didn't like my answer, it's good enough to get a digging type question. Sometimes, if interviewers want to give you a break, they will ask a question to browse your knowledge base a little and see if you can use what you do know to work yourself through the situation, or to find out if you lack sufficient knowledge. They could then ask a follow-up question, like "ok, well if you encounter that, how would you handle it?" Not as easy to answer that one. It went from define severe ice to tell me how you would handle it. You could talk about that for a while. Most people are capable, but alot of people talk themselves right out of the interview.

My best advice is to not get intimidated and do your best to answer all the questions correctly. If you can't give the aviation answer, give your best simple answer in layman's terms. Say what you do know and never give an excuse or apologize. Always be sure of yourself and show it, regardless of how you feel about how you're doing. And if you find that you're about to dig yourself into a hole, slow down and think it through. It's doable if you don't try to be fancy about something you don't know or forgot (interviewers hate bs). I've found in most of the interviews that I've had in my life, the interviewers will actually nurse you along a little if you struggle with something. They want to see if you can succeed if given the tools for success. They also want to know if you can make it through their training program. They know that nobody's perfect.

Interviews are taylored to find out 2 big things (among many others)

1. Do you have a tolerable personality and

2. Are you trainable
 
His reponse to the icing question probably wasn't the sole reason he wasn't selected.

He may think it was, but I seriously doubt it.

"Severe Icing", if you look at the textbook definition varies on the aircraft. I might be wrong, but that's the way I remember it!
 
Severe Icing is defined by the AIM as "The rate of accumulation is such that deicing/anti-icing equipment fails to reduce or control the hazard. Immediate flight diversion is necessary".

I don't know that I've ever seen an actual amount such as 1 inch an hour. As Doug said, of course it's going to depend on the aircraft - severe icing in a Bonanza may not even be noticed in a jet.

Maybe they wanted the textbook answer from above. Who knows. But I can tell you with almost absolute certainty, that's not the only reason he didn't get the job. I had an opportunity to conduct some interviews and then I would overhear the applicants talking among themselves and it's amazing how different their stories were from what actually transpired in the interview. I know one of the guys that does interviews at Pinnacle and he can be a flat out prick but not knowing that definition was not the only reason he didn't get hired. As evidenced by this thread, the vast majority of pilots wouldn't have any idea what the definition is without looking it up.

Jason
 
Pinnacle also used to (not sure if they still do or not) ask what the stalling AOA was in the CRJ. It's not published anywhere - I guess it's "common sense".
 
Telling them that "it doesn't matter I would just get out of it doesn't make any sense". How can you get out of something that you don't know your in? He basically comes off as telling the interviewer that they are asking a pointless question. Not a good way to show your trainable.

Is it true that they don't require you to use a checklist during the sim?
 
I think I'm in the school of thought that if you don't know what it is, how do you know you'd just get out of it? :)
 
Well a little background on that, after the FLG3701 incident the interview process significantly changed to become more technical. This question was on the written test on which you only needed a 70% (if I remember correctly) to pass. Not knowing the answer wouldn't necessarily have disqualified you. And quite frankly, if you'd seen the actual question, you would have been able to get the answer....it was multiple choice with 2 clearly wrong answers and one questionable answer leaving you with really only one reasonable answer so if you knew anything about swept wing aerodynamics I guess it could be considered 'common sense'. The big problem was people confusing AoA with pitch attitude.........that's Private Pilot 101 stuff.

To me, it's a stupidly useless question because who really cares what the actual numerical value is? Furthermore, there isn't even a true AoA indicator in the cockpit. Furthermore, with the swept wing, different areas of the wing stall at different times(different AoA's) anyway. The answer is definatley not 'hidden' - it took me less than 3 minutes to find online and it doesn't necessarily read "The critical AoA is...." but yes, it is published.

I don't think it's very well written question and maybe it shouldn't be on an interview test but in Pinnacle's defense (and this will probably be the only time I actually defend Pinnacle) if you look at this, and many of the other questions that people complain about, and really think about it and break it down it's really just a very basic level of understanding of concepts that people flying this size equipment should have.

I read alot of the reports on AviationInterviews.com from Pinnacle and other airlines that are hiring and I have noticed a trend over the past 12 months....it almost seems that people are getting their 'magical' 200 hours of multi time and think that they're entitled to a seat at a regional.....god forbid should we ask them to actually demonstrate a professional level of knowledge when it comes to subjects required to operate a jet safely and efficiently.

(Off my rant now)

Jason
 
mikecweb said:
Is it true that they don't require you to use a checklist during the sim?
Click to expand...


Don't know where you heard that but it's not even close to being true. Pinnacle, like every other airline I know of, uses 'flows' which means basically you do the items from memory in a (sometimes) logical pattern and then read the checklist to confirm that the items were completed. It is also sometimes called a Do/Verify checklist rather than a 'Read/Do' checklist as is common in the GA world.

Jason
 
Jason said:
Don't know where you heard that but it's not even close to being true. Pinnacle, like every other airline I know of, uses 'flows' which means basically you do the items from memory in a (sometimes) logical pattern and then read the checklist to confirm that the items were completed. It is also sometimes called a Do/Verify checklist rather than a 'Read/Do' checklist as is common in the GA world.

Jason
Click to expand...
uhhh I read it in the original post.
I should try that "Do/verify" you speak of today....I'll let ya know how it works out.:nana2:
 
mikecweb said:
uhhh I read it in the original post.
I should try that "Do/verify" you speak of today....I'll let ya know how it works out.:nana2:
Click to expand...

My apologies, I thought you meant during sim training. During the interview sim you probably don't use a checklist or a very basic one at best. They are more concerned with you flying the sim.

The 'Do/Verify' checklist method is usually less time consuming, particularly in a crew enviornment. You probably do it to a certain extent already, you just don't realize it.....on your approach to land do you pick up a checlist and read "Flaps...down" and then put them down and then read "Gear....down" and then put it down? No, you do it then read over the checklist to make sure you got everything....same concept except it's applied to all of the checklists.

Jason
 
Yeah I was being sarcastic. I'm a smarta$$ when I wake up sometimes sry :(. We use the do/verify at my company which really isn't a new concept since I was doing that since my first flight. I wish more flight schools taught it that way.
No gear down for me. Hopefully those caravan wheels are welded down pretty good.
 
mikecweb said:
Yeah I was being sarcastic. I'm a smarta$$ when I wake up sometimes sry :(. We use the do/verify at my company which really isn't a new concept since I was doing that since my first flight. I wish more flight schools taught it that way.
No gear down for me. Hopefully those caravan wheels are welded down pretty good.
Click to expand...

I've been painting since 0500 so I'm probably not all that 'awake' either :D

jec
 
Odds are, like has been said before, that one question didn't knock him out. Having flown that exact sim profile in my interview, I can tell ya it's a teardrop unless he did some freaky manuevering on the missed approach. There's one strike. He's coming across in his post as someone who, as Jason said, feels he deserves a seat in the CRJ. There's strike two. I'm sure there's some other things he did that he's either not talking about or repressing. No Q and As from his IFR procedures. He coulda blown that as well. Lastly, I don't know of anyone that's been through the interview process recently that failed (or know anyone that knows anyone) where they said "This is the question you 'missed.'" All the people in my group that were sent home were told "We can't offer you a position at this time, but feel free to re-apply in six months." No one was told what specifically they 'missed' unless it was a low score on the written or something crazy in the sim.

If you're referring to the sim at the interview, no they don't make you use a checklist. They're looking for instrument flying skills. I was specifically told "If you can't read a checklist by now, you shouldn't even be here, so don't worry about it. Just fly the sim." 'Course I almost forgot to put the gear down I was so nervous. :)
 
kellwolf said:
Lastly, I don't know of anyone that's been through the interview process recently that failed (or know anyone that knows anyone) where they said "This is the question you 'missed.'" All the people in my group that were sent home were told "We can't offer you a position at this time, but feel free to re-apply in six months." No one was told what specifically they 'missed' unless it was a low score on the written or something crazy in the sim.
Click to expand...

Will they tell you if you ask? I would think they would look favorably on an applicant who wants to learn what he did wrong so the next time he can improve himself and do it right. Is this true?
 
Usually they will not tell you why you bust an interview. In the past when that was done, applicants who were turned down sued for percieved discrimination in hiring. Now, if they don't tell you why, then it makes it harder to sue.
 
killbilly said:
Will they tell you if you ask? I would think they would look favorably on an applicant who wants to learn what he did wrong so the next time he can improve himself and do it right. Is this true?
Click to expand...


At the interviews I've been to the only time they've told people why they didn't get the job was if they were real marginal in the sim--some were told to go out and get a little more current and come back. Other than that, no one was told what they did wrong. I've heard the lawsuit-prevention angle as well.

In this case I'd definately bet it wasn't just that one question that lost it for the guy, but that answer to the severe icing question was pretty weak...how do you know to get out of it if you can't define it? At Eagle in the ATR we had to know the definitions of severe icing and icing conditions absolutely verbatim for the groundschool oral, and that definately would have been a failure to screw up a few words.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top