Captain development

[jrh]

I'm hoping to gain some wisdom from the masses here. What types of training, mentoring, programs, or other processes have you seen implemented in your operations to develop SICs/FOs into competent captains?

In my operation, historically we've hired pilots as SICs in Citations, assuming they do well we then promote them to PIC in King Airs, then after 6-12 months of King Air flying move them to a PIC role in a Citation. At each transition the pilot works with an IOE captain on each trip to ensure they are following SOPs, etc.

This progression has consistently developed very competent Citation captains. They simply handle things well. Weather decisions, maintenance issues, dealing with pax, etc. There is a maturity we see in these captains that we don't see in even our most experienced Citation SICs.

The problem I'm running into is that growth in our Citation fleet has far outpaced our King Air fleet. We need more Citation captains than what our King Air pilot group can provide.

Therefore, I'm looking for ways to promote directly from Citation SIC to PIC. Obviously lots of operations do this successfully. It's not like NetJets has a fleet of King Airs their pilots go through. I know it can be done, but looking for specific processes to put in place.

 

[adk]

I'll start with a caveat that I've never flown a Citation and I have less than 10 hours in a King Air.

Could you elaborate a bit on why your company thinks a pilot you hired into a Citation needs to "cut his teeth" as a King Air captain before transitioning back to the aircraft he was already flying and assumedly proficient in flying?

What is so different about the weather decisions, maintenance issues, and dealing with pax in a King Air versus a Citation?

To me, flying a specific type is a perishable proficiency but being a good captain is a lifelong skill that is transferrable between airframes. If you have a Citation SIC that is good at flying a Citation and you also think they are ready to be a captain, they are going to become a good captain just as quickly on a Citation as they are a King Air.

 

[adk]

And, I'm sorry, I never really addressed your question.

How does your company do recurrent? There is value in getting several of your SICs together in a group, presenting them an issue that a pilot at your company actually faced, and telling them to start talking like they're in charge.

Mentors can be extraordinarily helpful for some, but not all, pilots. Some just value the bond and the guidance more than others. But to be successful, there needs to be a lot of trust in the mentor. There needs to be confidence that when a pilot runs a not-so-great idea past a mentor, the mentor provides input but also holds some of the bad ideas in confidence and doesn't go telling others - especially management.

 

[jrh]

I'll start with a caveat that I've never flown a Citation and I have less than 10 hours in a King Air.

Could you elaborate a bit on why your company thinks a pilot you hired into a Citation needs to "cut his teeth" as a King Air captain before transitioning back to the aircraft he was already flying and assumedly proficient in flying?

What is so different about the weather decisions, maintenance issues, and dealing with pax in a King Air versus a Citation?

To me, flying a specific type is a perishable proficiency but being a good captain is a lifelong skill that is transferrable between airframes. If you have a Citation SIC that is good at flying a Citation and you also think they are ready to be a captain, they are going to become a good captain just as quickly on a Citation as they are a King Air.

It's mostly a single pilot versus crew mentality. The King Air captains are forced to figure things out on their own more. They get more confident in their decisions, more independent, and so on.

 

[ahw01]

In the sim world there are folks who have only ever been FOs. When getting them into the left seat the leadership and decisionmaking skills can be lacking. Theres no specific training to fix that other than running through scenarios to help develop the mindset

 

[jrh]

Could you elaborate a bit on why your company thinks a pilot you hired into a Citation needs to "cut his teeth" as a King Air captain before transitioning back to the aircraft he was already flying and assumedly proficient in flying?

I was in a rush when I first replied and want to give a deeper explanation now.

The stick and rudder skills have nothing to do with it. It's all a mental shift and I'll elaborate below...

What is so different about the weather decisions, maintenance issues, and dealing with pax in a King Air versus a Citation?

Weather decisions in a King Air are somewhat simpler and a pilot gets more of them. The leg lengths are rarely much more than an hour, so what the radar looks like and what the METAR says about your destination before leaving the ground is not going to be much different from what it's like when you arrive. In the jets, we frequently fly 3-4 hour legs and need to better assess what will be happening in the future. The King Airs don't get up and over weather, they go through it, so a pilot gets more experience working close to thunderstorms, ice, etc. The jets don't get nearly as much exposure to these conditions, but when they do, it's critical to make good decisions.

When it comes to maintenance issues and dealing with passengers, I think the biggest factor is that the captain handles these things all the time and the SICs generally stay in the background. The captains take the lead and sort things out.

If a Citation SIC doesn't really go out of their way to be involved with these things, they don't get exposure to them and get good at them.

Having them work as a King Air captain for a while forces them to learn these things and get good at them. It might be a bit of learning through the school of hard knocks.

In our operation, the King Airs are a simpler operating environment in general. Typically it's day trips flying an hour away to a small town, sitting around for a while, then flying home. Even though the weather might be a bit harder to deal with in some ways, it's a more forgiving environment overall.

The jets go all over. Sometimes it's one leg, sometimes it's five legs in a day. It might be international. It might be a 4200 foot long runway at an untowered airport, or it might be going to MIA, LAS, LAX, TEB, ORD, EGE, TEX, etc. It's a huge spectrum. We don't have dispatchers, the captains are responsible for flight planning, runway analysis, etc.

Another way to say it might be that the stakes are higher in the Citations and we know people are going to make mistakes initially, so we'd rather they make those mistakes at 160 knots in the middle of nowhere rather than at 280 knots on a STAR going into Miami.

It's not much different from why the FAA requires student pilots to get some hours solo before becoming a private pilot, or why it's generally better to get some experience in a 172 before jumping in an SR-22. Learn the fundamentals, then move on to something more advanced.

We've seen it play out this way for years. The King Air captains generally make smooth transitions into jets. Of course I know this isn't the only way and now I'm trying to develop alternatives.

 

[jrh]

Could you elaborate a bit on why your company thinks a pilot you hired into a Citation needs to "cut his teeth" as a King Air captain before transitioning back to the aircraft he was already flying and assumedly proficient in flying?

I was in a rush when I first replied and want to give a deeper explanation now.

The stick and rudder skills have nothing to do with it. It's all a mental shift and I'll elaborate below...

What is so different about the weather decisions, maintenance issues, and dealing with pax in a King Air versus a Citation?

Weather decisions in a King Air are somewhat simpler and a pilot gets more of them. The leg lengths are rarely much more than an hour, so what the radar looks like and what the METAR says about your destination before leaving the ground is not going to be much different from what it's like when you arrive. In the jets, we frequently fly 3-4 hour legs and need to better assess what will be happening in the future. The King Airs don't get up and over weather, they go through it, so a pilot gets more experience working close to thunderstorms, ice, etc. The jets don't get nearly as much exposure to these conditions, but when they do, it's critical to make good decisions.

When it comes to maintenance issues and dealing with passengers, I think the biggest factor is that the captain handles these things all the time and the SICs generally stay in the background. The captains take the lead and sort things out.

If a Citation SIC doesn't really go out of their way to be involved with these things, they don't get exposure to them and get good at them.

Having them work as a King Air captain for a while forces them to learn these things and get good at them. It might be a bit of learning through the school of hard knocks.

In our operation, the King Airs are a simpler operating environment in general. Typically it's day trips flying an hour away to a small town, sitting around for a while, then flying home. Even though the weather might be a bit harder to deal with in some ways, it's a more forgiving environment overall.

The jets go all over. Sometimes it's one leg, sometimes it's five legs in a day. It might be international. It might be a 4200 foot long runway at an untowered airport, or it might be going to MIA, LAS, LAX, TEB, ORD, EGE, TEX, etc. It's a huge spectrum. We don't have dispatchers, the captains are responsible for flight planning, runway analysis, etc.

Another way to say it might be that the stakes are higher in the Citations and we know people are going to make mistakes initially, so we'd rather they make those mistakes at 160 knots in the middle of nowhere rather than at 280 knots on a STAR going into Miami.

It's not much different from why the FAA requires student pilots to get some hours solo before becoming a private pilot, or why it's generally better to get some experience in a 172 before jumping in an SR-22. Learn the fundamentals, then move on to something more advanced.

We've seen it play out this way for years. The King Air captains generally make smooth transitions into jets. Of course I know this isn't the only way and now I'm trying to develop alternatives.

 

[DE727UPS]

I was an F/O for a long time caused I liked being senior. I was pretty passive, I guess. If the Capt wanted my input he could ask, and I'd be happy to give it, but otherwise didn't volunteer much. Slinging gear was fine. 8 years of that. Then I upgraded. It honestly was no big deal because I had seen how so many different Capts operated and had observed a lot (F/E for fours years, as well). IOE was where I actually did the job for the first time. Big airline had pretty standard procedures for everything and it's all written down somewhere. I think having a great IOE experience with a check airman that was really good and cared made a big difference. Still a big learning curve. You just have to throw yourself into it and do your best. I remember making a call on an MEL situation and approach minimums that was conservative and safe going into RFD. No autothrottles on an autoland. Wasn't in the book. We went to DSM for more gas. Company was a bit put out but I explained myself and my logic and nothing really came of it other than a slide on the next recurrent ground school. Boeing certified the autoland with manual thrust levers. Who knew. So, for your situation, I have three things. Hire potential Capts like the airlines do. I guess that's not easy. Try to get people with good PIC backgrounds and experience. Second, have procedures and standards and policies all written out to the Nth degree. Having that as a reference and expectation is helpful. Lastly, have a thorough IOE experience with your most experienced Capts. I don't think this is something you can teach in a classroom.

 

[adk]

Weather decisions in a King Air are somewhat simpler and a pilot gets more of them. The leg lengths are rarely much more than an hour, so what the radar looks like and what the METAR says about your destination before leaving the ground is not going to be much different from what it's like when you arrive. In the jets, we frequently fly 3-4 hour legs and need to better assess what will be happening in the future. The King Airs don't get up and over weather, they go through it, so a pilot gets more experience working close to thunderstorms, ice, etc. The jets don't get nearly as much exposure to these conditions, but when they do, it's critical to make good decisions.

When it comes to maintenance issues and dealing with passengers, I think the biggest factor is that the captain handles these things all the time and the SICs generally stay in the background. The captains take the lead and sort things out.

If a Citation SIC doesn't really go out of their way to be involved with these things, they don't get exposure to them and get good at them.

Having them work as a King Air captain for a while forces them to learn these things and get good at them. It might be a bit of learning through the school of hard knocks.

If your captains aren't including your FOs in the decision making processes, then your problem is your current captains. FOs are captains in training, and if your current captains and management don't care about helping them develop, then it's no wonder you don't think some of them are ready to be captains when they get the nod. When I was an FO I had several great captains just turn and ask me "well, you're upgrading soon, you tell me what you think we should do" and it was some of the best training I received. The great captains I flew with specifically did NOT "take the lead and sort things out" but rather included me in every step to make sure I understood the their thought process.

In our operation, the King Airs are a simpler operating environment in general. Typically it's day trips flying an hour away to a small town, sitting around for a while, then flying home. Even though the weather might be a bit harder to deal with in some ways, it's a more forgiving environment overall.

The jets go all over. Sometimes it's one leg, sometimes it's five legs in a day. It might be international. It might be a 4200 foot long runway at an untowered airport, or it might be going to MIA, LAS, LAX, TEB, ORD, EGE, TEX, etc. It's a huge spectrum. We don't have dispatchers, the captains are responsible for flight planning, runway analysis, etc.

Another way to say it might be that the stakes are higher in the Citations and we know people are going to make mistakes initially, so we'd rather they make those mistakes at 160 knots in the middle of nowhere rather than at 280 knots on a STAR going into Miami.

Do your pilots not fly into MIA, LAS, LAX, TEB, ORD, EGE, TEX, etc. before they upgrade? Those airports are considered difficult because a pilot is not familiar with busy airports, terrain, or specific local procedures. All of that experience is perfectly transferrable from the right seat to the left seat.

Have they not been flying 280 knots on a STAR going into Miami before they upgrade? This, again, is an aircraft handling proficiency and a not a captain-specific skill.

It's not much different from why the FAA requires student pilots to get some hours solo before becoming a private pilot,

Isn't the Private Pilot Certificate the only certificate that requires solo time? The certificate that sees a vast majority of its holders flying single pilot piston aircraft? The ATP, which sees the majority of its holders flying multi-crew aircraft, does not require solo time.

or why it's generally better to get some experience in a 172 before jumping in an SR-22. Learn the fundamentals, then move on to something more advanced.

From your narrative, your pilots already have experience in the faster aircraft (Citation) before they upgrade. That's where and when they should be learning the fundamentals of how to be a Citation captain.

We've seen it play out this way for years. The King Air captains generally make smooth transitions into jets. Of course I know this isn't the only way and now I'm trying to develop alternatives.

Have you tried upgrading Citation FOs directly to Citation captains? I think you'll be pleasantly surprised. The ones that are going to be good captains are going to be good captains on any airframe.

 

[derg]

I'm hoping to gain some wisdom from the masses here. What types of training, mentoring, programs, or other processes have you seen implemented in your operations to develop SICs/FOs into competent captains?

In my operation, historically we've hired pilots as SICs in Citations, assuming they do well we then promote them to PIC in King Airs, then after 6-12 months of King Air flying move them to a PIC role in a Citation. At each transition the pilot works with an IOE captain on each trip to ensure they are following SOPs, etc.

This progression has consistently developed very competent Citation captains. They simply handle things well. Weather decisions, maintenance issues, dealing with pax, etc. There is a maturity we see in these captains that we don't see in even our most experienced Citation SICs.

The problem I'm running into is that growth in our Citation fleet has far outpaced our King Air fleet. We need more Citation captains than what our King Air pilot group can provide.

Therefore, I'm looking for ways to promote directly from Citation SIC to PIC. Obviously lots of operations do this successfully. It's not like NetJets has a fleet of King Airs their pilots go through. I know it can be done, but looking for specific processes to put in place.

Tough question for an airline guy as so much of it is baked right into our training programs including OE.

Lemme do some soul searching/digging.

 

[Box hauler]

IMO I would have a program that has the current captains evaluate their FO’s and offer the company feedback on their ability to upgrade and have a solid OE period that allows the new CA time to become comfortable while knowing they have a good safety net in the right seat. Every candidate is ready at different times and for different reasons.

 

[CoffeeIcePapers]

Part 121 requires a professional development course. It might be something to consider. Have a couple of scenarios and walk through their thought process. Ensure they have resources they need. I’m not sure going from Citation FO to King Air CA to Citation CA is a logical progression.

 

[Roger Roger]

I have a similar question I’ve been pondering on but different enough for its own thread. Hopefully get around to it today

 

[Richman]

Not hard.

Pay more money, you can attract/retain people who engage rather than do a low pass through your program.

But I love to hear about programs that only sand around the edges of a problem, if that, so please, continue.

 

[derg]

I'm actually due for "Captain Leadership School" recurrent so maybe if you throw in a McDonalds gift card, I can show you my notes!