Deep Thoughts: Pre-employment simulator checks

[poser765]

6 mins is amazing. 15-20 mins you’re pretty much burnt toast. After discussing cargo fires here as much as we do it definitely keeps me on my toes more. I think some people get so wrapped up in doing things the way they usually do them and forget to just use common sense and be a pilot in certain situations.

My personal policy as a captain was always exactly this in a fire. People will get so involved running the checklist, which is fine but incredibly secondary. I mean we can start, get through the memory items/QRC/ecam or whatever but the pm has until we get to 1000 before it’s a knock it off, flaps full.

 

[derg]

My personal policy as a captain was always exactly this in a fire. People will get so involved running the checklist, which is fine but incredibly secondary. I mean we can start, get through the memory items/QRC/ecam or whatever but the pm has until we get to 1000 before it’s a knock it off, flaps full.

The isolation and smoke removable checklists were ridiculously laborious at that point.

Almost to the point where something tremendously bad happens in the simulator and the instructor says "Well, that went well, but you didn't brief the approach or talk about the biggest threat and where were you in the time bucket? You were in the no time bucket but the chart says these items can be accomplished…"

*eye roll*

 

[🦈💜]

Some airlines have pre-employment sim rides, some do not.

I'm torn. Part of me says 'Well, what a great way to see if someone can actually fly"

but on the other hand "Well, what a great way to see if someone can actually fly… A FRASCA and we don't fly Frascas so what's the point?"

Thoughts?

Eh, I dunno. I would like to have something to sink my teeth into in an interview other than trying to tell stories about "SO THERE I WAS" (most of which are exaggerated or just flat made up, from what I've heard).

Like, actually ask me questions about stuff, see if I know stuff about the stuff I've been doing. Aerodynamics, turbine ops, whatever.

Use the sim as a scenario device, not a "frasca flying exercise" and maybe you can see how the candidate will actually do. If I screw that sort of thing up, yeah, totally get it.

I'm pretty bitter about the aviation interview situation, so I'm probably not the right person to respond. I'm watching buzz-headed 20-somethings with bare ATP mins waltzing into right seats at all the majors before they spent any real time doing line flying, while I sit here functionally unemployed, so naturally I'd prefer a sieve that would actually showcase my relevant skills, rather than my ability to tell prepared tall tales on command.

 

[CoffeeIcePapers]

Eh, I dunno. I would like to have something to sink my teeth into in an interview other than trying to tell stories about "SO THERE I WAS" (most of which are exaggerated or just flat made up, from what I've heard).

Like, actually ask me questions about stuff, see if I know stuff about the stuff I've been doing. Aerodynamics, turbine ops, whatever.

Use the sim as a scenario device, not a "frasca flying exercise" and maybe you can see how the candidate will actually do. If I screw that sort of thing up, yeah, totally get it.

I'm pretty bitter about the aviation interview situation, so I'm probably not the right person to respond. I'm watching buzz-headed 20-somethings with bare ATP mins waltzing into right seats at all the majors before they spent any real time doing line flying, while I sit here functionally unemployed, so naturally I'd prefer a sieve that would actually showcase my relevant skills, rather than my ability to tell prepared tall tales on command.

You have a unique personal and professional background, so I think that shouldn’t be a problem. You probably dodged a bullet with WN, tbh. The longer you sit on the shelf, the less desirable you’ll get, especially once you get outside the 90 day window.

 

[poser765]

The isolation and smoke removable checklists were ridiculously laborious at that point.

Almost to the point where something tremendously bad happens in the simulator and the instructor says "Well, that went well, but you didn't brief the approach or talk about the biggest threat and where were you in the time bucket? You were in the no time bucket but the chart says these items can be accomplished…"

*eye roll*

Exactly. I very distinctly remember a sim ride something like 50 years ago where I was pm. Inside the marker we got a engine fire and my boy wanted to go around. What?! No! Just land, guy.


Or the engine fire after v1 followed by a 15 mile downwind to run checklists, TEST the FAs, brief the approach, blah blah blah.

 

[luke3]

Exactly. I very distinctly remember a sim ride something like 50 years ago where I was pm. Inside the marker we got a engine fire and my boy wanted to go around. What?! No! Just land, guy.


Or the engine fire after v1 followed by a 15 mile downwind to run checklists, TEST the FAs, brief the approach, blah blah blah.

Last G-IV recurrent before going to the airlines I was PM for my friend Greg. Greg is a great pilot but a bit of a character. Real southern and to this day I still wonder where he learned some of his expressions. Anyway same thing inside the marker we get an engine fire. I announce it and ask "what would you like me to do captain?". He instantly shouts "BRING OUT THE MARSHMELLOWS, WE GONNA LET ER BURN!". The instructor in the back was dying laughing all the way to touchdown.

 

[Wardogg]

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.

I'm sorry man but this screams " GET OFF MY LAWN!" Every time I here someone lament about glass cockpits and how they ruin pilots I just shake my head. There is a reason those things exist. There is a reason brand new airplanes don't come with six packs. That reason is because these modern cockpits are safer. Period. End of discussion. These "super pilots" that used to fly steam guages seemed to be able to still crash them just the same. So your DC9 and Metro gods you speak of, were they really any better?

 

[CoffeeIcePapers]

I'm sorry man but this screams " GET OFF MY LAWN!" Every time I here someone lament about glass cockpits and how they ruin pilots I just shake my head. There is a reason those things exist. There is a reason brand new airplanes don't come with six packs. That reason is because these modern cockpits are safer. Period. End of discussion. These "super pilots" that used to fly steam guages seemed to be able to still crash them just the same. So your DC9 and Metro gods you speak of, we're they really any better?

As a former Metro God, yes, I am better than you.


At reading lips. Because I can’t hear anything.

 

[Wardogg]

As a former Metro God, yes, I am better than you.


At reading lips. Because I can’t hear anything.

Ill see your hearing loss and raise you tinnitus I can hear over the wind noise driving down the highway with my windows down.

The song of my people. 4 T56-A-16s all humming along for 12 straight hours.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

I'm sorry man but this screams " GET OFF MY LAWN!" Every time I here someone lament about glass cockpits and how they ruin pilots I just shake my head. There is a reason those things exist. There is a reason brand new airplanes don't come with six packs. That reason is because these modern cockpits are safer. Period. End of discussion. These "super pilots" that used to fly steam guages seemed to be able to still crash them just the same. So your DC9 and Metro gods you speak of, were they really any better?

Boomers: "Remember the good old days when pilots were real men who hand flew using a six pack? Those were the days!"

Me: "You mean when 121 airliners were crashing on a semi-regular basis, largely due to pilot error? Yeah, let's go back to that."

It reminds me of the people who think the 50s were the golden age. You know, the era when a cancer diagnosis was pretty much a death sentence, black people were beaten for drinking from the wrong water fountain, and a typical middle class home had one bathroom for the whole family to share.

 

[Kingairer]

Once someone has years of 121 check rides and flight time under their belt I think there’s little value in a sim Eval for interview. You can tell if they’re a “nut” or not just talking with them. If they have a proven track record of sucesss in 121/military I don’t see the need. If this is a first time job situation with nothing but banner or CFI time it may be necessary.

 

[Chief Captain]

Maybe a certain large ACMI carrier would have an extra 767 flying around if they had a sim eval as part of the interview.

 

[///AMG]

Maybe a certain large ACMI carrier would have an extra 767 flying around if they had a sim eval as part of the interview.

Ouch. Though maybe not wrong. That being said, being half good at this job, is pretty easy. That is enough to pass an interview/sim/recurrent/etc. The remaining 50% of being good at the job is the elusive part that i personally don’t think you can test for. But you can certainly screen for “has no business flying an airplane”

 

[🦈💜]

Maybe a certain large ACMI carrier would have an extra 767 flying around if they had a sim eval as part of the interview.

Oof. But yeah.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

Maybe a certain large ACMI carrier would have an extra 767 flying around if they had a sim eval as part of the interview.

Highly doubtful.

 

[Wardogg]

Highly doubtful.

These days, I agree. If sim rides were done right? Then we could have that conversation.

 

[ZapBrannigan]

You can tell if they’re a “nut” or not just talking with them.

If that's true than HR is REALLY dropping the ball, because they're letting a LOT of wing nut conspiracy theorists and zombie apocalypse prepper's through the gate.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

If that's true then HR is REALLY dropping the ball, because they're letting a LOT of wing nut conspiracy theorists and zombie apocalypse prepper's through the gate.

You’re incorrectly assuming that’s a bug and not a feature. You know who you went to work for.

 

[Maurus]

Interviews in general are pretty poor at getting the job done. I honestly don't see a sim eval as an improvement.

This opinion is based on the fact that you barely get a glimpse of who a person may be at an interview.

You are more likely to extrapolate if a person will be successful base on their application. For example, someone with multiple type ratings and minimal training hickups will likely be better than a person that has been flying the same plane for their entire career.

DECs that trained for a new airframe could be a good target. Not only do they show they can still complete initial training they also show they can adopt new airline procedures and policies more readily.

 

[Chief Captain]

Highly doubtful.

Did you read what the instructors at the previous employer had to say about his sim sessions?