Greg Feith on Colgan 3407

Told to me from a seasoned aviator

From 0-1500 or so you make mistakes and see what happens.... 1500 to 3000+ you know bad stuff is going to happen before it happens.... 3000 and up you can see it coming and know from previous experience how to avoid the hhhmmmmm that didn't go like I thought it was going to moments.....

I look back now after 9 years in aviation and a varied background and at the hours that I did I shouldn't have been in the positions with the responsibility I was given... I now am in that phase of having made a lot of those hhmmmm moments and I can attest to my own stupidity and I am glad that I made a large chunk without people in the back.

I am really glad for all of my decisions, good and bad and the experience level that it has given me.
 
If my understanding is correct IRO's and SO's will not be doing any takeoffs or landings so that would just make them button pushers. Sure they would familar with the automation, systems, and cockpit but take all the automation away along with the Autopilot and I am sure they would be just as dangerous a low time FAA pilot at the controls off 777, CL-65, etc.

Again the military is very unique. They can take a 24 year old person and turn out a quality pilot in a short period of time. I don't know of any other program out there that is on par with the US Military Flight Schools.
that is correct, enroute portions only. But they sit and observe every take off and landing. I'm going to give the odds to the guy who has seen it done hundreds of times, rather than the one who has not. While instructing, I noticed that the students who went up and observed other flights almost always progressed faster, and made better choices.

This is also not a Jaa specific program, so it has nothing to do with FAA vs. JAA sorry
 
There are MANY MANY more European aviation accidents than there are US. Not particularly airlines, but aviation in general. Very Very Smart pilots, but very very poor pilot ability.
 
European cadet programs are worlds apart from anything equivalent in the US.

There's a lot litany of screening they do on candidates before they even get into a basic Frasca simulator. For a period of time, in the US, you could more or less drop out of high school with 0 hours and within a couple of years be a regional captain.

We have zero aptitude testing required by the FAA. The CAA is much different. Hell, my airline does (did?) aptitude testing and required a four-year degree and you should have heard people caterwauling about people who didn't have a degree or pass the tests. Unfair! Unjust! How DARE they!

I should get off my lazy ass and talk to someone about the Lufthansa cadet program to show just what goes on over there from "Zero to Hero".

Thanks so much for bringing this into context.
It's amazing how people compare the European system to our "sold out to the lowest bidder" system.

Please do post what goes on in their 0 to Hero programs, what the average selection is like (I went through the aptitude testing for LH)
I have 4 Lufthansa, 2 Ex Condor, a bunch of Swiss Air, 1 Air France, and a bunch of Lufthansa Cityline Captains and Check Captains in close proximity. I heavily doubt a 300 hour LHCL jockey is anywhere in reach for his/ her peer flying for some beaten up, out of money American regional for a dollar a seat.
 
There's a lot litany of screening they do on candidates before they even get into a basic Frasca simulator. For a period of time, in the US, you could more or less drop out of high school with 0 hours and within a couple of years be a regional captain.

We have zero aptitude testing required by the FAA. The CAA is much different. Hell, my airline does (did?) aptitude testing and required a four-year degree and you should have heard people caterwauling about people who didn't have a degree or pass the tests. Unfair! Unjust! How DARE they!

I should get off my lazy ass and talk to someone about the Lufthansa cadet program to show just what goes on over there from "Zero to Hero".

Doug, I agree with you in general. Some schools (usually the most prestigous academies that offer an integrated ATPL course), as well as some airline cadet programs do aptitude training. This is very European. When i took a management position in Holland in the biz world, I had to take the HR aptitude test like everyone else.

I would point out though that the JAA/ UK CAA system doesnt require it. Also, many airlines don't. There are alot of 200 hr (not even 250) sitting right seat in may 737/320 cockpits. Many of them are not very prepared, except at a minimum they have taken an atp gs and past the battery of tests. As you often say, mileage varies.
 
My Company does just that. They provide you with a company paid hotel room or space in one of the company owned condos.



I am have seen first hand the British Ab Initio programs and they are light years ahead of US training. First you already have to have college degree to apply for the job, then take a battery of entrance exams. After that their ground schools are very thorough and cover much more that the FAA's. The cadets also have to keep a very high GPA in class room studies and continually show advancement in the flight portions. If the GPA drops or they stop advancing they are terminated from the program.

I am still not crazy about 300 hr FO's in the right seat but they do have significantly more training and are supervised by senior, high time captains and they will not see the left seat for many years and a few thousand hours.

The problem with Ab Initio and the US pay to play schools is experience. You just can't buy experience. I went to the reigionals with approximately 2500 TT with the majority of my experience in 135 cargo. I know when I had 300 hours I was not ready to pilot an airliner. At 300 hours a pilot just hasn't gained enough experience period.

I personally would like to see the FAA mandate that any pilot at the controls of 121 airliner must have an ATP.

Requiring an ATP would of course raise the minimum age for 121 employment to 23. Perhaps not many people are hired who are younger than 23, but I think this requirement would make an impact on hiring.
 
Requiring an ATP would of course raise the minimum age for 121 employment to 23. Perhaps not many people are hired who are younger than 23, but I think this requirement would make an impact on hiring.

You would be surprised.
 
Requiring an ATP would of course raise the minimum age for 121 employment to 23. Perhaps not many people are hired who are younger than 23, but I think this requirement would make an impact on hiring.

This would definately help, IMO. Not so much for the age but an ATP requires 1500 hours. It would hinder the 0 to hero schools.
 
The European students I trained for a year had already been heavily screened, out of hundreds of applicants I was dealing with approx 16 who were continuing.

The standards were high, the students were expected to learn, and not repeatedly make the same mistakes. Two or three below average lessons were grounds for removal from the program.

There was little "feeling" involved in their results, the standards and lesson objectives were either achieved or not achieved. The lesson objectives and standards were clearly defined. No fraternization with students off the flight line.

These guys were sharp, and motivated. They treated me as a professional ready to teach and in turn they came PREPARED, 2 routes planned (in case of poor wx on one route), familiarity with lesson objectives, weather briefing, notams, preflight all complete.

So, combine students with an aptitude for aviation with a very stringent, goal oriented training with continuous monitoring from instructors and people from their airline and you usually get good results.
 
And here in the good old US of A the screening is the ability to walk into a FBO and write a check. So easy even a Caveman can do it. Problem is they didn't have airplanes back in the Caveman days so no one should be upset if the Caveman crashes by pulling back when he needed to push.
 
Back
Top