How do they upgrade ?

[kellwolf]

If they pass a training program, they have earned their seat. If they are locking up on call outs, something is wrong with the training system and not the pilot, as it should weed these kind of guys out. The captain is the PIC, the one who is ultimately responsible for the flight, not the FO.

Dude, I can teach a 250 hour guy how to play a video game and parrot memory items. That's what FO training is. What I CAN'T teach them is decision making skills. The FO isn't there to say "Yes sir" to the CA. He's there to help him out. I've had to say "What the heck are you doing?" to more than a few CAs already (mostly b/c reduced rest overnights, JMs and working you like a dog tends to sap your brain). It wasn't on memory items, call outs or profiles, it was on things like decent planning, diversions and fuel management. They don't TEACH that to FOs in ground school. You learn that by doing it.

 

[Timbuff10]

Yeah, I think I am going to find someone who is proficient in the area and then let them babysit me for a bit before I start taking students up through the marine layer. It seems that the layer is usually only between 2000-3000MSL.

Now that I think of it, maybe I should do that in the twin and knock out two birds with one stone.

 

[CoffeeIcePapers]

Dude, I can teach a 250 hour guy how to play a video game and parrot memory items. That's what FO training is. What I CAN'T teach them is decision making skills. The FO isn't there to say "Yes sir" to the CA. He's there to help him out. I've had to say "What the heck are you doing?" to more than a few CAs already (mostly b/c reduced rest overnights, JMs and working you like a dog tends to sap your brain). It wasn't on memory items, call outs or profiles, it was on things like decent planning, diversions and fuel management. They don't TEACH that to FOs in ground school. You learn that by doing it.

I see what you are saying, and I can't speak from experience, but how else are you going to learn decision making? What would be your hiring minimums, ceteris paribus, if you owned a regional?

 

[staplegun]

but heavens to murgatroid if I can find the damned switch to turn the thing on.

That's easy, Doug! It looks like all those other beige Boeing rotary switches up on that overhead panel...

Kevin

 

[FlyChicaga]

By all means, start another thread, then, please - I, for one, would be very interested in your thoughts on the above. I think a lot of other people would be, too.

In the morning, after I have a cup of coffee.

 

[FlyChicaga]

I don't think hiring low time pilots to act as SIC is that big of a deal. The captain is ultimately responsible for the safety of the flight, and if for some reason the captain becomes incapacitated, the SIC will have enough sim and real time experience to "step up to the plate" and get the plane on the ground safely. If they are that horrible of a pilot, won't they most likely wash out of training?

Not quite. The real world and the world we operate in while in a simulator are two very, very different things. The simulators are amazing machines that can replicate nearly every emergency a pilot can face in their lifetime, all at once. As realistic as it is, there is still that little reminder in the back of your head that says, "If I crash, I won't die." You don't have that luxury when flying a real aircraft, in real weather, in real time. There is no "freeze" button.

The initial new-hire training program is meant to teach pilots how to fly the particular airplane the company operates, to the company's specifications. It is not meant to teach the pilot to be a pilot. Those skills should already been instilled in the pilot from prior training and experience. New-hire airline training is about eight to twelve weeks long... that is not time to teach someone how to fly. That is time to teach someone how to fly an airliner.

As a captain, I do not want a body in the seat to my right that spent their time in initial training trying to learn the intricacies of the US IFR airspace system and IFR procedures. I want someone who had that knowledge and skill and came to training prepared to learn to fly the EMB-145. I don't care if the pilot next to me misses a callout, or needs help programming the flight plan into the FMS. Those things are new. But when a pilot needs to be explained why we fly 200 knots on departure from a Class C airport, or how to read a Jeppesen low-altitude enroute chart, or proper radio phraseology, that takes away from the captains main job: To be in command of an aircraft that is used in air commerce. There are people in the back of that airplane that expect the pilots up front know what they are doing. They do not expect to board an airplane as an airline customer and have their captain providing dual instruction on IFR procedures.

 

[FlyChicaga]

If they pass a training program, they have earned their seat. If they are locking up on call outs, something is wrong with the training system and not the pilot, as it should weed these kind of guys out. The captain is the PIC, the one who is ultimately responsible for the flight, not the FO.

There is nothing wrong with the training system. There are thousands of pilots out there who operate safely day in, day out, and do it in a professional manner. We all go through the same training program. It is expected that people will make mistakes, and any good captain will realize this and nurture the first officer instead of berate them. However, there is an expectation that the first officer does have a level of competency as a pilot, now they are at the level of professional airline pilot.

It is true that the captain of a flight is the final authority and ultimately responsible for the flight. It is also the responsibility of the first officer to be prepared to assume that role in case of crewmember incapacitation. This means the first officer should be using his or her time wisely, observing, learning, and asking questions so they are gaining experience and knowledge should that ever occur.

Who has ultimate control of the aircraft when the captain goes in back to pee?

 

[Dugie8]

So Matt

You got on with your first regional flying saabs with a little over 300 hours, but you have yours now (Capt) it is time to pull up the ladder?

 

[FlyChicaga]

So Matt

You got on with your first regional flying saabs with a little over 300 hours, but you have yours now (Capt) it is time to pull up the ladder?

Where did I ever say anything about pulling up the ladder?

I think I have alluded to it in maybe about six different posts on here in the past 24 hours that there is nothing wrong with hiring pilots with low time, as long as they have quality training and a good attitude. The problems occurring right now are not associated with quantity as much as quality of the time these pilots spent previously in an airplane.

I am not sitting here trying to inflate my ego, saying "I got mine, see ya!" I'm trying to make a concentrated effort to encourage pilots who have low time to press hard and take a very professional approach to their flight training so they are prepared for what lay ahead. If a pilot is going to get hired with 500 hours, don't you agree they should be prepared? I don't want to see anyone half-ass their training and just "get by" to get a regional job. That seems to be happening now. Not with the JetCareers membership, but just with pilots in general. There is too much focus on the "airline" part of "airline pilot."

Apparently you misunderstood my intentions, or maybe you just have a bone to pick. I'm definitely not "raising the ladder" at all, and I'm actually insulted you would insinuate that.

 

[KLB]

I have to say that even in my single pilot 135 operations....if I have a good F.O. onboard, I feel like it reduces my workload by 80%.

 

[CoffeeIcePapers]

But when a pilot needs to be explained why we fly 200 knots on departure from a Class C airport, or how to read a Jeppesen low-altitude enroute chart, or proper radio phraseology, that takes away from the captains main job:

Doesn't the interview process help to weed out guys that don't know the regs? Isn't there a written and oral exam before they even get there? I don't buy that a guy that doesn't know basic IFR or how to read a LEC can make it all the way through training, without this becoming obvious. If so, then there is definitly a problem with the interview/training process.

 

[KLB]

Interviews can be really easy if you get the gouge. Its like them throwing the slow one right over the plate everytime...you'd have to not even attempt to swing to not hit it out of the ball park. How there are still people who walk into these interviews unprepared with all of the resources out there today is beyond belief.:insane:

 

[Dugie8]

Not quite. The real world and the world we operate in while in a simulator are two very, very different things. The simulators are amazing machines that can replicate nearly every emergency a pilot can face in their lifetime, all at once. As realistic as it is, there is still that little reminder in the back of your head that says, "If I crash, I won't die." You don't have that luxury when flying a real aircraft, in real weather, in real time. There is no "freeze" button.

The initial new-hire training program is meant to teach pilots how to fly the particular airplane the company operates, to the company's specifications. It is not meant to teach the pilot to be a pilot. Those skills should already been instilled in the pilot from prior training and experience. New-hire airline training is about eight to twelve weeks long... that is not time to teach someone how to fly. That is time to teach someone how to fly an airliner.

As a captain, I do not want a body in the seat to my right that spent their time in initial training trying to learn the intricacies of the US IFR airspace system and IFR procedures. I want someone who had that knowledge and skill and came to training prepared to learn to fly the EMB-145. I don't care if the pilot next to me misses a callout, or needs help programming the flight plan into the FMS. Those things are new. But when a pilot needs to be explained why we fly 200 knots on departure from a Class C airport, or how to read a Jeppesen low-altitude enroute chart, or proper radio phraseology, that takes away from the captains main job: To be in command of an aircraft that is used in air commerce. There are people in the back of that airplane that expect the pilots up front know what they are doing. They do not expect to board an airplane as an airline customer and have their captain providing dual instruction on IFR procedures.

You really think somone with 250/300 hours has that level of knowledge? I barely did.

Be offended if you want, I have no bone to pick with, I don't know you from you Adam, but you are preaching from a fairly high box there.

 

[Nick]

Doesn't the interview process help to weed out guys that don't know the regs?

This seems to have moved into a new-hire discussion a little bit, but anyway...interviews help but I don't think some airlines do enough. The interview at some regionals is around the fifteen minute mark when you count just the time that is actually spent interviewing.

Isn't there a written and oral exam before they even get there?

Some regionals have writtens and some don't.
Some have sims and some don't.
Some have medicals and some don't.

Some have all three and some have none. I know of someone who got hired at one part 121 RJ operator after a five minute long phone interview.

 

[Dugie8]

Doesn't the interview process help to weed out guys that don't know the regs? Isn't there a written and oral exam before they even get there? I don't buy that a guy that doesn't know basic IFR or how to read a LEC can make it all the way through training, without this becoming obvious. If so, then there is definitly a problem with the interview/training process.

This is a two edge sword for companies. How long and complex do you make the interview. How much resource(s) do you pour into interviewing 10 people. The basic assumption is, you have the knowledge that your certificate requires, a lot of people don't. I was in awe with during my XJT interview of how much of the basic stuff some of these guys didn't know, and they weren't exactly "low time" (600 to 1000 hours).

The training side, this is where I think the real weakness is, and where the solution lies. Not that the training department should be training people to be pilots, but they should be washing those out who just aren't up to snuff.

I really think if the message got out there, that a lot people where being pink slipped by XYZ airline people would really reconsider going there with lower experience OR they would start showing up having studied and prepared A LOT more.

Look at that solution from the airlines point of view as well, that is a lot of money and time invested in someone only to show them the street after 4 or 6 weeks, not a whole lot of incentive to do it.

 

[derg]

That's easy, Doug! It looks like all those other beige Boeing rotary switches up on that overhead panel...

Kevin

Ahh!

 

[SteveC]

Here are some posts that I've collected regarding low time pilots and experience. Enjoy!

<snip>

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.

<snip>

<snip>

Low time can be relative. If I've only got a few hundred hours in a 767...I'm not going to be the most qualified pilot in my position. Someone with 5000 hours in type and 8 years as a 767 F/O is going to be a much better F/O than me due to accumulated levels of experience in type. If I've got 10 years as an F/O and I'm flying with a Captain who has 30 hours in the airplane...I as the F/O very well may be the most capable person in the cockpit. It doesn't mean I have the right to make decisions for the Captain. But most Captains in this position...will brief the F/O...that..."hey...watch me and let me know if I can do something better...as my learning curve is steep right now".

This is also why the FAA puts pairing limits on low time guys flying together. Because it's not very safe and escalates the level of risk.

<snip>

Bring a guy with 500 total time into a new situation...and he doesn't have as much experience to fall back on. Not only does he have to learn his new airplane type...but he still has to learn how to fly IFR, multi engine airplanes, and get used to the pace of a faster operation. Can he "git-r-done"? Most probably. But also probably at some increased level of risk for a while.

A pilot with 1500 hours of quality flying should more capable than one with 500 hours. He will be somewhat of a liability in his new type for awhile...as pilots of any experience level would be...but his battle readiness should be a bit more formidable given his extra level of preparedness coming into the job.

This is why I feel that a higher minimum than 1000 hours should be required for the advanced pace of an airline operation.

Yes, flying around in the RJ, or the Beech, is scary when the person next to you has 300 hours or less. Been there, done that, and you are VERY ALONE!!!!

I do believe I posted it before, but just a few weeks after I upgraded in the RJ (with 4000TT, personal choice), I did a leg from LAS to ELP. Weather enroute wasn't too bad, but the weather in ELP hadn't cleared out like it was supposed to. No alternate (none was required), not enough gas to go anywhere of choice, and no-one but myself to bounce ideas off. My FO, a good guy with all of 400TT, was basically worthless because he had no experience. Could he answer systems questions? Sure. Could he pass a checkride? Yeup. Was he of any use real use to me? Nope.

Not much will chill your bones worse than sitting at FL350, 88 people behind you, one next to you, and knowing that it truely all does rest upon your shoulders. This is why I'm not a fan of the academies or any fast-track program.

Maybe the subject does get old, but that is mostly because there are always low time guys that think that being smart and a good pilot make them qualified to fly jets, when in reality there is one more piece to the puzzle - experience. People get experience by: flying in the system; seeing and dealing with all kinds of weather; dealing with other people, both in and out of the cockpit; handling equipment malfunctions; dealing with turbulence and icing and thunderstorms; making hundreds of decisions about what the weather is doing, what it might do, and how to respond to it; learning how the ATC system works in the real world day-to-day operations; learning the vagaries of your aircraft and what parameters are most important to follow and which ones are less lethal; and literally thousands of other things that you learn every time you fly, one day, one flight at a time. There is nothing that will make up for experience. A 500 hour pilot cannot have enough time in the system to truly be an asset in a jet cockpit, other than running checklists and following procedures.

I've always said low time guys can get through training. My beef is with the level of experience they bring to the cockpit outside the training enviornment.

<snip>

300 hour jet F/O's who get through training meet the "minimum" standard. Basically, I would like to see the bar set higher. As a high time F/O with Capts seniority for the last 7 years, I've seen the importance bringing experienced F/O's to the cockpit.

It boils down to this....

You guys that are proponents of the low time F/O's think that it's all about training. If you "train" a guy properly, he can equal someone with "thousands of hours of experience" (there is actually an ad that says that). It's my view that experience takes time, and it's not something you can get enough of in a training enviornment (unless it's military).

Is a guy with 1000 total and has been a CFI going to be more successful in RJ training than a guy with 300 hours who went through an RJ course. Nope. Is he going to be a more well rounded and more highly experienced pilot. Yep. Let's say they both get though RJ initial at an airline and are now jet F/O's. The 300 hour guy still has less overall experience and background as a pilot as the 1000 hour CFI. I'd rather fly with the higher time guy....

I (personally) would rather have a 500 hr guy specifically trained to fly an RJ than a 1000 hour CFI...

QUANTITY does not mean he has the QUALITY. Hours do not magically turn into systems knowledge once you get 1000 hours.

You miss the point entirely....we don't want EITHER of them in the cockpit.

I could put my wife in a CPT or Level D sim for 200 hours and train her to help flip switches. But she still won't have a clue about flying the plane.

I don't care if you're a trained in a sim at 250 hours or a 1000 CFI. You need PRACTICAL experience. Go fly freight in a C210, Baron for a few hundred-1000 hours. Fly some charter in King Airs.

For comparison, I have over 300 hours in level D sims alone. Sure it was helpful, but the true knowledge comes from the road. How is someone with 500 hours TOTAL and a little bit of sim time "experienced."

I don't care how you dress up a resume and make it smell nice. HR is hiring low time pilots because they have to. The experienced pilots aren't applying to them anymore. Ever wonder why mins are so low, when 10,000 major airline guys are furloughed???? Think about it. Then ask, "What do they know that I don't?"

 

[kellwolf]

I see what Matt's saying, and I agree 100%. For the record, read the last quote from NJA_Capt in Steve C's post. That quote he's responding to? I'm about 95% sure that's me from a few years ago when I was pondering MAPD. I'll tell ya right now....I didn't have a damn clue what I was talking about then, and I got no problem saying so. The low time guys can probably fly profiles in the sim just as well as any of the high time guys. However, I think I can count on one hand how many times I've used a profile in real world flying.

As far as interview stuff, avitioninterviews.com is all you need to know to pass. The PCL written is INSANE. There's some CRJ systems stuff on there which, honestly, NO ONE should have to know for an interview unless you're coming in as a street CA on the RJ. Doesn't matter if you've got 300-1200 hours, there's no reason to know how many TRUs there are on the RJ BEFORE you start training. There were a few basic questions on there about airspace, RVSM, etc that I think people SHOULD know. For the most part, it seemed like they wrote it to see if people wanted the job enough to get the gouge and study it. There were a LOT of guys that interviewed with me that knew the answers, but they couldn't tell you WHY that was the answer. That's part of the problem with Gleim-ing your writtens for PPL-CFI, too. Heck, I know for a FACT there's a copy of the systems test floating around that guys get before taking the final test in ground school. You don't need to know which bus tie opens if TRU 1 fails, you just have to know it's answer B.

 

[RRPower]

I see what Matt's saying, and I agree 100%. For the record, read the last quote from NJA_Capt in Steve C's post. That quote he's responding to? I'm about 95% sure that's me from a few years ago when I was pondering MAPD. I'll tell ya right now....I didn't have a damn clue what I was talking about then, and I got no problem saying so. The low time guys can probably fly profiles in the sim just as well as any of the high time guys. However, I think I can count on one hand how many times I've used a profile in real world flying.

As far as interview stuff, avitioninterviews.com is all you need to know to pass. The PCL written is INSANE. There's some CRJ systems stuff on there which, honestly, NO ONE should have to know for an interview unless you're coming in as a street CA on the RJ. Doesn't matter if you've got 300-1200 hours, there's no reason to know how many TRUs there are on the RJ BEFORE you start training. There were a few basic questions on there about airspace, RVSM, etc that I think people SHOULD know. For the most part, it seemed like they wrote it to see if people wanted the job enough to get the gouge and study it. There were a LOT of guys that interviewed with me that knew the answers, but they couldn't tell you WHY that was the answer. That's part of the problem with Gleim-ing your writtens for PPL-CFI, too. Heck, I know for a FACT there's a copy of the systems test floating around that guys get before taking the final test in ground school. You don't need to know which bus tie opens if TRU 1 fails, you just have to know it's answer B.

I agree with most of that, but I think we all would agree that when taking a written test ESPECIALLY PVT,COMM,INST and so on that most of that stuff is pointless. How many times have we all said, why are they asking that, no one ever uses that or does that or would have just this amount of information....So I don't think it is bad that you are studying to pass the test. I agree you should know a lot of this stuff that has to do with your airplane but how many times are we all going to get asked about a prog chart or a weather depiction chart....who uses that. Look at a freaking radar and read some textual stuff and you will be fine. When you get out of training with all that MEMORIZED stuff in your head, you will begin to forget what you don't use (minus memory items on a checklist, always nice to know when it hits the fan) and remember what you do use. So I believe it goes either way.

 

[kellwolf]

I agree you should know a lot of this stuff that has to do with your airplane but how many times are we all going to get asked about a prog chart or a weather depiction chart....who uses that. Look at a freaking radar and read some textual stuff and you will be fine.

Who use that? Me. If there's crappy wx where I'm going, I'll look at a prog chart to see what it's supposed to be like when I get there. A lot of times you can compare that with what's going on now to see if the trend is supposed to increase or decrease. The radar is like looking into the past. I don't wanna know what's going on NOW when I'm gonna be in OMA in 2 hours. As far as text stuff.....I wish I had a dime for every time the TAF was wrong.