kellwolf
Piece of Trash
I don't care how well built the plane is, how good the training was or how standard the procedures are. None of that can save a CA that makes catastrophically bad decisions. THAT is written in blood.
I'm going to start taking bets....
- Thread starter Seggy
- Start date
- Status
I don't care how well built the plane is, how good the training was or how standard the procedures are. None of that can save a CA that makes catastrophically bad decisions. THAT is written in blood.
Airdale
Well-Known Member
I think my systems instructor said it best.... "The Captain is your biggest mentor as an FO." Meaning, the Captain is not your instructor, he's not your left seat crutch and sometimes the Captain makes mistakes too. Thats why its the FO's job to work with the Captain to acheive a safe flight. Everyone talks about experience, experience, experience.
Let me speak from "experience" in a crew environment. As many know, I was in the Coast Guard. I was a Machinery Technician, heavy wx certified, CRM instructor, LEO, SIC on a 47' rescue boat. I personally took part in the saving of 22 lives over my tour. I've been in situations where everything went wrong, when mother nature threw everything she had at us, tossed us, rolled us and slammed us. Yet every single time - the mission was accomplished - and with junior inexperienced crew members on board. It was my experience as an instructor, that 98% of junior crewmen, with less then 50hrs on that boat, performed exactly the way they were trained and improvised situations based on their training. Yes, its a different situation then just flying an airplane, but 99.9% of the time, nothing catastrophic happens in an airplane and 99.9% of the time, everything went as it should have running SAR.
The point is this - every single individual will handle and react to emergency situations differently. Fight or flight. The average individual should react rapidly and exactly within the limits of their training. Sound familiar? Experience can not fix those individuals who lack the ability to react as stated above during an emergency or high stress situation. I've run crews with guys with years of experience who still made disasterous mistakes, that if not caught by someone, could spell big big trouble during crew operations.
Look at every major air disaster in history. In some cases, the pilots, who had plenty of experience in the way of flight time in their logbooks, made poor decisions, reacted improperly and in some cases, against the companies policies. Bad habits maybe? Then look at some *almost* air disasterous that had positive outcomes. United 232 immediately comes to mind and Captain Al Haines. Perfect example of average or above average individuals working together within the limits of their training and then some. They remained calm, they followed procedures, they remained professional and because of their actions, a lot of people walked away.
I think the answer to preventing air disasters is not "higher minimums", its TRAINING. And not just training, but constant evaluation during training. I trained 18yr old kids right out of boot camp in the Guard. The training usually consisted of me constantly screaming, yelling and down right shaking the heck out this kids to see how they react to stressful, dangerous situations. Bad reactions, bad habits or dangerous attitudes were quickly fixed or the crewmember was removed from performing duties.
The same should take place during sim training. Not the yelling and screaming of course, I think too many people would cry.
But putting these new FO's through literal hell in that sim and see how they react. Anyone that becomes useless or exhibits dangerous habits or reactions, should not be allowed through. I've said it before, I've flown with 1000-2000hr pilots who were down right dangerous in an airplane. The answer is not soley flight time, its a myriad of things that need to happen during the interview and training/evaluation process to ensure that nobody who would be a hazard in that cockpit ever makes it there. We as professional pilots need to hold high and advocate standardization and training. Your job as a Captain is not to train your FO, but mentor them. When faced with a normal operating situation that the FO has never been in before, say a 25kt crosswind, the correct action from the Captain is mentor the FO through the situation. When everything hits the fan, the Captain should rely on his FO to impart his knowledge and thought process in correcting the situation while being open to hear different perspectives. Thats why its called Crew Resource Management and not Captain Resource Management. My big .02 cents.
Let me speak from "experience" in a crew environment. As many know, I was in the Coast Guard. I was a Machinery Technician, heavy wx certified, CRM instructor, LEO, SIC on a 47' rescue boat. I personally took part in the saving of 22 lives over my tour. I've been in situations where everything went wrong, when mother nature threw everything she had at us, tossed us, rolled us and slammed us. Yet every single time - the mission was accomplished - and with junior inexperienced crew members on board. It was my experience as an instructor, that 98% of junior crewmen, with less then 50hrs on that boat, performed exactly the way they were trained and improvised situations based on their training. Yes, its a different situation then just flying an airplane, but 99.9% of the time, nothing catastrophic happens in an airplane and 99.9% of the time, everything went as it should have running SAR.
The point is this - every single individual will handle and react to emergency situations differently. Fight or flight. The average individual should react rapidly and exactly within the limits of their training. Sound familiar? Experience can not fix those individuals who lack the ability to react as stated above during an emergency or high stress situation. I've run crews with guys with years of experience who still made disasterous mistakes, that if not caught by someone, could spell big big trouble during crew operations.
Look at every major air disaster in history. In some cases, the pilots, who had plenty of experience in the way of flight time in their logbooks, made poor decisions, reacted improperly and in some cases, against the companies policies. Bad habits maybe? Then look at some *almost* air disasterous that had positive outcomes. United 232 immediately comes to mind and Captain Al Haines. Perfect example of average or above average individuals working together within the limits of their training and then some. They remained calm, they followed procedures, they remained professional and because of their actions, a lot of people walked away.
I think the answer to preventing air disasters is not "higher minimums", its TRAINING. And not just training, but constant evaluation during training. I trained 18yr old kids right out of boot camp in the Guard. The training usually consisted of me constantly screaming, yelling and down right shaking the heck out this kids to see how they react to stressful, dangerous situations. Bad reactions, bad habits or dangerous attitudes were quickly fixed or the crewmember was removed from performing duties.
The same should take place during sim training. Not the yelling and screaming of course, I think too many people would cry.
But putting these new FO's through literal hell in that sim and see how they react. Anyone that becomes useless or exhibits dangerous habits or reactions, should not be allowed through. I've said it before, I've flown with 1000-2000hr pilots who were down right dangerous in an airplane. The answer is not soley flight time, its a myriad of things that need to happen during the interview and training/evaluation process to ensure that nobody who would be a hazard in that cockpit ever makes it there. We as professional pilots need to hold high and advocate standardization and training. Your job as a Captain is not to train your FO, but mentor them. When faced with a normal operating situation that the FO has never been in before, say a 25kt crosswind, the correct action from the Captain is mentor the FO through the situation. When everything hits the fan, the Captain should rely on his FO to impart his knowledge and thought process in correcting the situation while being open to hear different perspectives. Thats why its called Crew Resource Management and not Captain Resource Management. My big .02 cents.OldTownPilot
Well-Known Member
I wish the Comair crash in LEX was a couple of new guys in their seats on a reduced rest overnight. Does that make me sick and peverted? I don't think so.
Heck, a low time FO and a CA of marginal abilities crashed an airplane, after screwing up at FL410. It has happened before and will happen again. Unfoutunately in that situation there was no outcry because there was no passengers onboard, and therefore the media never latched onto it. Had 3701 been a revenue flight, I think there might be 121 SIC mins.
Heck, a low time FO and a CA of marginal abilities crashed an airplane, after screwing up at FL410. It has happened before and will happen again. Unfoutunately in that situation there was no outcry because there was no passengers onboard, and therefore the media never latched onto it. Had 3701 been a revenue flight, I think there might be 121 SIC mins.
Airdale
Well-Known Member
I'm sorry man, but you can not contribute that crash at PCL to EXPERIENCE. Its called being STUPID and IMMATURE. Where's the professionalism? What they did, had absolutely nothing to do with their experience. Oh yeah, lets take a CRJ to its max ceiling, play musical chairs and horse around. It was plain immaturity. Ashame that they didn't live to learn about it - I bet they would have gained a lot of experience about horsing around in airplanes and maybe even learned a little about high altitude aerodynamics.
kellwolf
Piece of Trash
The same should take place during sim training. Not the yelling and screaming of course, I think too many people would cry.
THink there's a staffing problem now? Try doing that. Even the experienced guys that WOULD do well would be saying "F this. I don't have to put up with this crap" and fly freight. It's not worth the agony for $18K a year. If it were a higher paying job (as in paying what it SHOULD), then I think the training might be there to weed out the people that shouldn't be there. Unfortunately, we're seeing a time period where those seats HAVE to be filled. Turning the dial up on training isn't gonna solve the issue, it'll make it worse.
How long of an interview are we talking here? What kind of training program? Remember, it has to be fiscally responsible while still meeting the staffing needs of the airline.
But....but...the SIM has us landing in 27 kt crosswinds! I agree with the mentoring part, but some of these guys are getting through without basic instrument skills. That's not mentoring, that's instructing. I think a lot of the CAs are fine with the FO being a little lax in some areas, but when things that they should already know at this level start piling up, the CA starts wondering what's gonna happen when the crap hits the fan.
Ah, and there's the crux of the situation. How do you draw from your experience bank when you don't have much experience? How do you offer valiable input if you've only had to make one or two critical decisions yourself? A lot of the FOs I've talked to coming out of training lately are systems encyclopedias, but put them in a hypothetical and they start looking around for help. They can tell you all about the hydraulics, electrics, pneumatics, profiles, etc. But, put them outside of that and in the real world, and things start to fall apart. The CA doesn't need a systems encyclopedia. That's what the QRH is for. He needs someone who can relate experience to the current situation. Obviously, not every FO is gonna have 121 experience or CRJ experience, but the real world experience gained from flying is priceless compared to what they learned buying the CRJ type rating. If the FO doesn't have any meaningful input beyond "Uh, we'll lose the #2 hydraulic pump if #1 is shut down," then it IS Captain resource managment.
BE19Pilot
Flying a Box
Airedale,
Are you on the Beech here at Colgan? I'm a Captain up in HYA, and am former Navy. I was an aircrewman and rescue swimmer on the SH-60F/HH-60H when I retired.
It has been a difficult adjustment on many different fronts in the airline industry compared to the military. I understand that I am no longer in the military, and I cannot have expectations that things will be the same. But, on many occasions I have witnessed such a lack of attention to detail that it amazes me that we don't have more accidents/incidents.
I have a lot of respect for the "Coasties" growing up on Cape Cod and being around Base Woods Hole and Coast Guard Air Station Cape Cod. Those folks are always in the local paper doing good work on rescues, assisting mariners, etc...Takes a lot of guts to operate those small boats in a high sea state. At least in the helos we were always above it!
Regards,
ex-Navy Rotorhead
BE-1900 Captain (HYA)
Are you on the Beech here at Colgan? I'm a Captain up in HYA, and am former Navy. I was an aircrewman and rescue swimmer on the SH-60F/HH-60H when I retired.
It has been a difficult adjustment on many different fronts in the airline industry compared to the military. I understand that I am no longer in the military, and I cannot have expectations that things will be the same. But, on many occasions I have witnessed such a lack of attention to detail that it amazes me that we don't have more accidents/incidents.
I have a lot of respect for the "Coasties" growing up on Cape Cod and being around Base Woods Hole and Coast Guard Air Station Cape Cod. Those folks are always in the local paper doing good work on rescues, assisting mariners, etc...Takes a lot of guts to operate those small boats in a high sea state. At least in the helos we were always above it!
Regards,
ex-Navy Rotorhead
BE-1900 Captain (HYA)
flyover
New Member
Yes and no, training is a big component of judgement. The better the education on a given subject the greater the ability to apply that knowledge ie show good judgment.
And experienced pilots who are ingrained with bad habits (either through poor training or deficient procedures) are real hazards.
But the most significant safety improvements in the last couple of decades have involved taking "decisons" out of flying as much as possible. The more human judgment required the less safe an operation is. There will continue to be improvements in that area going forward.
Really, the only question about low-time pilots and safety is: how good will the training be? So far the safety numbers don't support the idea that's been around for many years that: "They're all worse pilots than I was when I started and everyone is going to die!!" (Well, everyone is going to die, but that's another matter.)
H46Bubba
Well-Known Member
Trip7
Well-Known Member
I think this whole discussion is silly. Low timers are not going to decrease air safety. If it was true MESA would have the worst safety record in history because they've been doing MAPD and PACE for a while. FAA deemed 250 hr safe enough for SIC. Any minimums above that is looked upon as a business decision by the airline. Besides, all the nice equipment in today's passenger jets provide more safety. Just my .02
EatSleepFly
Well-Known Member
Do you even know what "safety" means?
Dictionary (emphasis added) said:safe·ty
/ˈseɪf
ti/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[seyf-tee] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –noun, plural -ties. 1.the state of being safe; freedom from the occurrence or risk of injury, danger, or loss.
Just because Mesa, et al, aren't piling airplanes into the ground left and right doesn't make them safe. Safety can be compromised LONG before any metal is bent. And if you think the FAA is out to promote safety by requiring 250 hours or whatever, you're way naive. The FAA does a piss poor job at promoting safety.
flyover
New Member
The only way we can really measure safety in aviation is by recording occurrences. The opinion that lower hiring standards compromises safety hasn't been borne out by any data I've seen. Doesn't mean it isn't there. This opinion about lower standards (in terms of total time I guess, although many used to feel it meant "non-military trained") has been around for decades. In the meantime safety has improved markedly, at least by any measurable standard. We fly much more and crash much less compared to the days when airline flying was an exclusive club with very experienced pilots. What accounts for it? Who knows for sure? What you can't deny is it's safer now than then. Well I guess you could deny it if you're talking about having a strong opinion that things are less safe. But if you're looking at real numbers, no, can't deny it.
Sprint100
Well-Known Member
Awww jtrain, you can come harder than that. Hmmmmm, unless your setting him up for the knockout punch, I'll just shut up and watch it unfold.
Bog
New Member
Sure the "nice equipment" in the RJs provides more safety, but an inexperienced operator will be of little use when those "nice things" stop working. The N1 fan that departed the aircraft a few months ago ... flown by a senior crew. The TR that departed the aircraft this past Saturday, dinging the horizontal and vertical stab ... flown by a senior crew. What happens when we see these events happen junior crew, at night, in bad weather? Sure, that's piling it on ... but that's reality.
flyover
New Member
I understand exactly what you are saying. It's frustrating. In my current flying there are issues coming up that I didn't have before. Things are changing out there.
But it is also true that when I started there were many captains who thought the airline was really throwing away all reasonable standards in hiring civilian pilots. Later as I watched the regionals explode and the age and experience level of commercial jet captains/FOs plummet to all time lows I was sure we were about to see a bloodbath. That's why when things just continued to get safer I was forced to take a second look.
How numerous factors converge and interact to produce a safe (or unsafe) operation are hard to predict. I do know that some of the most dangerous pilots I have ever flown with had a ton of hours. And some of the most professional pilots I've flown with were low-timers.
It is also true that in the history of the airlines they have always hired low-time pilots when they had to. So in that sense this isn't new at all.
mtsu_av8er
Well-Known Member
The same should take place during sim training. Not the yelling and screaming of course, I think too many people would cry.
Some of these punks could use it . . .
kellwolf
Piece of Trash
Take the experienced CA that's sitting next to him out of the equation, then come back and say that. You've got guys that have been there done that as those CAs in this thread telling you about increased workload on the CA b/c the FO is so green. You gonna just write that off as "Ah, what do they know?"
Like Bog said, the thing about "nice equipment" is it's a real handful when it stops working. Take the FMS for example. It's REALLY nice when it works. When it fails on you 2 hours outta DTW at 32,000 ft, then you have to unfold the charts and fly green needles, DC-9 style. I really wouldn't wanna be doing a IR training flight while running the radios, setting up for an approach and talking to dispatch/mx/station ops. You lose your FMS in training.....while being vectored to final on an approach. The first time you experience an FMS failure en route is gonna be in the real plane.
Airdale
Well-Known Member
You get PAID to fly to strict procedures and follow checklists. Not to improvise what you *think* is right. If you have a problem, you do your memory action items if required, then what? You reference the appropriate checklist.
I'll just keep my mouth shut.
BE19Pilot, you have a PM.
I'll just keep my mouth shut.
BE19Pilot, you have a PM.
Plus, the airlines are no place for flight instruction.
If you don't know what you're doing when the poop hits the fan, you're certainly more of a liability than an asset during a non-normal situation.
Even this evening in the CPT, the captain is trying to unlearn some 737NG items, I'm trying to unlearn some mad dog items and we had a serious of bus failures which killed the autopilot and we had to "split the cockpit" and both go independent.
Now if I was depending on the captain to constantly spoon feed me because he was supposedly there to "raise" me, we had been in a world of hurt. As an FO, you're not there to be be groomed, you're there to backup the PIC and "learning" is important but is secondary to your operational duties as a crewmember in my opinion.
Most of the learning that you do in the cockpit isn't systems, airmanship and whatnot, it's usually learning from the rotten guys what type of captain you don't want to be and learning from the fantastic captains the type of captain you strive to be.
But spoonfeeding a guy who is clearly in over his head? Nah, not with paying passengers or time-critical payload onboard.
People aren't paying for that.
If you don't know what you're doing when the poop hits the fan, you're certainly more of a liability than an asset during a non-normal situation.
Even this evening in the CPT, the captain is trying to unlearn some 737NG items, I'm trying to unlearn some mad dog items and we had a serious of bus failures which killed the autopilot and we had to "split the cockpit" and both go independent.
Now if I was depending on the captain to constantly spoon feed me because he was supposedly there to "raise" me, we had been in a world of hurt. As an FO, you're not there to be be groomed, you're there to backup the PIC and "learning" is important but is secondary to your operational duties as a crewmember in my opinion.
Most of the learning that you do in the cockpit isn't systems, airmanship and whatnot, it's usually learning from the rotten guys what type of captain you don't want to be and learning from the fantastic captains the type of captain you strive to be.
But spoonfeeding a guy who is clearly in over his head? Nah, not with paying passengers or time-critical payload onboard.
People aren't paying for that.
Damn seggs!
You like to stir up the.......
Seriously, if your scared of regional pilots here in the states, dont go flyin Kingfisher or Air India! Those Airbus pilots have about 253 hours in the right seat. You couldnt pay me enough to fly on those airlines!
Kingfisher, you might be right (it is owned by a liquor tycoon after all). As far as I know, Air India only hires ex-airforce and you are FO for 500 years.
Why, did the stickshaker go off the last time you flew with an FO or jumpseated Seggy?
- Status