Scudrunners

What is your opinion on pilots training from zero to F.O. at an airline with no commercial flying in between?


It works in other parts of the world why not here?


Oh, by the way I think it is correct way to the airlines because airline flying has little in common with commercial flying such as bush flying.

Like most things, I think it can work if all parties give it the respect it deserves.

[quote author=Chuck Ellsworth link=topic=5773.msg15132#msg15132 date=1488847462]
What is your opinion on pilots training from zero to F.O. at an airline with no commercial flying in between?


It works in other parts of the world why not here?


Oh, by the way I think it is correct way to the airlines because airline flying has little in common with commercial flying such as bush flying.
[/quote]


It all depends on the training - both quality and quantity.


Additional ground school/extra Sim sessions/extra Line Training well above the minimum required is the way to do it correctly.


The biggest issue is not being able to upgrade these people fast - can become a problem with rapid expansion.


One company I worked for hired a group of F/O - some with experience some straight out of flight school. After 1 year flying you couldn't tell the difference.


And this is a one way street - you can never put these guys on a Beaver or Navajho.

The mechanics of flying an NG aircraft are pretty simple. If they are good programmers they can function very well under the direction of an experienced skipper. I have to question the area of crew augmentation though. Air France was a tragic example. How would one define "experienced" F/O when the captain is resting and his helper is a cadet program person.

[quote author=Eric Janson link=topic=5773.msg15140#msg15140 date=1488904333]
And this is a one way street - you can never put these guys on a Beaver or Navajho.
[/quote]
Maybe so, but if you give a candidate 250 hours of nothing but prep work to fly a Beaver then tossed them into a 737 instead they'd probably suck at that too.

I think that was the point a couple of the posters made.  There is a huge gap in the particular skills at each end of the spectrum, and transferring from one class to the other after awhile becomes difficult.

The underlying issue, I think, is that basic flight skills can deteriorate over time, and particularly if they are not well founded to begin with.  That is where experience comes into play.  The Air France disaster and a couple of others brought that to the forefront. I am fairly confident that the PF at the time had learned how to do a stall recovery some time during his training.
There was an accident in San Fransisco years ago, where the pilots were doing an intentional dead engine take off, and encountered asymmetric thrust in a four engine jet.  The investigation uncovered the fact that only the Flight Engineer seemed to understand what was happening before they lost complete control of the aircraft.  And again, I expect that the two pilots flying had had previous training on how to correct  asymmetric thrust.

Unfortunately, in our world today, some bad ideas take a long time before they surface.  It is going to take many years for the present FO's to move into the left seat in any numbers, and even then, as long as things go well, things will end well.
Automation is continually advancing rapidly, so maybe as it takes over more and more, programming will pretty much be all that is required of future airline pilots.

Where does Ryan Air get their Captains from?

I just think its sad that these "kids" are missing the best flying of their careers. Canadian Aviation has so much more to offer than pavement to pavement flying, now that being said if someone asked if I wanted to drive a 737 when I had 250 hours you bet I would have jumped at it.

I do know a recent high time retiree who signed up to go north again and pound a turbine around. I know not a beaver or nor will he be doing off strip work, but I thought good for him!  maybe his cojo's can learn a thing from him and he can connect with his roots in aviation and relearn some lessons.

Now at the far end of my flying career, I've often said I need at least another 50-60 trips around the sun to do all the things I'd like to try.

In no particular order:

1.  Bush flying in Canada's north
2.  Flying heavy helicopters
3.  Airline career
4.  Airshow career
5.  Instructing 
6.  University degree (Basket weaving, engineering, computer science, doesn't matter)

Maybe I'll just do another trip back East this summer in my RV instead...  (;>0) 

[quote author=Chuck Ellsworth link=topic=5773.msg15132#msg15132 date=1488847462]
What is your opinion on pilots training from zero to F.O. at an airline with no commercial flying in between?[/quote]


What are the answers to these questions on the topic of cadet vs experienced FO's:


For the passengers, which is safer?


For the airlines, which is cheaper, easier, more effective?