Scudrunners

[quote author=Eric Janson link=topic=9535.msg27212#msg27212 date=1552930676]
You had to watch out - a few tried to fly me into the ground. They needed help when they encountered something new.

I never had to take control from any of them - the worst I've had to do was to issue verbal commands to stop a rapidly deteriorating situation.
[/quote]

I find that very commendable. A great attitude towards multi crew in a cockpit with a big knowledge and experience gradient. *thumbs up*

And I say this without any sarcasm.

[quote]multi crew in a cockpit with a big knowledge and experience gradient[/quote]

We call that "single pilot ops". 

Truthfully.  Guy in the right seat should be logging dual.

Like the 200TT FO in Ethiopia.  Not sure I'd send that guy to pick up my dry cleaning.


[quote]a crew shortage[/quote]

There is no such thing as a pilot shortage.  There is a shortage of skilled, qualified,
experienced pilots that are willing to work for shit money and shit conditions for
@ssholes.

Open letter to all airline HR departments:  Go fuck yourselves, scum.

My pay scale, don't care what you fly:

Starting FO:  $100k.  5 yr FO tops at $150K.
Starting Four Bar:  $200k, 5 yr tops at $300k.

USD, and live somewhere with no state income tax.

[quote author=Colonel Sanders link=topic=9535.msg27217#msg27217 date=1552957893]
[quote]multi crew in a cockpit with a big knowledge and experience gradient[/quote]

We call that "single pilot ops". 

[/quote]

As I've mentioned somewhere else before, whether the captain believes that or not, he'll be right.

[quote author=Colonel Sanders link=topic=9535.msg27217#msg27217 date=1552957893]
My pay scale, don't care what you fly:

Starting FO:  $100k.  USD
[/quote]
That’s a good chunk of change for a 190 hour wonder (integrated CPL FTW) who just finished cheating their way through the course.

Sorry.  Right seat (eg part 121) FO, means someone with an
ATPL, at least a couple thousand hours, and at least one type
rating.

A competent, experienced, qualified professional.

Not someone receiving dual instruction.  200TT in the right
seat of a large aircraft is a bad joke.  That's single pilot ops.
You might as well have the head FA sit down in the right seat -
she probably knows more about aviation, actually.

What do you do about the 200-1499 hour pilots?  Have them log tasks like an apprentice mechanic?

[quote] great attitude towards multi crew in a cockpit with a big knowledge and experience gradient. *thumbs up*

And I say this without any sarcasm.
[/quote]

Now we are getting closer to the centre of an ongoing issue. All the years of CRM, human factors and efforts to develop multi crew skills is possibly the biggest failure in aviation. Let me assure you the system is still producing, despite all the training, a hard core group of the  epitome of the definition of the "old time" captain. I have said this before but spending a bit of time as a DFO and chief pilot of a 703 operation I was floored at how upgraded new captains  morph into this mind set. I can only conclude that there is a certain group out there that you unable to remove this trait. I have always found that if you are an anal retentive little prick you will usually turn into a very poor captain when it comes to utilizing crew and the laid back, take it as it comes with a dash of self confidence usually makes a far better crew manager. This is one area where a multi crew aircraft (3 crew) developed CRM to a higher degree.

When Airbus first developed the commercial fly by wire Boeing were very negative and actually advertised the fact they were staying with the ability to fly the aircraft manually. Fast forward to the present and all that has gone. It's also another example of possibly marketing a new product with insufficient testing. Seems they went through this at Douglas with the DC10 and the 737 classic with the rudder hard overs and it started with the very first jet airliner when metal fatigue cost lives. Can we change the process where paying public sacrifice their lives to develop a safe aircraft.

I guess there will always be that level of carnage when it comes to moving bodies around the world. Money is always king.

My view is Boeing gave in to give the owners what they wanted. I believe they had to, or they would not be able to compete with Airbus. The Max 8 flys a bit different than the other 737s but uses less fuel.

Easy fix, just program the computer system to fly it instead of requiring pilots to transition on type and don't tell anyone they are not fully controlling the thing. It seems like they thought the automation would never fail.

Full manual trim might be safer but some pilots would not trim it properly for best fuel economy. Can't have that. It's much more difficult to get cheap fuel than less expensive pilots.

[quote]What do you do about the 200-1499 hour pilots?[/quote]

um, have them get some experience and acquire some skill and knowledge?

In the US, they instruct (shudder) but I might recommend getting a job flying
singles and light twins.  Banner tow.  Freight.  Caravan pilot, for example.

Go where the work is.  Leave the parent's basement.  Go up north.  Africa.
Leave Toronto and Vancouver.  Buffalo Joe is probably hiring.


[quote]Money is always king.[/quote]

Of course.  Ask any of the Hollywood Elite Left about buying their kids
admission into the best schools.

[url=[/url]

[facebook]][/facebook]