AVCANADA

It is currently Thu Oct 19, 2017 7:33 pm

All times are UTC-07:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 79 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2 3 4 Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sat Mar 04, 2017 1:19 pm 
Online
Rank 10
Rank 10

Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 6:13 pm
Posts: 2737
Location: North America, sometimes
olddirtyloud wrote:
double-j wrote:
15L is notorious for tailwinds on final. Perhaps they couldn't meet stabilized approach criteria and executed the missed approach?

Good job I say.

Carry on with your pitchforks and torches!

JJ


Perhaps the cadet couldn't keep a stabilized approach. A 200 hour pilot has 0 business being in the front end of a 737. Especially when they aren't allowed to land at certain airports. What if the captain has a heart attack? "Sorry folks, I'm not allowed to land here so we are all going to die.... "


Does a 250-hour guy has any buisness being a FO on a C-17? What about an 800-hour guy as the AC?


_________________
Going for the deck at corner


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Mar 04, 2017 1:30 pm 
Offline
Rank 10
Rank 10

Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:24 pm
Posts: 2410
What airports aren't they allowed to land at?


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Mar 04, 2017 1:42 pm 
Offline
Rank 10
Rank 10

Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:24 pm
Posts: 2410
olddirtyloud wrote:
A 200 hour pilot has 0 business being in the front end of a 737.


Apparently they have all the business in the world to be in that seat, they got hired after all and it's between them and Sunwing.

I'll agree there are certainly marginally more experience pilots in the market for that job, but maybe you'd care to post your resume and that qualifications that allow you to make that statement? Extensive transport category jet training experience?

I understand Sunwing has taken 4 of these guys? Presumably they are hiring guys out of turboprops and such also?

Anyway, U realise it's a bummer to see a job you covet go to someone newer to the industry than you - but it happened to all of us and the industry owes you sh!t ...



Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Mar 04, 2017 2:17 pm 
Offline
Rank 6
Rank 6

Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 10:44 am
Posts: 472
Quote:
Perhaps the cadet couldn't keep a stabilized approach. A 200 hour pilot has 0 business being in the front end of a 737. Especially when they aren't allowed to land at certain airports. What if the captain has a heart attack? "Sorry folks, I'm not allowed to land here so we are all going to die.... "


How many hours do you feel are needed to sit in the front end of a 737?

Hours don't equate to competence or ability.

You do understand that there is such a thing as training and a certain standard has to be achieved to obtain a 737 Type Rating no matter how many hours an individual has?

There's nothing unusual about having restrictions on First Officers - most companies I've worked for have had them.


_________________
Always fly a stable approach - it's the only stability you'll find in this business


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Mar 04, 2017 4:38 pm 
Offline
Rank 0
Rank 0

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2013 4:59 pm
Posts: 12
You can't train experience. Experience is what will save your bacon some day. Eventually someone will let go of your hand and you'll have no "experience" to draw upon.


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Mar 04, 2017 4:41 pm 
Online
Rank 10
Rank 10

Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 6:13 pm
Posts: 2737
Location: North America, sometimes
You don't think between the time they have 200 hrs and hired by Sunwing to the time they upgrade they'll gain experience?

_________________
Going for the deck at corner


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Mar 04, 2017 4:45 pm 
Offline
Rank 0
Rank 0

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2013 4:59 pm
Posts: 12
Eric Janson wrote:
Quote:
Perhaps the cadet couldn't keep a stabilized approach. A 200 hour pilot has 0 business being in the front end of a 737. Especially when they aren't allowed to land at certain airports. What if the captain has a heart attack? "Sorry folks, I'm not allowed to land here so we are all going to die.... "


How many hours do you feel are needed to sit in the front end of a 737?

Hours don't equate to competence or ability.

You do understand that there is such a thing as training and a certain standard has to be achieved to obtain a 737 Type Rating no matter how many hours an individual has?

There's nothing unusual about having restrictions on First Officers - most companies I've worked for have had them.


A monkey can be trained to fly a 737. Does a 200 hour fresh CPL have a clue what the jetstream is? where to avoid it? Do they know what an RFI is? and how its even relevent to a 737? I'm sure these cadets fly the plane fine or they wouldn't be there, but what about the operation aside from just flying? Flying is the easy part..... (But apparently with the tailstrike, its not that easy....)



Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Mar 04, 2017 6:35 pm 
Offline
Rank 1
Rank 1

Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2014 10:12 pm
Posts: 16
This is an interesting thread. Back in the 70's Air Canada as all the other airline took graduates from Selkirk and few other programs an hired them off the street. Now to get hired at CP they had to fly a DC-3 or a little later a 737 simulator. That program was the same for the 250 hour or 5000 hour candidate. What they were assessing was can you learn and be taught. Most made it some did not. The other relevant item is those hired were accepted as SO's. And of course at that time all aircraft had simple autopilots and you needed good hands and feet. After the early 70's that direct hire out of colleges ceased. Not sure why but I have my suspicions.

The use of automation has dumbed down the requirement to be able to fly an aircraft using your hands and feet. I have flown with many excellent lower experienced pilots and also many other high time pilots who you had to watch like a hawk. Hours is not only the sole factor in being a good pilot but at least it is an indicator that they have some experience to draw from. I can tell you flying with inexperienced crew on any aircraft type is a lot more intensive for the Captain period.

It was normal, "in the day" to hand fly a 737 from 10,000 and below, as I did on an Airbus, turn off the automation once in a while and fly the aircraft I heard more gasps saying, can we do that, or I'd prefer to use the automation please. My reply was, it's an aircraft you CAN fly it.

So from my perspective I am a not to worried that a 250 hour pilot can actually read checklists and operate the Autopilot, it's when the autopilot is not available and the Captain is distracted or not on the flight deck will this low hour pilot be able to keep the jet right side up? An initial conversion course is much shorter than in the past and training has been reduced to a minimum required giving a low hour pilot little background to draw on, so little to help there. Jumping from a Seneca to a 737 is a big leap.



Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Mar 04, 2017 6:53 pm 
Offline
Rank 8
Rank 8

Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:24 am
Posts: 763
I don't imagine a king air captain would know much about the jet stream either, or even a Q400 pilot for that matter. They both spend all their time at FL250 or below.

Who's going to be more helpful when there's a line of CBs en route? Probably the guy who's done it before.

Who's going to be more helpful when the pressurization starts doing weird things that has no checklist? Probably not the person with only 172 time.

What about a gear malfunction, fuel leak, bad vector from ATC, alternate craps out, unexpected headwinds create a fuel shortage. I could go on, but it's all something a 3000hr turboprop pilot will have dealt with in the past and will be useful in the flight deck of a 737.



Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Mar 04, 2017 6:58 pm 
Offline
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 7:04 am
Posts: 1659
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Oo2zsZOjqXs

Now when I had 200-300 hrs and a fresh CPL, and not being the brightest light bulb in the aviation chandelier I can honestly say I would have great difficulty with this beast in the gusty xwinds. I had enough trouble with a PA-28. The are a good number of low time folks though who were better than me.



Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Mar 04, 2017 9:00 pm 
Offline
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2004 3:49 pm
Posts: 1719
Location: of my pants is unknown.
Been there. Done that. In that type, at that airport, in fact.

But you know what? Even at EK, with an FO with 12,000 hours of experience with previous military experience on a C-5 - that would STILL be a captain's landing, mandatory. FO's are restricted to 20 knots crosswind max, in the Ops Manual. And of course the captain can elect to take ANY landing if he feels it would be in the best interests.

olddirtycloud, you're just embarrassing yourself. It appears you have zero knowledge of the how cadet programs work. No, a "monkey can not be trained to fly a 737", I'm sorry you have such low self-regard. Cadet programs are an incredibly competitive process even to be selected, and every inch of the way these guys/girls are tested way beyond the licensing minimum. They don't just throw low-time guys in a seat. Every single sim/flight is an intensive training session in which they can be cut from the program. Perhaps you can explain how doing hundreds of hours in a level D sim of your type, training every conceivable non-normal situation, is less valuable than hour-building in a Cessna, for airline ops lol? And then hundreds of sectors with a training captain before even being released to the line. As I said, an incredible opportunity.

Of course experience can only be developed over time and exposure to the operation. A couple weeks ago I did a trip to JFK. My FO was a young lady with about 230 hours TT. Her first job was with the airline - on the B777. But she was only with me after two years of nearly constant training. She did a flawless job. I did not have to correct her or instruct her whatsoever. (I'm guessing that she now has more operational experience on a trans-polar ULR widebody flight to JFK than you do!) Now if we'd had a serious emergency, who knows? But I could also say the same about any FO I've never flown with before. I've had some potentially serious inflight incidents in the past, and even with "experienced" FO's it still wasn't always pretty. Observing her performance I have every confidence that between my own experience and her proficiency we would have handled anything just fine. Incidentally she'll probably be in that seat another 10 years+ before getting a chance to upgrade. Still want to trade places? I'm guessing there should be enough "experience" in that time to satisfy you?

I AM slightly surprised that Sunwing is going with such a program - because it's expensive! That's why it's usually only done in places where there are other reasons like lack of GA or nationalism i.e. the Middle East / Asia /Europe. My only concern is that they'll do the typical Canadian airline thing, roll their own and cheap out and do a bare minimum to get bodies in seats. If that's the plan, then they WILL give ab initio a bad name. But the attempt to vilify cadets on the basis of something like a go-around is ignorant.


_________________
I’m still waiting for my white male privilege membership card. Must have gotten lost in the mail.


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Mar 04, 2017 10:12 pm 
Offline
Rank 4
Rank 4

Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 7:28 pm
Posts: 205
olddirtyloud wrote:
I heard after all the cancelled flights to CYSB earlier in the week, a "Cadet" was forced to drive a car from YYZ to YSB to position for the flight! If they can't tell them to F Off for something like that, you think they will stand up to a captain? CRM disaster waiting to happen....


You heard wrong, and shame on you for posting something this stupid. A cadet and the rest of the crew were scheduled on an AC flight that was cancelled. The company booked a coach for the four hour drive instead. Carry on with your nonsense.



Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Mar 04, 2017 10:47 pm 
Offline
Rank 4
Rank 4

Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 7:28 pm
Posts: 205
olddirtyloud wrote:

A Sunwing Boeing 737-86J (C-FWGH/SWG522) enroute from Puerto Vallarta, MX(MMPR) to Toronto, ON (CYYZ) initiated a missed approach to Runway 15L due to unstable approach and landed Runway 15L at 0722Z.


18/02/2017 07:00->
METAR CYYZ 180700Z 00000KT 15SM FEW240 M02/M04 A2967 RMK
CI2 SLP057=


I checked the crew. Both the captain and the F/O are very experienced. There was NOT a cadet at the controls, and honestly that shouldn't matter. Well done to the crew for initiating a missed approach if they were unstable.



Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Mar 04, 2017 11:07 pm 
Offline
Rank 4
Rank 4

Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2010 8:43 pm
Posts: 223
olddirtyloud wrote:
double-j wrote:
15L is notorious for tailwinds on final. Perhaps they couldn't meet stabilized approach criteria and executed the missed approach?

Good job I say.

Carry on with your pitchforks and torches!

JJ


Perhaps the cadet couldn't keep a stabilized approach. A 200 hour pilot has 0 business being in the front end of a 737. Especially when they aren't allowed to land at certain airports. What if the captain has a heart attack? "Sorry folks, I'm not allowed to land here so we are all going to die.... "


I guess you will be shocked to learn there are some airports swg operates into that even a 20,000 hour fo isn't allowed to land at.



Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Mar 04, 2017 11:11 pm 
Online
Rank (9)
Rank (9)

Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2010 6:32 am
Posts: 1363
This is what I was trying to say taking 200 hour people out of your Canadian flight school is much different than the European style cadet programs where it is trained from day 1 to fly an airliner.




complexintentions wrote:
Been there. Done that. In that type, at that airport, in fact.

But you know what? Even at EK, with an FO with 12,000 hours of experience with previous military experience on a C-5 - that would STILL be a captain's landing, mandatory. FO's are restricted to 20 knots crosswind max, in the Ops Manual. And of course the captain can elect to take ANY landing if he feels it would be in the best interests.

olddirtycloud, you're just embarrassing yourself. It appears you have zero knowledge of the how cadet programs work. No, a "monkey can not be trained to fly a 737", I'm sorry you have such low self-regard. Cadet programs are an incredibly competitive process even to be selected, and every inch of the way these guys/girls are tested way beyond the licensing minimum. They don't just throw low-time guys in a seat. Every single sim/flight is an intensive training session in which they can be cut from the program. Perhaps you can explain how doing hundreds of hours in a level D sim of your type, training every conceivable non-normal situation, is less valuable than hour-building in a Cessna, for airline ops lol? And then hundreds of sectors with a training captain before even being released to the line. As I said, an incredible opportunity.

Of course experience can only be developed over time and exposure to the operation. A couple weeks ago I did a trip to JFK. My FO was a young lady with about 230 hours TT. Her first job was with the airline - on the B777. But she was only with me after two years of nearly constant training. She did a flawless job. I did not have to correct her or instruct her whatsoever. (I'm guessing that she now has more operational experience on a trans-polar ULR widebody flight to JFK than you do!) Now if we'd had a serious emergency, who knows? But I could also say the same about any FO I've never flown with before. I've had some potentially serious inflight incidents in the past, and even with "experienced" FO's it still wasn't always pretty. Observing her performance I have every confidence that between my own experience and her proficiency we would have handled anything just fine. Incidentally she'll probably be in that seat another 10 years+ before getting a chance to upgrade. Still want to trade places? I'm guessing there should be enough "experience" in that time to satisfy you?

I AM slightly surprised that Sunwing is going with such a program - because it's expensive! That's why it's usually only done in places where there are other reasons like lack of GA or nationalism i.e. the Middle East / Asia /Europe. My only concern is that they'll do the typical Canadian airline thing, roll their own and cheap out and do a bare minimum to get bodies in seats. If that's the plan, then they WILL give ab initio a bad name. But the attempt to vilify cadets on the basis of something like a go-around is ignorant.



Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Mar 05, 2017 6:46 am 
Offline
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 7:04 am
Posts: 1659
fish4life wrote:
This is what I was trying to say taking 200 hour people out of your Canadian flight school is much different than the European style cadet programs where it is trained from day 1 to fly an airliner.




complexintentions wrote:
Been there. Done that. In that type, at that airport, in fact.

But you know what? Even at EK, with an FO with 12,000 hours of experience with previous military experience on a C-5 - that would STILL be a captain's landing, mandatory. FO's are restricted to 20 knots crosswind max, in the Ops Manual. And of course the captain can elect to take ANY landing if he feels it would be in the best interests.

olddirtycloud, you're just embarrassing yourself. It appears you have zero knowledge of the how cadet programs work. No, a "monkey can not be trained to fly a 737", I'm sorry you have such low self-regard. Cadet programs are an incredibly competitive process even to be selected, and every inch of the way these guys/girls are tested way beyond the licensing minimum. They don't just throw low-time guys in a seat. Every single sim/flight is an intensive training session in which they can be cut from the program. Perhaps you can explain how doing hundreds of hours in a level D sim of your type, training every conceivable non-normal situation, is less valuable than hour-building in a Cessna, for airline ops lol? And then hundreds of sectors with a training captain before even being released to the line. As I said, an incredible opportunity.

Of course experience can only be developed over time and exposure to the operation. A couple weeks ago I did a trip to JFK. My FO was a young lady with about 230 hours TT. Her first job was with the airline - on the B777. But she was only with me after two years of nearly constant training. She did a flawless job. I did not have to correct her or instruct her whatsoever. (I'm guessing that she now has more operational experience on a trans-polar ULR widebody flight to JFK than you do!) Now if we'd had a serious emergency, who knows? But I could also say the same about any FO I've never flown with before. I've had some potentially serious inflight incidents in the past, and even with "experienced" FO's it still wasn't always pretty. Observing her performance I have every confidence that between my own experience and her proficiency we would have handled anything just fine. Incidentally she'll probably be in that seat another 10 years+ before getting a chance to upgrade. Still want to trade places? I'm guessing there should be enough "experience" in that time to satisfy you?

I AM slightly surprised that Sunwing is going with such a program - because it's expensive! That's why it's usually only done in places where there are other reasons like lack of GA or nationalism i.e. the Middle East / Asia /Europe. My only concern is that they'll do the typical Canadian airline thing, roll their own and cheap out and do a bare minimum to get bodies in seats. If that's the plan, then they WILL give ab initio a bad name. But the attempt to vilify cadets on the basis of something like a go-around is ignorant.


Before you start slagging CDN training, perhaps a little research may be in order. Check this out and look at programs offered paying particular to the 4 yr program B.Sc associated with Mount Allison and the 2 yr Dp programs

http://www.mfc.nb.ca/main.html



Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Mar 05, 2017 10:39 am 
Online
Rank 3
Rank 3

Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2015 3:46 am
Posts: 125
It's very expensive when it's done right. But "expensive" is a company's most hated word and frankly companies, in Canada at least, usually try and skimp on costs wherever they can. If they can do the minimum, they will. Undoubtedly, if there was a fully integrated, closely monitored, and "expensive" program to help guide the low-timers AT LEAST to a level of comfortable competency (timing can be debated all day) then such a program would work. It works for the military, it works for NASA, etc.. But when companies are hiring 200h pilots and putting them on the line as unrestricted and full-fledged FOs after minimal training and indoc, then there's a period of danger until the pilot does naturally get acquainted with their own experience over time.


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Mar 05, 2017 12:03 pm 
Offline
Rank 1
Rank 1

Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2014 10:12 pm
Posts: 16
I am quite sure Sunwing is not placing any money in to the MFA program. And I would bet it is not the same category as the Lufthansa Training program which is mostly paid for by Lufthansa. Just a question for any Jazz pilots, is there still a intake of similarly trained pilots directly from any Aviation program? And if so what is the percentage of new pilots from those programs?


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Mar 06, 2017 1:02 am 
Offline
Rank 6
Rank 6

Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 10:44 am
Posts: 472
olddirtyloud wrote:
[A monkey can be trained to fly a 737. Does a 200 hour fresh CPL have a clue what the jetstream is? where to avoid it? Do they know what an RFI is? and how its even relevent to a 737? I'm sure these cadets fly the plane fine or they wouldn't be there, but what about the operation aside from just flying? Flying is the easy part..... (But apparently with the tailstrike, its not that easy....)


Well I don't know what an RFI is either - google turns up Radio France International! :wink:

There are manuals that contain relevant operational information (OM A and OM C) at my Airline.

There is also Line Training that is designed to familiarise new people with the operation - the first few Line Training flights are done with a safety Pilot in addition to the Instructor and Trainee. That's how it's been done at most places I've worked.

There's always going to be a learning curve moving onto a different aircraft Type. I have no F/O time on 5 different jet types. In one case my first flight on the actual aircraft was a revenue flight with passengers. Circuit training is now done in the Sim at most companies.


_________________
Always fly a stable approach - it's the only stability you'll find in this business


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 12:07 am 
Offline
Rank 10
Rank 10
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 5:52 am
Posts: 2762
ant_321 wrote:
I guess you will be shocked to learn there are some airports swg operates into that even a 20,000 hour fo isn't allowed to land at.


Really? Which one's?



Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 8:50 am 
Offline
Rank 4
Rank 4

Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 7:28 pm
Posts: 205
Bede wrote:
ant_321 wrote:
I guess you will be shocked to learn there are some airports swg operates into that even a 20,000 hour fo isn't allowed to land at.


Really? Which one's?


YAM and LBA are two examples. There are others.



Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 11:07 am 
Offline
Rank 4
Rank 4

Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 12:48 am
Posts: 278
The butthurt is strong in this thread. All I hear is boo hoo, I had to work the ramp or I had to fly up north slinging dung and medevacs and freeze my nuts off. Perhaps that's why you're all "testy". Like mentioned on here already, it's the norm in Europe and around the world. I've flown with a few fresh 250 guy, wouldn't be able to tell them apart from 1500 hr guy. Is a 250 wonder perfect? No, neither is a +20k hr old fart or any of the other front end ballasts inbetween. While they sit in the right seat for a few thousand hrs, they'll see and learn what they'll need to know. And don't tell me if you were in their shoes you would say "No Mr Sunwing, I wanna go fly up north and be a real pilot first and live the glamorous lifestyle."
An airplane is an airplane. Flying a Boeing or an Airbus isn't much different than a king air. So get use to 250hr guys getting in while the going is good to the 705 ops for them. Matter of fact, maybe we should have a Hug a 250hr pilot day. Feel the love, and wipe away those tears.



Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 11:50 am 
Offline
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 7:04 am
Posts: 1659
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4_0Pt3HAR8

Ole Randy Bachman says it all............



Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 12:19 pm 
Offline
Rank 1
Rank 1

Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2015 5:04 am
Posts: 48
Hmmm...lessee..."flying an Airbus or a Boeing isn't much different than flying a Kingair..."
I'll betcha you're wrong...
Really wrong....seriously wrong...
:roll:



Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Mar 07, 2017 12:49 pm 
Offline
Rank Moderator
Rank Moderator

Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 4:58 pm
Posts: 621
Seeing young people with 250 hours jumping in the right seat of a 737 is going to hurt people who had to go the 5k hours route. It is just humane.
Doesn't mean that the lucky ones can't do it either.

Now I went from the King Air to the 737, it is a totally different world, but hey, I am just speaking for myself !



Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 79 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2 3 4 Next

All times are UTC-07:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 42 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
[ GZIP: Off ]

For questions/comments please send them to
avcanada@gmail.com


AvCanada Topsites List
AVIATION TOP 100 - www.avitop.com Avitop.com

While the administrators and moderators of this forum will attempt to remove or edit any generally objectionable material as quickly as possible, it is impossible to review every message. If you feel a topic or post is inappropriate email us at avcanada@gmail.com .  By reading these forums you acknowledge that all posts made to these forums express the views and opinions of the author and not the administrators, moderators or webmaster (except for posts by these people) and hence will not be held liable. This website is not responsible or liable in any way for any false or misleading messages or job ads placed at our site. 

Use AvCanada's information at your own risk!

We reserve the right to remove any messages that we deem unacceptable.
When you post a message, your IP is logged and may be provided to concerned parties where unethical or illegal behavior is apparent. All rights reserved.