B6 Application window open February 11th for 7 days only

[Smarta$$]

Prior to the Colgan crash, I distinctly remember stall training in the CRJ landing configuration involved max power and slight back pressure to ride it in the shaker basically. Only after this crash did the industry say screw it, nose down and power up.... as it should have been in the first place. The whole "minimize altitude loss" is crap and had the training always been to push the nose down unequivocally, the aircraft would likely have recovered and continued flying. If you get to the point of near stall or stall, then you're gonna have to suck it up and know you are going to lose altitude as you recover.

Well, I agree the training should have been that way all along, and if the captain was any kind of real aviator, he would have known that as well. He F-ed up badly. This is a real lesson on why it is so critical that most pilots do at least a minimum amount of primary flight instruction before flying complex airplanes. Maybe military flight training can sufficiently close the gap between simply following basic stall recovery techniques and having a true and deep understanding of what it really takes to break a stall.

He had deficient knowledge and skills, in addition to deficient training.

 

[Splert]

Play the game, get hired.

Yep ... they did not ask about ALPA or unions but the question lets you sink yourself.

 

[Flyer1015]

Well, I agree the training should have been that way all along, and if the captain was any kind of real aviator, he would have known that as well. He F-ed up badly. This is a real lesson on why it is so critical that most pilots do at least a minimum amount of primary flight instruction before flying complex airplanes. Maybe military flight training can sufficiently close the gap between simply following basic stall recovery techniques and having a true and deep understanding of what it really takes to break a stall.

He had deficient knowledge and skills, in addition to deficient training.

True, but we still lack a focus and training on stalls in general. There needs to be a focus on approach stalls in landings and in cruise scenarios that can lead to stalls. AF Flight 447 wasn't just pilot error, when 3 sets of eyes miss it, especially when one pair stepped into the flight deck and had a perspective of seeing things without the stuff the other two went through since the beginning of the event. It was a system failure, and that system of training needs to be fixed.

Ask yourself, what have you done in your PCs? It's the same stuff from years ago. It doesn't matter what plane, I can tell you it's gonna be 4 approaches, 2 precision, 2 non-precision, a V1 cut, and a SE ILS approach that is handflown. It is because that is what's required on paper. Airlines with CQ training instead of PC/PT setup I think fare much better, because they train with real life events that have happened based on case studies and ASAP reports. That's how it should be. We should be in a sim at 37,000 feet and fail an engine. Easy right? Well do it. Or try and simulate fake smoke in the sim (somehow) with the O2 mask on the whole time. Or perhaps a high altitude stall. All of these would reflect recent accidents, UPS Flight 6, AF 447. It's time to move away from the mundane PC/PTs and switch to real life based events that CQ training provides.

 

[Flyer1015]

Theres no way I'd bring up ALLA to this question. Sadly, there are pilots who do and then wonder why they didn't get hired.

I meant ALPA*

 

[Flyer1015]

Play the game, get hired.

Play the game, and you won't get hired. It's funny hearing guys who try and game the system or game the interview then complain that they didn't get hired even though they had the perfect interview.

 

[MikeSF340]

Play the game, and you won't get hired. It's funny hearing guys who try and game the system or game the interview then complain that they didn't get hired even though they had the perfect interview.

Every interview is a game, it doesn't matter where you're applying. You tell the interviewers what they want to hear and they decide if you're full of sh$t. I'm not saying lie threw your teeth, but frame the answer in such a way that it makes you look your best. If I was interviewing at JB I wouldn't go on and on about how much I love ALPA. If they ask if I ever had any involvement in a union I would answer matter of factly. It's all one big BS game.

 

[Flyer1015]

Every interview is a game, it doesn't matter where you're applying. You tell the interviewers what they want to hear and they decide if you're full of sh$t. I'm not saying lie threw your teeth, but frame the answer in such a way that it makes you look your best. If I was interviewing at JB I wouldn't go on and on about how much I love ALPA. If they ask if I ever had any involvement in a union I would answer matter of factly. It's all one big BS game.

I disagree. I don't tell anyone what they want to hear in an interview. I'm honest and be myself. So far in aviation, that's gotten me 2 out of 2 jobs and both were first time attempts. I really believe if you use your own stories for TMAAT, and are honest about it, they can see that.

 

[MikeSF340]

I disagree. I don't tell anyone what they want to hear in an interview. I'm honest and be myself. So far in aviation, that's gotten me 2 out of 2 jobs and both were first time attempts. I really believe if you use your own stories for TMAAT, and are honest about it, they can see that.

For the most part I agree with you. I wouldn't make things up or tell lie after lie. However, know your audience and sell yourself any way you can.

 

[Splert]

It is hard to fake: TMAAT you believed everything your employer ever told you.

Flyer1015 didn't have too.

 

[Splert]

I keed

I keed