Crew Hiring Trends

[TankCommander]

This is something I found on the internet that blew my mind!

http://www.vaxxine.com/aviation/rats.htm


Crew Hiring Trends:

An item that seemed to be unanimously agreed upon at the R.A.T.S conference was the fact that current regional airlinehiring practices weren't always the most efficient or cost effective. Both Greg McGowen of FlightSafety International and Randy Hotton of USA Jet presented many similarities of what they believe the industry must look for in pilot candidates.l The common thought shared between these two major aviation companies was that air carriers must get away from the idea of hiring pilots; they should be looking at hiring potential captains. Much time and money can be lost in training a second officer who will ultimately perform poorly when placed as a captain. The overall consensus was that those pilots who typically demonstrated the most potential to perform as future captains came from the military or pilot bridge programs. U.S.A. Jet and Atlantic Coast Airlines (ASA)shared the common idea that candidates with extensive experience as flight instructors showed poor performance as captains, and lacked the overall leadership to effectivelymove into the left seat. The suggestion put forth by Greg McGowen was that airlines should seek a candidate with 500 hours total time and 250 as second in command flying turboprop aircraft, instead of hiring a pilot who spent 1200 hours flight instructing. To further add to these hiring ideas, Drew Bedson of Atlantic Southeast Airlines(ASA) suggested that air carriers must back away from going to the "lowest common denominator" when selecting crew. Although industry standards may suggest hiring at 1200 hours with 100 hours flown in multi-engine aircraft, it will ultimately be up to the regional airline to bridge the gap between what meets industry standards and what credentials will produce effective captains.

Any ideas on which way togo?

 

[Sctt@NJA]

"The suggestion put forth by Greg McGowen was that airlines should seek a candidate with 500 hours total time and 250 as second in command flying turboprop aircraft, instead of hiring a pilot who spent 1200 hours flight instructing."

Because he will be better captain material? This is amazing to me and totally against my thoughts on the subject.

What has a 500 hr guy with 250hrs of sic time ever comanded? His comercial x-countries were the only times a guy like this has ever been in charge of an airplane.

As a jet captain myself, and former flight instructer, I think there are lots of great lessons of responsibility and authority to be learned from flight instructing.

Sic turboprop? I have done that too, and it can be great experience, or it could be a joke. When flying Cheyennes as a captain I would see brand new commercial pilots come in, sit in the right seat for a few months, never even get a clue what was going on, and be hired by Continental Express or American Eagle.

Hire the flight instructors dumb a$$ companies!

 

[SierraPilot]

wow what a shocker.. I'd venture to guess this is nothing more then those companies trying to justify their bridge programs to put a low time pilot into the right seat. While I wouldnt mind being let into a right seat at 500 hrs, I also think CFI's bring alot to the table in terms of knowledge and skill and it would be a mistake to discount that totally.

Ryan

 

[kabz]

U.S.A. Jet and Atlantic Coast Airlines (ASA)shared the common idea that candidates with extensive experience as flight instructors showed poor performance as captains, and lacked the overall leadership to effectivelymove into the left seat.

I know a few ex-CFIs who are captains, and it seems from listening to them, that they are STILL CFIs in terms of working with their FOs and being in overall charge with THEIR license on the line.

I know that I'd much rather have a 1000 or 2000 hours as a CFI or other type of PIC, than 300 sitting in the RHS paying for the privelege, wondering whether I should really be there.

What does RATS stand for anyway, or is it just a wind-up ? Grr

 

[pilotyip]

RATS

Regional Airline Training Seminar. Flt time has very little to do with an individuals ability to perform in the cockpit. There is a relation that more flight time will normally do better, but that alone is not a universal predictor of success in a training program.
As stated before we have hired pilots as DA-20 F/O's with 150 hr of fixed wing time and they out performed CFI's with over 4000 hours. The military has a great track record of weeding out the weak performers, so hiring a military trained pilot is a pretty sure bet of being successful in getting this guy into the Capt.'s seat. And it really does not matter what he flew in the military, it is selection criteria and training that makes the difference.

 

[Doberman]

CFI's blow!

The only reason in the world that someone would waste time as a CFI it the fact that no one would hire them. Don't even try to argue this.

 

[Publishers]

ideas

What they are talking about makes some sense as most of the bridge people have been immersed in the airline way of doing things, the airline way of study of the systems, the airline crew coordination, etc. for their entire time. Flight instructors may have more time, but, what kind of time is it. A good deal is just sitting there and making sure the student does not crash it, and telling him what to do through instruction. Good but not particularly relative.

Even with the military guys, there was the feeling to stay away from fighter pilots as they tended to be more loners and aggressive, not something as desirable as a flight crew situation. What they had shown was the ability to understand complex situations.

This is why the PFT slots that everyone loves to hate have been successful whether you lile them or not. The hours are not as im,portant as having a kind of instruction.

 

[100LL... Again!]

Nice flamebait, deberman.

For a minute I thought you were serious.



Publishers:

And thus, the world of single pilot and freight operations will be the last bastion of the independent self-made aviator.

Over at the airliones:

We are Borg. You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile.

This is another step in the degradation of the profession.

Have fun being a bunch of button-pushing airborne bus drivers.

The phrase "airline pilot" sure means very little today. And I am one.

Bunch of losers who think like this.


Where's ACATerry - c'mon man, back me up here!!!

 

[pilotyip]

Doing your own thing

100-LL, doing your own thing in an airplane is an accident waiting to happen, look at the lower end of the industry. Without enforced cockpit procedures, strong company support, check airman who take their jobs very seriously, you cannot have a culture of safety. Lack of strong CRM skills allow non-stablized approaches, uncommanded configuration changes, and a long list of cockpit short coming that increase the risk of an accidents. The history of the airlines and military training program evolution show that well defined and enforced SOP is the only way to fly a multi-crewed airplane safely.

 

[100LL... Again!]

Okay, so this is the post I got the PM about.

You misunderstand me.

My beef is that low-timers who are bred into the systems without finding their own way for a while by spending some time early on in command of any aircraft. By keeping them in the training environment from zero time to say, 300 hours, then immersing them in airline-think and putting them right into a regional aircraft, you stunt their growth, and they cannot develop decision making skills as well. This is the whole reason for solo time during the private training.

Get 'em to 300 or so hours, then send 'em out into the world, call us back when you have 1000-1200.


As to company procedures. I am someone who writes SOP.
I never advocate stepping outside of SOP, unless conditions make SOP impractical/unsafe.

Even when I think an item of SOP is stupid, I think it is safer to do the standard call or procedure instead of making things non-standard. If you think a procedure is stupid, complain to the Chief Pilot until they fix it.

But when someone lives their whole aviation life in a box, they may hav tremendous problems learning to think (cliche alert) outside of it.

Otherwise we would skip college and entry-level jobs and just immediately take high-school students and put them in corporations as middle managers.

To much instruction is as bad as too little.