Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

PFT rears it's head again

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
How exactly does someone "earn" a type rating with 100 hours of sim time? I thought an ATP was required for a Type Rating.

None the less, the zero to hero wonders do usually fly an approach with great precision and know the regs better than anyone at the airline. However, they also are very weak when it comes to flying outside the sim. They can't prioritize tasks ( making calls to company to report times and fuel is more important than catching what altitude ATC clears us to ). A scheduled airline operation is no place for folks to get their first 500 hours of "real flying experience."

The military is a different situation. Military training is not 5 weeks long under a regional airline budget, then to sit for 45 days before flying a month of continuous duty overnights ( 3 hours of flying 3 hours of sleep and another 3 hours of flying starting at 5 in the morning into the World's busiest airport )

If it were my choice these program graduates would not be going straight to the right seat of anything. PIC time is needed to hone their skills and to weed out those who should not be flying. But, no one much cares what line pilots think about this issue. Management wants technically qualified pilots buts in seats for as little as they can spend. As long as the airplane doesn't crash it seems airlines are pleased - and the Captains who fly with these zero to heros have a pretty strong incentive to avoid crashing until they can find other jobs.
 
UALjan15 said:
The core argument here seems to be whether quality training can substitute for experience. Everyone compares the big $$ flight academy guys to the "pay your dues" camp, but no one seems to look at the military. No one seems to bat an eye at a 200 hour UPT grad going right into the right seat of a C-5 or B-1, or into the only seat of an F-16 or A-10. I can tell you from experience that any of these are more challenging than flying the right seat of the CRJ. The reason why the Air Force can trust a low-time pilot with these jobs is that they built them a very solid foundation in UPT, and built upon it with aircraft-specific training.

I think the reason nobody compares military aviation training to a program like CAPT is that they don't compare. The motives are vastly different: profit vs. mission. The DoD has the resources and assets to select and train a qualified candidate. These pilot farms fudge qualifications (or potential) based on ability to pay for the training.
 
~~~^~~~ said:
How exactly does someone "earn" a type rating with 100 hours of sim time? I thought an ATP was required for a Type Rating.

Nope, you can get a type on a comm or pvt certificate.
 
UALjan15 said:
No one seems to bat an eye at a 200 hour UPT grad going right into the right seat of a C-5 or B-1, or into the only seat of an F-16 or A-10. I can tell you from experience that any of these are more challenging than flying the right seat of the CRJ. The reason why the Air Force can trust a low-time pilot with these jobs is that they built them a very solid foundation in UPT, and built upon it with aircraft-specific training.

Another difference is leadership and supervision. You say it is more challenging to fly any of these military mission than it is to fly a CRJ, but the comparison is somewhat unfair. When we were 200 UPT grads we had our hands held. We were exposed to a squadron full of knowledge and experience every day and every flight was planned to the most minute detail and then thourghly analysed afterwards. A RJ pilot will fly with differnt folks all of the time and there is no consistant leadership focused on developing our young aviator. Weaknesses will fester and grow unchecked until we have a real problem. While a 121 carrer is an ideal place for an aviator to grow, that pilot needs a certain amount of maturiity, experience and air sense to be able to take advantage.
Just my opinion, but there is nothing in the civilian world that duplicated the military's approach, and because it is tied not just to the training but to the culture and mission of the military I don't think there can be.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top