rj captain question

[Typhoon1244]

I have, in the five years since I upgraded, flown with a variety of newhire types: "mill" graduates, ex-military, ex-airline, and some "freelancers" (i.e. none of the above). The biggest surprise was that there was almost no difference in their flying ability.

Honestly, after a year of line flying, it's hard to tell the difference between the pilot who left FlightSafety with 500 hours and the pilot on furlough from another carrier!

 

[FlyChicaga]

USA Today = Aircraft Ops Manual Vol. 3.

 

[Caveman]

"I have, in the five years since I upgraded, flown with a variety of newhire types: "mill" graduates, ex-military, ex-airline, and some "freelancers" (i.e. none of the above). The biggest surprise was that there was almost no difference in their flying ability.

Honestly, after a year of line flying, it's hard to tell the difference between the pilot who left FlightSafety with 500 hours and the pilot on furlough from another carrier!"

I only upgraded a year and a half ago but, based on my own experiences, I completely agree.

 

[N2264J]

I see plenty of CAs tuning in the sports channels or NASCAR... Are the ADF police going to be monitoring my usage now? Safety of flight is my primary concern. Period!

The ADF is the most dangerous piece of gear in the plane and ought to be removed from all part 25 aircraft.

It's unreliable and downright scary for shooting a real approach. Even if you've got the bearing nailed, there's really no telling if you will break out in a position to make a stabilized approach and landing. Not to mention the distraction of tuning into Rush Limbaugh in flight and filling impressionable minds with crap.

 

[IanSaw]

The difference is going to be when one of these pilots who gained their so called "experience" gets furloughed or ugrades into the left seat of a turboprop flying many more legs into much less controlled airports with no skills to fall back on. I instruct on a turboprop sim at a 121 and the worst pilots coming through training are these types of f.o.'s doing transition upgrades. If, and if they make it through training, they have a high probobility of really screwing up on line and making that job a permanent one. The law of primacy doesn't work when you have no basic skills to begin with.

 

[scotts]

,,,,,

 

[BackSoon05]

You guys missed the most important aspect of the experience the guy in the right seat has. Its the STORIES. Tell me about how many times a student tried to kill you. Tell me about the time that #$it hole company asked if you could ferry that aircraft back single-engine with the gear down. Tell me something, anything, except the fact that you only learned to fly two years ago, and before that you were a (fill in the blank) and one time, in the office (or in High School.., or in ??),

It takes experience and time to develop those really good stories, and you can really see the difference...

 

[Typhoon1244]

If, and if they make it through training, they have a high probobility of really screwing up on line and making that job a permanent one. The law of primacy doesn't work when you have no basic skills to begin with.

Well, some of the worst pilot-induced debacles at ASA were perpetrated by relatively senior pilots with a respectable amount of experience. By the time you reach this level of flying, the villain isn't inexperience, it's complacency.

The policies and procedures at most Part 121 operators are so good that as long as you stick to "the book," you'd be hard pressed to screw something up very badly. The experience you gain while flying the line helps you put your book knowledge in context...and that's how you become a "professional" pilot.

 

[Typhoon1244]

You guys missed the most important aspect of the experience the guy in the right seat has. Its the STORIES. Tell me about how many times a student tried to kill you. Tell me about the time that #$it hole company asked if you could ferry that aircraft back single-engine with the gear down. Tell me something, anything, except the fact that you only learned to fly two years ago, and before that you were a (fill in the blank) and one time, in the office (or in High School.., or in ??),

It takes experience and time to develop those really good stories, and you can really see the difference...

So...you're saying pilots are the only people who have interesting stories? That's a pretty shallow point of view.

 

[XRMEFLYER]

By the time you reach this level of flying, the villain isn't inexperience, it's complacency.

Roger that!

 

[BackSoon05]

So...you're saying pilots are the only people who have interesting stories? That's a pretty shallow point of view.

The other thing pilots develop with experience is a sense of humor....

 

[Typhoon1244]

The other thing pilots develop with experience is a sense of humor....

Mine's deferred.

Sorry...got wrapped around the axle and thought you were serious.

 

[IanSaw]

Whatever Typhoon, those guys were bound to make those mistakes. If you consider 4 or 5000 hours a lot of time then you don't understand. If you were hired after 97 and are making this arguement, you don't understand. When you lose your job and end up in over your head, you will understand. 75% of the incidents happening right now are low time pilots (<1000 hours in type) in turboprops and laughable PIC time pilots on the jets. Not knowing those simple facts proves you don't even know your own weakness or that of the industry. When I got hired at the regionals, the the average start time was 3000+ hours including instruction and 135 and we were barely hanging on. You can't even tell the difference of where you stand and won't listen to past experience in the business. Maybe that is where the probelems are coming from. FAR's are written after pilots like you screw up. You guys are weak and complacency isn't going to get you, your big head is.

 

[Typhoon1244]

Whatever Typhoon...

Ian, you don't know me. I didn't make this personal. If you're mad because those of us who got hired after '97 got to play with the toys younger than you did, that's your problem. And if you make judgements about a pilot's skills based on FlightInfo posts, you're a moron.

When I got hired at the regionals, the the average start time was 3000+ hours including instruction and 135 and we were barely hanging on.

Maybe your training sucked.

 

[FD109]

Whatever Typhoon, those guys were bound to make those mistakes. If you consider 4 or 5000 hours a lot of time then you don't understand. If you were hired after 97 and are making this arguement, you don't understand. When you lose your job and end up in over your head, you will understand. 75% of the incidents happening right now are low time pilots (<1000 hours in type) in turboprops and laughable PIC time pilots on the jets. Not knowing those simple facts proves you don't even know your own weakness or that of the industry. When I got hired at the regionals, the the average start time was 3000+ hours including instruction and 135 and we were barely hanging on. You can't even tell the difference of where you stand and won't listen to past experience in the business. Maybe that is where the probelems are coming from. FAR's are written after pilots like you screw up. You guys are weak and complacency isn't going to get you, your big head is.

I haven't posted anything on this board in a long time IanSaw, but I just have to answer you. Your post was both the rudest and the most incompetent bit of blather I have seen yet on this board.

I've been in this industry for 38 years. I've been a check airman and instructor at a major and two supplemental jet carriers. I've also been a chief pilot, a director of operations, and a director of training. During that time I've trained, checked, and hired, hundreds of airline pilots. Sadly, I've had to fire a few as well. There is one thing I can tell you absolutely: How safe a pilot is depends upon that pilot's attitude, ability, and training. Certainly, experience is wonderful and it helps tremendously, but it is not the deciding factor. I've hired and trained pilots on both ends of the experience spectrum. I've seen some very good pilots and I've seen some very bad ones on both ends of that spectrum.

If, as you said, you were barely hanging on at 3,500 hours, then you better look at yourself very closely rather that impuning someone else's ability. By the way, I may yet have the chance to interview you and/or give you a simulator evaluation, and, I promise you that I will try very hard to evaluate you based upon your performance, and not your mouth, or your misconceptions.

You remind me of a very "experienced" first officer I once had to fire. With our company, he was in the right seat for some younger captains who had less flying time than he. He was an ex-military, C-141 aircraft commander prior to coming to work for us. Unfortunately, when his seniority number came up, he couldn't get through upgrade training and we had to let him go after two tries through the upgrade program. You're not him are you? That might explain your attitude.

 

[rigger]

I have flown in just about everything, with all kinds of pilots in all parts of the world -- British, French, Pakistani, Iranian, Japanese, Chinese -- and there wasn't a dime's worth of difference between any of them except for one unchanging, certain fact: the best, most skillful pilot has the most experience.

— Chuck Yeage​

Nough said....The more you listen, the more you fly, the more you know the better you'll be!

 

[FD109]

It isn't that simple!

I have flown in just about everything, with all kinds of pilots in all parts of the world -- British, French, Pakistani, Iranian, Japanese, Chinese -- and there wasn't a dime's worth of difference between any of them except for one unchanging, certain fact: the best, most skillful pilot has the most experience.

— Chuck Yeage​

Nough said....The more you listen, the more you fly, the more you know the better you'll be!

Rigger,

There is absolutely no question that ALL OTHER THINGS BEING EQUAL that the more experienced pilot will be the best pilot. Unfortunately, in the real world that is not necessarily the way it works out.

A friend of mine once flew an L-1011 into the swamp west of Miami. (Actually, he allowed the autopilot to do it.) Between them, the three guys in that cockpit had over 50,000 hours and more than 60 years of experience; yet, they committed one of the most simple, basic errors that a pilot can commit. There were, of course, a lot of individual enabling events, but the root event was one stupid oversight that none of them ever thought they would be guilty of.

If you study human factor accidents, you will find that once they reach an operationally competent level of experience that low time pilots and high time pilots make the same mistakes, with about the same frequency. With due respect to Chuck Yeager, I stand by my absolute certainty that experience alone is not the factor that determines how good or safe a pilot is.

To make myself absolutely clear, I'm not talking about comparing an eight-hour student pilot's errors to a 25,000 hour airline captain's errors. What I am saying is that a 1,500 or 3,000 hour captain CAN BE just as safe, and just as good a pilot, as a 25,000 hour veteran captain.

Making sure that it works out that way is the job of an airline's flight operations management. If they hire the right people (primarily people with the right attitude); If they train them properly, and give them sound, error-mitigating procedures; If they give them the right kind of operational support; and if they give them good, well maintained aircraft to fly, then a lower time pilot group can be every bit as good as a higher time pilot group. On occasion, a particular lower time group can be much better than a particular higher group, if that higher time group does not receive the support I referred to above.

Operating in the real world, many factors determine how safe a pilot is. Experience is certainly one of those factors, but, in the airline environment, experience is not THE determining factor.

 

[rigger]

FD



Point well made, I agree that in the airline world a 3000 hr guy can be as effective (and as you point out sometimes more effective) then the 25K pilot. We are very fortunate that reputable companies make flying these things as idiot proof as possible. Good training, good op’s specs, great checklists, and increased situational awareness with the glass. The list can go on and on. All reasons most of want to get out of the bush and fly the “Big Stuff”



But, I believe what Yeager was saying (from the flying I’ve done I also very much believe this) is that when the crap really hits the fan and the glass goes down and the manual does not have listed in it what to try next and the checklist becomes useless then we are left to actually flying this bird by the seat of our pants and when you are alone up there no training can prepare you for everything but the more experience you have the better prepared you’ll be.



A perfect example of this is the Air Transsat (??) flight that set the record glide distance a number of years ago after loosing all their fuel the crew knew exactly what to do (fly the plane) even though the books were useless, the Iowa City crash who knew what to do? great experience up front in that one saved a ton of lives, etc, etc.



As you have said “experience alone is not the factor that determines how good or safe a pilot is” You are right on my friend but it sure makes for a good starting point.



All this said, we still all start somewhere right around 0 and work up from here I am honored to fly with each and every one of you! Every time I get into a flying machine I expect to learn not only from the more experienced guys and gals but from the less experienced cause I know all your experiences are unique I would be a fool to not listen and learn!

 

[FD109]

Rigger,

You are correct that you should learn as much as you can from more experienced folks. You are also correct that sometimes you have only experience to fall back on when something weird happens, but you work with what you have. If you've had proper training, have a good attitude about learning, and have the basic ability, you'd be surprised what you can do when you have to.

One other comment: very often but not always, when someone is preaching about exerience being THE factor in pilot selection, or upgrading, or safety, or whatever, it's a disgrunteled individual who has younger or less experienced pilots senior to him/her. Always consider the source.