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

SHHHH this was supposed to be a secret!!!!!!!!!

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
"We’re [Piedmont] the only regional that trains
pilots using AQP (Advanced Qualification Program). It is labor intensive and it’s expensive, but it’s a better program.

Just curious - how did this come about? What's the safety culture like at PDT?
 
Do they really expect anyone to believe that it isn't the cheapest way they can get pilots through training? Explain to me how having less classroom and sim time equates to more expensive.

Sorry Junior, you are off the mark here.

I have been trained at two different airlines... One using the 121 model and one using AQP (PDT). I can tell you, without question, that AQP is a far more effective method of training than is the typical training for a 121.441 ride.

My initial training at my previous carrier had no more classroom or sim sessions than I had during initial at PDT under AQP. My training under the old 121 model was training for the checkride... Not much in the way of "real world" stuff. The checkride was right to the script. No suprises but no chance to F'up either.

The AQP model is way more pilot freindly. The maneuvers validation is train to proficiency, so you can repeat those things you are rusty on. The LOFT is pass/fail, but interesting as a learning experience. It's scenario is driven by ASAP reports from the line and data collection from training the previous year. In a nutshell, AQP is expensive because it is very data and "man hours" intensive. It is also way more relevant than just prepping for the same checkride year after year.

You'll probably dismiss my remarks out of hand... But there it is.
 
Wtf

T-Prop, not so hard to understand, I do believe the training to be excellent, as much as I believe this it doesn't change the fact that they have NO flying experience. I just arrived in Japan with a pilot that briefed, operated and executed the entire flight without flaw, later the next night I complemented him on his handling, by the way how much flying time do you have, the answer was 800 hours. :eek:

I only compare the training to my own experience, I could barely spell Cessna at 800 hours experience. This guy can safely plan and execute including taxiing like a pro, that's impressive.
 
including taxiing like a pro, that's impressive.

I guess I'm missing something, when was taxiing ever considered that difficult? Short of staying in between the blue lights and paying attention to what ground has to say???
:confused:
 
I guess I'm missing something, when was taxiing ever considered that difficult? Short of staying in between the blue lights and paying attention to what ground has to say???
Yes, I guess you are missing something. :rolleyes:
 
deleted...nev' mind
 

Latest resources

Back
Top