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
Wyvern Requirements ???
- Thread starter bafanguy
- Start date
- Watchers 7
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
Znobrdr
Member
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2003
- Posts
- 22
Wyvern is a consulting group. Wyvern has established some standards relative to safety and operations.
Check the link below for more info
http://wyvernltd.com/Pilot_requirements.htm
Check the link below for more info
http://wyvernltd.com/Pilot_requirements.htm
PMVULB AvMgr
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2003
- Posts
- 319
Jump Pilot
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2001
- Posts
- 277
PMVULB AvMgr
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2003
- Posts
- 319
The requirements for a PIC or SIC as outlined at http://www.wyvernltd.com/Pilot_requirements.htm were created by the Customer Advisory Board.
Keep in mind that these are the minimum numbers (hours, ratings and other training) required for pilots to fly the equipment that is being chartered. The customers have determined that this is the minimum standard they want the pilots to meet in order to fly the aircraft the customer is chartering, and in turn, paying for.
Obviously, since we are talking charter, these numbers only pertain to companies who charter their aircraft out (Part 135) and who have passed the Wyvern audit process, probably in the neighborhood of 20% of all charter companies domestically.
Just because a pilot doesn't have the minimum hours required in order to get him "wyverned" doesn't mean that a company can't hire him. It simply means that he can't be used as a crew member for a flight that requires Wyvern recommended aircraft and crew. Those flights are only required by those companies that have this need, and who actually pay Wyvern to get access to their website, where all companies, aircraft and pilots are listed that are "Wyvern recommended".
Keep in mind that these are the minimum numbers (hours, ratings and other training) required for pilots to fly the equipment that is being chartered. The customers have determined that this is the minimum standard they want the pilots to meet in order to fly the aircraft the customer is chartering, and in turn, paying for.
Obviously, since we are talking charter, these numbers only pertain to companies who charter their aircraft out (Part 135) and who have passed the Wyvern audit process, probably in the neighborhood of 20% of all charter companies domestically.
Just because a pilot doesn't have the minimum hours required in order to get him "wyverned" doesn't mean that a company can't hire him. It simply means that he can't be used as a crew member for a flight that requires Wyvern recommended aircraft and crew. Those flights are only required by those companies that have this need, and who actually pay Wyvern to get access to their website, where all companies, aircraft and pilots are listed that are "Wyvern recommended".
Brett Hull
Pastafarian
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2001
- Posts
- 970
TIS
Wing, Nosewheel, Whatever
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2001
- Posts
- 366
Oh come on now!
Of COURSE there's no prohibition against hiring someone who cannot rise to the glorious Wyvern standard - that is unless they've worked out some deal with their insurance company that says they'll use only Wyvern recommended/approved pilots.
Here's the reality. Some guy thought he could make some money using what at the time was 20 years of aviation experience. He put together a consulting group and proclaimed his company to be a leading expert group in the field to get the ball rolling.
Since then, as one of the few groups doing what it does Wyvern has esablished itself as a leader in the field. Problem is that the field is relatively unpopulated, so of course they're a leader!
The captain requirments listed are realistic a good part of the time but I would hasten to point out that historically there have been a TON of regional airline captains out there that haven't meet those requirements. So, to say that somehow an operation has a high probability of being unsafe if pilots AREN'T "Wyverned" is just silly.
For FOs I think the standards are a bit tough. i also think that the existence of a violation is not, in itself, reason for flat disqualification because the reality is that if you are in this business long enough you WILL get tangled up in the FAAs legal mess sooner or later. What a violation really represents is a reason to get the full story by taking a much closer look at your candidate. There are too many guys out there who got into trouble because the FAA decided to make an example out of them to ignore them just because the FAA has something bad to report about them.
The reality is that for Wyvern to come up with anything less than what they publish would be a liability to THEM. They can't go around recommending that people give a little guy a shot to help him with his career. What if he screws up? Who will get at least some of the blame?
Now, does this mean that I think Wyvern is useless? Not at all. Someone has to be out there telling the uninitiated how to make flight crew selections when they buy a plane. And I have to add that anyone who can build a serious business by saying he's the best is doing a LOT more than just saying he's the best - he's PROVING it on some level.
It's kinda like the confidence that's placed in Flight Safety. Those of us who go there from time to time know that it can be a joke. The ground school instructors often know less about the aircraft than the students there to be "refreshed." The sim instructors are sometimes helpful but are usually more interested in getting you to fly like they want you to than the way your company says you should. Somehow all of this gets turned into an endorsement of their programs as the be-all and end-all of the corporate aviaiton industry.
Don't get me wrong - sim training is the best training you can get but when you're the only thing (almost) going there's no choice but to select you as the best - no matter how good you actually are, no matter how good your product actually is.
End of semi-rant.
TIS
Of COURSE there's no prohibition against hiring someone who cannot rise to the glorious Wyvern standard - that is unless they've worked out some deal with their insurance company that says they'll use only Wyvern recommended/approved pilots.
Here's the reality. Some guy thought he could make some money using what at the time was 20 years of aviation experience. He put together a consulting group and proclaimed his company to be a leading expert group in the field to get the ball rolling.
Since then, as one of the few groups doing what it does Wyvern has esablished itself as a leader in the field. Problem is that the field is relatively unpopulated, so of course they're a leader!
The captain requirments listed are realistic a good part of the time but I would hasten to point out that historically there have been a TON of regional airline captains out there that haven't meet those requirements. So, to say that somehow an operation has a high probability of being unsafe if pilots AREN'T "Wyverned" is just silly.
For FOs I think the standards are a bit tough. i also think that the existence of a violation is not, in itself, reason for flat disqualification because the reality is that if you are in this business long enough you WILL get tangled up in the FAAs legal mess sooner or later. What a violation really represents is a reason to get the full story by taking a much closer look at your candidate. There are too many guys out there who got into trouble because the FAA decided to make an example out of them to ignore them just because the FAA has something bad to report about them.
The reality is that for Wyvern to come up with anything less than what they publish would be a liability to THEM. They can't go around recommending that people give a little guy a shot to help him with his career. What if he screws up? Who will get at least some of the blame?
Now, does this mean that I think Wyvern is useless? Not at all. Someone has to be out there telling the uninitiated how to make flight crew selections when they buy a plane. And I have to add that anyone who can build a serious business by saying he's the best is doing a LOT more than just saying he's the best - he's PROVING it on some level.
It's kinda like the confidence that's placed in Flight Safety. Those of us who go there from time to time know that it can be a joke. The ground school instructors often know less about the aircraft than the students there to be "refreshed." The sim instructors are sometimes helpful but are usually more interested in getting you to fly like they want you to than the way your company says you should. Somehow all of this gets turned into an endorsement of their programs as the be-all and end-all of the corporate aviaiton industry.
Don't get me wrong - sim training is the best training you can get but when you're the only thing (almost) going there's no choice but to select you as the best - no matter how good you actually are, no matter how good your product actually is.
End of semi-rant.
TIS
Znobrdr
Member
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2003
- Posts
- 22
I never thought this thread would get such a response!
Some thoughts.
Frankly I don't like the high times for the FO, but... this is corporate aviaiton. Why do the travellers like corporate? Quite simply First Class (Plus). The traveler's want First class in all aspects right. That should be the crew too.
Standards also tend (when used properly) to "raise the bar" of performance and eventually rates!!!!!! That would eventually translate into more dollars for those that meet the standards. (not such a bad thing either) If a company can get another 10 or 15% out of a traveller because they meet a standard some of that margin can go to pay for that standard. Top of range of salaries also helps move the average salary up too. Of course this all breaks down if the "Wyvern standard pilot" flies cheap!
And, yes I know hours do not translate directly to quality
A thread in another forum had a 500 hr pilot in the right seat of a CRJ and he seemed pretty high on it. What do you think a first class traveller on a corporate jet at twice the going rate of a first class United ticket would say to that! (probably want some money back!) I know I would!
Marketing is a key element in separating anyone from their cash. If the customer feels "warm and fuzzy" they may back again.
What may be interesting is if the "standard" proves itself with lower operating costs and a better safety record that offsets the increased costs of the crew.
A couple of sets of brakes and tires might do that.
Some thoughts.
Frankly I don't like the high times for the FO, but... this is corporate aviaiton. Why do the travellers like corporate? Quite simply First Class (Plus). The traveler's want First class in all aspects right. That should be the crew too.
Standards also tend (when used properly) to "raise the bar" of performance and eventually rates!!!!!! That would eventually translate into more dollars for those that meet the standards. (not such a bad thing either) If a company can get another 10 or 15% out of a traveller because they meet a standard some of that margin can go to pay for that standard. Top of range of salaries also helps move the average salary up too. Of course this all breaks down if the "Wyvern standard pilot" flies cheap!
And, yes I know hours do not translate directly to quality
A thread in another forum had a 500 hr pilot in the right seat of a CRJ and he seemed pretty high on it. What do you think a first class traveller on a corporate jet at twice the going rate of a first class United ticket would say to that! (probably want some money back!) I know I would!
Marketing is a key element in separating anyone from their cash. If the customer feels "warm and fuzzy" they may back again.
What may be interesting is if the "standard" proves itself with lower operating costs and a better safety record that offsets the increased costs of the crew.
A couple of sets of brakes and tires might do that.
This is true, but when a company has a choice of who to hire it makes sense for them to go with the pilot with the Wyvern minimums because it makes the crewing picture easier. It's not only Wyvern that sometimes dictates the minimum qualifications for pilots. Certain clients may have their own minimums that a charter company has to meet.PMVULB AvMgr said:
LJDRVR
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2001
- Posts
- 1,134
I'm not going to toss out specifics, but I will say this:
Wyvern DOES NOT conduct "true" due diligence. Any client thinking of engaging their services needs to understand that "Wyvern approved" doesn't really mean anything in regards to safety.
Any company interested in the type of information Wyvern supplies would be much better suited by hiring an INDEPENDANT consultant with the cajones to ask the right questions when auditing scumbag operators.
Wyvern DOES NOT conduct "true" due diligence. Any client thinking of engaging their services needs to understand that "Wyvern approved" doesn't really mean anything in regards to safety.
Any company interested in the type of information Wyvern supplies would be much better suited by hiring an INDEPENDANT consultant with the cajones to ask the right questions when auditing scumbag operators.
Share this page
Latest resources
-
-
-
-
-
AC 90-89C - Amateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing HandbookAmateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing Handbook
- Neal
- Updated:
