Tom Cruise and his P-51

[RyanShort1]

From what I've been reading, the airline industry right now seems to think that the FAA's pilot training focuses too much on single-pilot operations and not enough on CRM for their purposes. There was a series on Aero-News recently about that from some airline symposium or something like that. I always thought my instructors were trying to teach me to be safe if I went out alone.
One of my instructors (I'm working on the CFI right now) mentioned something to the extent that it would really be good to do away with the written being a known test and having more stringent tests with answers from random parts of books like the Airplane Flying Handbook. Would really force a lot of the less competent pilots to get the brain part of flying down a bit better if they want to pass. I feel like I've learned WAY more right now in the CFI process than ever before.

Ryan

[Dave Hackett]

Randy, you hit the nail on the head! No matter the plane, and the "souls" responsible, everyone must be a part of the game or......there is no game!

You guys that strap on the war machine on a daily basis and do what is asked of you deserve all the respect! People like me that haul people around for a living are no different. Nor are the people hauling boxes or checks. We all have to live up to the job expectation which is to make the flight happen safely from point A to point B.

"Civilian" pilots are not held to the same "standard". Not that they should not be, but that the world in general call aerobatic pilots, .....wait for it...... STUNT PILOTS! If I won the lottery and chose to buy a T-38, I know I would come to a guy who has been in the IP position on the airplane.(Not a chance an F-15 would show up on the market, and even then, the lottery would not be enough money!)

Pilots deserve the respect they earn on a daily basis. Those guys flying civilian owned hardware in formation with the U.S. government active duty hardware are held to a standard. Everyone is on the same sheet for every flight, or at least that is the plan. That Q program is available to anyone who can qualify for it. Who knows what famous plane or pilot could be included right?

I operate in a "crew" piece of equipment. I understand the logic and responsibilities of that position. Looking at the airplane someone flies or the stature they hold in life means nothing about "who" is flying the airplane. Whether Randy's G-suit or my tie, we all have to go to work thinking the same thing......SAFETY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Heckler's beware......you are judged too! He who throws the biggest stone wins what.......oh, yeah, an imaginary pony!

dave hackett

[warbirdcrew]

RyanShort1
PostPosted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 9:12 pm Post subject:
From what I've been reading, the airline industry right now seems to think that the FAA's pilot training focuses too much on single-pilot operations and not enough on CRM for their purposes. There was a series on Aero-News recently about that from some airline symposium or something like that. I always thought my instructors were trying to teach me to be safe if I went out alone.
One of my instructors (I'm working on the CFI right now) mentioned something to the extent that it would really be good to do away with the written being a known test and having more stringent tests with answers from random parts of books like the Airplane Flying Handbook. Would really force a lot of the less competent pilots to get the brain part of flying down a bit better if they want to pass. I feel like I've learned WAY more right now in the CFI process than ever before.

I think this is why ICAO has adopted the "multi-crew pilot's license" to put an emphasis on multiple-person operations in the cockpit. Correct me if I'm wrong, but this is how I have come to understand the literature on the topic.

[gilt]

The core reason for the "Multi-crew License" is to satisfy the third world's growing demand for pilots with (very) low time pilots who will only be able to fly as part of a crew.

Tom-

[gary1954]

One must recognize his/her capabilities.
One must never let the machine exceed those capabilities.
Trainining training training training training.
Everytime you strap on a plane, you are training and maintaining proficiency.

[gary1954]

The core reason for the "Multi-crew License" is to satisfy the third world's growing demand for pilots with (very) low time pilots who will only be able to fly as part of a crew.

Tom-

that is scary

[RyanShort1]

The core reason for the "Multi-crew License" is to satisfy the third world's growing demand for pilots with (very) low time pilots who will only be able to fly as part of a crew.

Tom-

that is scary

You have no idea! On the other hand, there are some plus sides to it as they are being trained more directly for the environment they will work in. I'm seeing a LOT of these foreign students in flight training where I'm at.

Ryan

[gary1954]

Wasn't it in Germany, that if a kid wanted to be an airline pilot, that the state (government) put him through school, and the airline trained him when he came of age to be a pilot? Prior to "flying" he or she would receive all of the ground training prior, kinda like being a journeyman so to speak.

[Hal B]

One must recognize his/her capabilities.
One must never let the machine exceed those capabilities.
Trainining training training training training.
Everytime you strap on a plane, you are training and maintaining proficiency.

Like Harry said: "A mans got to know his limitations"...

[warbird1]

The core reason for the "Multi-crew License" is to satisfy the third world's growing demand for pilots with (very) low time pilots who will only be able to fly as part of a crew.

Tom-

that is scary

You think that is scary? When I got my type rating in a big Boeing, there were students from foreign countries being trained with less hours than some students. In some African countrys' airlines, there are co-pilots with less than 300 hours total time, flying around paying passengers on 727's, 737's, and Airbuses. That's why I will never EVER fly any airline from Africa or any small Third world country. It is very similar in other countries, as well.

[Dudley Henriques]

One must recognize his/her capabilities.
One must never let the machine exceed those capabilities.
Trainining training training training training.
Everytime you strap on a plane, you are training and maintaining proficiency.

Like Harry said: "A mans got to know his limitations"...

Knowing your limitations has been a subject of great interest of mine for many years as I work within the display and demonstration community dealing with the human factors involved with these venues. I spend a whole LOT of my time thinking about ways to keep pilots alive while displaying airplanes on level 1 waivers..
One of the first things pilots come to realize when dealing with these issues on any serious basis is that "limitations" as that term applies to flying, are in a constant state of flux. The aircraft's limitations for example, change by the minute as it operates in a dynamic environment of density altitude. A display pilot's personal limitations are even more difficult to define as they actually can change while a display is in progress.
In other words, limitations as this applies to flying are constantly changing in the highly dynamic world of display flying, and to a bit lessor extent changing as well for pilots engaged in other forms of professional and pleasure flying.
Knowing one's limitations can indeed be the subject of a lifetime's worth of study for ANY pilot!
The answer lies in a constant ongoing process of objective self evaluation coupled with a totally professional approach to the act of flying whether a pilot is doing a display in a Mustang, flying a planeload of passengers in a 737, or taking a Sunday trip around the patch in the ole' trusty Cessna 150.
Dudley Henriques

[BHawthorne]

Now you know why I went simpit instead of flight capable warbird. I'm apprehensive that after all the work I'd put into something that I'd end up a splatter mark in the ground because of my skills. It'll still be fun for me to fly my F-84F in X-Plane and FSX though...not to mention a heck of a lot cheaper to maintain flight ready.

Last edited by BHawthorne on Thu Dec 04, 2008 8:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[RyanShort1]

You think that is scary? When I got my type rating in a big Boeing, there were students from foreign countries being trained with less hours than some students. In some African countrys' airlines, there are co-pilots with less than 300 hours total time, flying around paying passengers on 727's, 737's, and Airbuses. That's why I will never EVER fly any airline from Africa or any small Third world country. It is very similar in other countries, as well.

Think India, Mexico, the Middle East, Korea, and now, China (doesn't just have to be a small third-world countries - I regularly fuel students who are from Saudi and other places who are going to get to fly Daddy's fast jet as soon as they get their commercial ticket). I know this to be true, because I rub shoulders with some of these guys. They're not bad, and their training isn't bad for the level they're at, but many of them will be going straight into opportunities and given responsibilities that it would take YEARS for me to even be considered eligible for. Some of them may not be ready for the responsibilities because of their lower training and experience standards.

Ryan

[Dave Hackett]

Numerous things come to mind......

First of all, how do we compare apples to apples....

I was at Reno this year, and watched a very young gentleman race an airplane at about 380 (total guess). I also know he has been flying for a few years, but not multi-thousands a year. Does that mean he is not capable of flying that airplane?

China has for as long as I have known, hired pilots (read people) and then spent a lot of money to send them to AMERICA to learn how to fly.....no matter how many hours it took to pass the tests to get to instrument multi-engine commercial! Has that young approach affected safety?......Really, would love to know!

Aviation is a burden! We all who strap on an airplane owe it each other and the past to DO it the right way, to THINK it through the right way, and to BE safe, as far as the environment will allow us. Anything else is a travesty if not crime.

I love to see an airplane on the deck, making a beautiful pass......Let's just do it the right way!!

Dave Hackett

[warbird1]

Numerous things come to mind......

First of all, how do we compare apples to apples....

I was at Reno this year, and watched a very young gentleman race an airplane at about 380 (total guess). I also know he has been flying for a few years, but not multi-thousands a year. Does that mean he is not capable of flying that airplane?

That is a different scenario. I assume you are talking about Steve Hinton, Jr. He is VERY capable of flying that airplane. Besides having enough experience in taildraggers and warbirds, he had some VERY specialized training with his dad being one of the best warbird instructors around. I could be wrong, but I thought that Stevie (as he's called) had a few thousand hours of flight time prior to Reno.

China has for as long as I have known, hired pilots (read people) and then spent a lot of money to send them to AMERICA to learn how to fly.....no matter how many hours it took to pass the tests to get to instrument multi-engine commercial! Has that young approach affected safety?......Really, would love to know!

Do you really want a pilot who took 200 hours to solo to be flying your family around? Think about what you said. Some people are just not cut out to be commercial pilots. Those people should not be allowed to fly passengers around no matter how long it takes to "pass the tests". I have flown in Asia and have several friends who are American, fly with Asian carriers, and have Asian First Officers/Co-Pilots. There is a common theme to a lot of their experiences. Many of those Co-pilots have poor skills and judgement. Also, the Asian culture acts as an impedance to good CRM. In most Asian cultures, the Captain is "god" and his authority is never questioned. Also, the concept of "saving face" is absolutely sancrosanct and is NEVER violated, even to the detriment of safety. To answer your question, it HAS affected safety. There are numerous accounts of Asian crews making simple piloting mistakes, resulting in the loss of lives. I'm sure you are well aware that most flight schools in this country just train foreign students until they are barely safe enough to pass a checkride. Standards are relaxed and ratings are given, knowing full well that the "problem child" students will be out of the United States soon and the flight schools will be much richer with their money.

Aviation is a burden! We all who strap on an airplane owe it each other and the past to DO it the right way, to THINK it through the right way, and to BE safe, as far as the environment will allow us. Anything else is a travesty if not crime.

I agree 100%, but not every pilot in the world is held to that standard, much less taught with that philosophy engrained in their head during training. A lot of Third World countries don't adhere to this mindset. Because of that, they tend to have more aviation accidents/incidents than First and Second World countries. Is it any accident that a lot of Third World country airlines prefer U.S./U.K./Aussie pilots with experience in their own countries of origin? It's because they are taught and held to a higher standard than the Third World country in which the airline is based at.