Gateway select interview
07-22-2016, 08:50 PM
#31
On Reserve
Joined APC: Apr 2016
Posts: 16
Originally Posted by grim04
I have tried to give you examples but you won't listen. Most pilots here do not approve of this proggram. I hate to burst your bubble, well I actually am enjoying it, but you still seem to think there isn't a difference between majors and regionals and there end lies your problem. You go to a regional to gain enough experience to handle many different types of situations you can't be taught.
Originally Posted by grim04
you still seem to think there isn't a difference between majors and regionals and there end lies your problem. You go to a regional to gain enough experience to handle many different types of situations you can't be taught.
You are basically saying the solution to gain the experience required to safely fly passengers around is to simply do the same thing, only do it with a Regional logo stamped on the plane somewhere. Do you realize those Regional pilots are flying into the same weather and airports that the mainline guys do, or am I wrong there as well?
Originally Posted by grim04
As for why? We have no idea why they are doing it. You actually think management is open with us? That's funny. If you actually worked here you'd k in that they actually do things here to **** us off and try and make us think we aren't as important as we are to this airline.
Like I suggested, how about asking them? Let us know what they say.I will go back and say, however, that I understand what you're saying regarding situations that can't be taught. I have learned that first-hand myself through my own flying, as I'm sure every pilot has. It is important and I'm not trying to diminish its value, but it is not everything. Quality of training is important. The type of flying is important. The safety culture of your organization, etc. There are a myriad of factors that help create a safe pilot and it's important to discuss what those are.
07-23-2016, 03:44 AM
#32
What’s it doing now?
Joined APC: Mar 2011
Position: 190CA
Posts: 726
Originally Posted by UpAndAway
You have not provided examples, but broad generalizations that I have repeatedly questioned you on that you have still not answered with clear and concise answers. They have been reasonable questions, yet your responses have been borderline rambling and I sometimes wondered if you were drunk when you posted due to your temperament and inability to carry a constructive discussion at times. Don’t get too much enjoyment, you’re not bursting anyone’s bubble. For anyone reading, here’s the original thread. Make up your own mind.
So, my United-branded ExpressJet flight I paid $550 for last week, how does the public know the difference? Why am I paying exorbitant prices to fly 1.5 hours on an aircraft operated by pilots that do not have sufficient experience to operate, as you’re suggesting? Are thousands of Regional flights every day gambling the lives of their passengers? Do you really think the Regional model exists to help pilots gather experience, or to save shareholders money? At what point does someone have sufficient experience to fly at a Major? What type of training should they receive? How many hours? Do you believe pilots that go through ab-initio programs are unsafe pilots?
You are basically saying the solution to gain the experience required to safely fly passengers around is to simply do the same thing, only do it with a Regional logo stamped on the plane somewhere. Do you realize those Regional pilots are flying into the same weather and airports that the mainline guys do, or am I wrong there as well?
You sound like a really great person to be around Like I suggested, how about asking them? Let us know what they say.
I will go back and say, however, that I understand what you're saying regarding situations that can't be taught. I have learned that first-hand myself through my own flying, as I'm sure every pilot has. It is important and I'm not trying to diminish its value, but it is not everything. Quality of training is important. The type of flying is important. The safety culture of your organization, etc. There are a myriad of factors that help create a safe pilot and it's important to discuss what those are.
So, my United-branded ExpressJet flight I paid $550 for last week, how does the public know the difference? Why am I paying exorbitant prices to fly 1.5 hours on an aircraft operated by pilots that do not have sufficient experience to operate, as you’re suggesting? Are thousands of Regional flights every day gambling the lives of their passengers? Do you really think the Regional model exists to help pilots gather experience, or to save shareholders money? At what point does someone have sufficient experience to fly at a Major? What type of training should they receive? How many hours? Do you believe pilots that go through ab-initio programs are unsafe pilots?
You are basically saying the solution to gain the experience required to safely fly passengers around is to simply do the same thing, only do it with a Regional logo stamped on the plane somewhere. Do you realize those Regional pilots are flying into the same weather and airports that the mainline guys do, or am I wrong there as well?
You sound like a really great person to be around
Like I suggested, how about asking them? Let us know what they say.I will go back and say, however, that I understand what you're saying regarding situations that can't be taught. I have learned that first-hand myself through my own flying, as I'm sure every pilot has. It is important and I'm not trying to diminish its value, but it is not everything. Quality of training is important. The type of flying is important. The safety culture of your organization, etc. There are a myriad of factors that help create a safe pilot and it's important to discuss what those are.
I don't think that the program is an "easier path" or a short cut compared to what I did. I think it's a harder path that costs more money, takes a long time, doesn't give you a wide variety of experience, and at the end only leaves you competitive with one company. I think choosing that path demonstrates poor decision making because of its many risks and large costs.
07-24-2016, 07:55 AM
#33
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2007
Posts: 113
Originally Posted by UpAndAway
You have not provided examples, but broad generalizations that I have repeatedly questioned you on that you have still not answered with clear and concise answers. They have been reasonable questions, yet your responses have been borderline rambling and I sometimes wondered if you were drunk when you posted due to your temperament and inability to carry a constructive discussion at times. Don’t get too much enjoyment, you’re not bursting anyone’s bubble. For anyone reading, here’s the original thread. Make up your own mind.
So, my United-branded ExpressJet flight I paid $550 for last week, how does the public know the difference? Why am I paying exorbitant prices to fly 1.5 hours on an aircraft operated by pilots that do not have sufficient experience to operate, as you’re suggesting? Are thousands of Regional flights every day gambling the lives of their passengers? Do you really think the Regional model exists to help pilots gather experience, or to save shareholders money? At what point does someone have sufficient experience to fly at a Major? What type of training should they receive? How many hours? Do you believe pilots that go through ab-initio programs are unsafe pilots?
You are basically saying the solution to gain the experience required to safely fly passengers around is to simply do the same thing, only do it with a Regional logo stamped on the plane somewhere. Do you realize those Regional pilots are flying into the same weather and airports that the mainline guys do, or am I wrong there as well?
You sound like a really great person to be around Like I suggested, how about asking them? Let us know what they say.
I will go back and say, however, that I understand what you're saying regarding situations that can't be taught. I have learned that first-hand myself through my own flying, as I'm sure every pilot has. It is important and I'm not trying to diminish its value, but it is not everything. Quality of training is important. The type of flying is important. The safety culture of your organization, etc. There are a myriad of factors that help create a safe pilot and it's important to discuss what those are.
So, my United-branded ExpressJet flight I paid $550 for last week, how does the public know the difference? Why am I paying exorbitant prices to fly 1.5 hours on an aircraft operated by pilots that do not have sufficient experience to operate, as you’re suggesting? Are thousands of Regional flights every day gambling the lives of their passengers? Do you really think the Regional model exists to help pilots gather experience, or to save shareholders money? At what point does someone have sufficient experience to fly at a Major? What type of training should they receive? How many hours? Do you believe pilots that go through ab-initio programs are unsafe pilots?
You are basically saying the solution to gain the experience required to safely fly passengers around is to simply do the same thing, only do it with a Regional logo stamped on the plane somewhere. Do you realize those Regional pilots are flying into the same weather and airports that the mainline guys do, or am I wrong there as well?
You sound like a really great person to be around
Like I suggested, how about asking them? Let us know what they say.I will go back and say, however, that I understand what you're saying regarding situations that can't be taught. I have learned that first-hand myself through my own flying, as I'm sure every pilot has. It is important and I'm not trying to diminish its value, but it is not everything. Quality of training is important. The type of flying is important. The safety culture of your organization, etc. There are a myriad of factors that help create a safe pilot and it's important to discuss what those are.
Actually I am fun to be around but your so thick headed you can't understand plain english. I'm sorry but I'm not the only one on here that has stated the same opinion. Most of the JB pilots are against it and are doing whatever we can to stop this. You have no experience in our industry and it seems you want someone desperately to take your side. Too bad.
Do you think it is ok for a person to go through this program and start on a 777 to gain experience? How about looking into the asiana crash in SFO. Prime example of why this program doesn't work. Look at the German wings....same type of program. A320 crash.
The specific examples you ask for are fodder for your desperate attempt to justify this program in your sad mind. I'll give you an idea of how this works....
You start by learning how to fly in a small plane. Then you learn instrument flying in a small plane. Then you earn the commercial license then multi rating then instructor atp etc etc etc. This is called building upon prior knowledge. You cannot learn how to handle smoke in the cockpit with a hydraulic failure searching for a suitable airport while handling 2 flight attendants 100 passengers without hundreds and hundreds of hours of experience dealing with the basic things associated with day to day flying.
According to you you can learn this as a 1500 hour instructor pilot from a 172 because you'll get trained in a sim. That's not how it works. If that's the case why not let you go straight to a 777?
Let's take a look at two different crashes shall we?
Buffalo Colgan flight 3407. And US Air flight 1549. Inexperienced vs experienced.
What do you think would have happened if you had a more experienced captain on the Colgan flight? Now how about a 1500 hour inexperienced pilot on 1549? Simulators Do not and Can not teach everything.
Like I said before we are not baby sitters and should not be put into a situation where we have to watch a poorly trained and inexperienced FO like a hawk.
Last edited by grim04; 07-24-2016 at 08:07 AM.
07-24-2016, 09:47 AM
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2008
Position: Left,Right, Left, Right,Right,Left, Right, Left
Posts: 3,150
This... All day. Every day.
Originally Posted by grim04
Actually I am fun to be around but your so thick headed you can't understand plain english. I'm sorry but I'm not the only one on here that has stated the same opinion. Most of the JB pilots are against it and are doing whatever we can to stop this. You have no experience in our industry and it seems you want someone desperately to take your side. Too bad.
Do you think it is ok for a person to go through this program and start on a 777 to gain experience? How about looking into the asiana crash in SFO. Prime example of why this program doesn't work. Look at the German wings....same type of program. A320 crash.
The specific examples you ask for are fodder for your desperate attempt to justify this program in your sad mind. I'll give you an idea of how this works....
You start by learning how to fly in a small plane. Then you learn instrument flying in a small plane. Then you earn the commercial license then multi rating then instructor atp etc etc etc. This is called building upon prior knowledge. You cannot learn how to handle smoke in the cockpit with a hydraulic failure searching for a suitable airport while handling 2 flight attendants 100 passengers without hundreds and hundreds of hours of experience dealing with the basic things associated with day to day flying.
According to you you can learn this as a 1500 hour instructor pilot from a 172 because you'll get trained in a sim. That's not how it works. If that's the case why not let you go straight to a 777?
Let's take a look at two different crashes shall we?
Buffalo Colgan flight 3407. And US Air flight 1549. Inexperienced vs experienced.
What do you think would have happened if you had a more experienced captain on the Colgan flight? Now how about a 1500 hour inexperienced pilot on 1549? Simulators Do not and Can not teach everything.
Like I said before we are not baby sitters and should not be put into a situation where we have to watch a poorly trained and inexperienced FO like a hawk.
Do you think it is ok for a person to go through this program and start on a 777 to gain experience? How about looking into the asiana crash in SFO. Prime example of why this program doesn't work. Look at the German wings....same type of program. A320 crash.
The specific examples you ask for are fodder for your desperate attempt to justify this program in your sad mind. I'll give you an idea of how this works....
You start by learning how to fly in a small plane. Then you learn instrument flying in a small plane. Then you earn the commercial license then multi rating then instructor atp etc etc etc. This is called building upon prior knowledge. You cannot learn how to handle smoke in the cockpit with a hydraulic failure searching for a suitable airport while handling 2 flight attendants 100 passengers without hundreds and hundreds of hours of experience dealing with the basic things associated with day to day flying.
According to you you can learn this as a 1500 hour instructor pilot from a 172 because you'll get trained in a sim. That's not how it works. If that's the case why not let you go straight to a 777?
Let's take a look at two different crashes shall we?
Buffalo Colgan flight 3407. And US Air flight 1549. Inexperienced vs experienced.
What do you think would have happened if you had a more experienced captain on the Colgan flight? Now how about a 1500 hour inexperienced pilot on 1549? Simulators Do not and Can not teach everything.
Like I said before we are not baby sitters and should not be put into a situation where we have to watch a poorly trained and inexperienced FO like a hawk.
07-25-2016, 05:31 AM
#37
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2013
Position: Captain
Posts: 241
Originally Posted by grim04
Actually I am fun to be around but your so thick headed you can't understand plain english. I'm sorry but I'm not the only one on here that has stated the same opinion. Most of the JB pilots are against it and are doing whatever we can to stop this. You have no experience in our industry and it seems you want someone desperately to take your side. Too bad.
Do you think it is ok for a person to go through this program and start on a 777 to gain experience? How about looking into the asiana crash in SFO. Prime example of why this program doesn't work. Look at the German wings....same type of program. A320 crash.
The specific examples you ask for are fodder for your desperate attempt to justify this program in your sad mind. I'll give you an idea of how this works....
You start by learning how to fly in a small plane. Then you learn instrument flying in a small plane. Then you earn the commercial license then multi rating then instructor atp etc etc etc. This is called building upon prior knowledge. You cannot learn how to handle smoke in the cockpit with a hydraulic failure searching for a suitable airport while handling 2 flight attendants 100 passengers without hundreds and hundreds of hours of experience dealing with the basic things associated with day to day flying.
According to you you can learn this as a 1500 hour instructor pilot from a 172 because you'll get trained in a sim. That's not how it works. If that's the case why not let you go straight to a 777?
Let's take a look at two different crashes shall we?
Buffalo Colgan flight 3407. And US Air flight 1549. Inexperienced vs experienced.
What do you think would have happened if you had a more experienced captain on the Colgan flight? Now how about a 1500 hour inexperienced pilot on 1549? Simulators Do not and Can not teach everything.
Like I said before we are not baby sitters and should not be put into a situation where we have to watch a poorly trained and inexperienced FO like a hawk.
Do you think it is ok for a person to go through this program and start on a 777 to gain experience? How about looking into the asiana crash in SFO. Prime example of why this program doesn't work. Look at the German wings....same type of program. A320 crash.
The specific examples you ask for are fodder for your desperate attempt to justify this program in your sad mind. I'll give you an idea of how this works....
You start by learning how to fly in a small plane. Then you learn instrument flying in a small plane. Then you earn the commercial license then multi rating then instructor atp etc etc etc. This is called building upon prior knowledge. You cannot learn how to handle smoke in the cockpit with a hydraulic failure searching for a suitable airport while handling 2 flight attendants 100 passengers without hundreds and hundreds of hours of experience dealing with the basic things associated with day to day flying.
According to you you can learn this as a 1500 hour instructor pilot from a 172 because you'll get trained in a sim. That's not how it works. If that's the case why not let you go straight to a 777?
Let's take a look at two different crashes shall we?
Buffalo Colgan flight 3407. And US Air flight 1549. Inexperienced vs experienced.
What do you think would have happened if you had a more experienced captain on the Colgan flight? Now how about a 1500 hour inexperienced pilot on 1549? Simulators Do not and Can not teach everything.
Like I said before we are not baby sitters and should not be put into a situation where we have to watch a poorly trained and inexperienced FO like a hawk.
Gateway guys may share the cockpit with me but we are not equal. Years of experience 1000's of landings (day, night, vfr, ifr) over 10,000 hours makes me more qualified than a gateway pilot to fly a major airline. You may get "hired" but from the pilot side gateway guys aren't welcome
07-25-2016, 01:08 PM
#38
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,206
Gateway select interview
Originally Posted by blueballs
+3300 JetBlue pilots
Gateway guys may share the cockpit with me but we are not equal. Years of experience 1000's of landings (day, night, vfr, ifr) over 10,000 hours makes me more qualified than a gateway pilot to fly a major airline. You may get "hired" but from the pilot side gateway guys aren't welcome
Gateway guys may share the cockpit with me but we are not equal. Years of experience 1000's of landings (day, night, vfr, ifr) over 10,000 hours makes me more qualified than a gateway pilot to fly a major airline. You may get "hired" but from the pilot side gateway guys aren't welcome
One of my favorite Einstein quotes...
Some of you guys are exhibiting some pretty big egos.
07-25-2016, 01:22 PM
#39
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2014
Posts: 155
Originally Posted by Southerner
One of my favorite Einstein quotes...
Some of you guys are exhibiting some pretty big egos.
Some of you guys are exhibiting some pretty big egos.
07-25-2016, 01:25 PM
#40
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,206
Gateway select interview
To those applying, don't let the obnoxiously loud minority scare you. Most pilots here are (at worst) ambivalent about the program. It's 20 pilots a year starting in 3-4 years from now, so it isn't a huge stream of pilots competing with other sources. I'm willing to bet that those hired from this program will do better in training than most who have over 6,000 hours. High-time new hires often struggle in training. But hey, if the high time guys make it through training, at least they will be welcome on the line with the egomaniacs on this web board...
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
