Originally Posted by
mrgoodguy
Let me reiterate that I didn't "wash out" of this training. I never had anything close to "struggle" or training failure in my 10+ years flying jets.
I think that the APDs (Examiners) still go into AQP training as though it was "old-style" checkride. This is where the discontinuities with "true" AQP come from I believe. Not enough time has passed for Sun Country's APDs to "internalize" AQP philosophy.
Examples:
For every checkride (PV, MV, LOE) the instructors would say that there are "no new maneuvers" that haven't been seen before in training that are going to be introduced on the checkride. False. Every checkride introduced a never-before-seen maneuver. They like "flap failure / assymetry" on go around to be introduced on the checkride. Also, Second-segment-climb engine failure was also introduced on my checkride.
Whenever you make a mistake (nothing too bad) easily caught by the other guy, the APD would tap the other guy on the shoulder and shush him. At that point you are single pilot, no CRM. I had "heading select" mode that didn't take (I didn't press the button hard enough) that was easily caught by the other guy "tapped out" by the APD and that was one of my "maneuver failures"
One of the LOE scenarios had the ILS out NOTAM for the wrong runway, and weather forecast for the whole period was MAX 300 3/4 with no rain that pretty much lead to ILS approach ONLY for the runway that was in use. They give you an ATIS card as though from the printer. Oh and the FO reading light on the sim was out. SURPRISE! Weather was 800/2. Also, the sim brakes at this time, for the second time on the checkride!
Well ok, good. However I didn't notice that on the bottom on the card they were using RNAV approach and there was rain w/braking action reports. Unforecast, Un-NOTAMd. If I didn't read the paperwork I would be good, but since like a good pilot I read the paperwork, I expected no rain and ILS to mins.
Oh, and of course the ILS was identified by the aircraft and the needles matched.
Since the SIM broke, the ride stopped at that point.
Heard there are maneuver fails for not setting ILS inbound courses for RNAV approach, even though it's not a requirement. "must follow procedure" was the answer. Also the other guy was "tapped out" of that one.
Other things like that. Nothing major in it of itself but in combination reminds me more of a "full-of-tricks" PC rather than more realistic scenario-based AQP training.
Appreciate the write up. I'm going to give you some constructive criticism. The business with the ILS/RNAV and unforecast weather has me confused. If I'm reading you right, you
assumed based on forecasts that you'd be flying a particular approach to a particular runway and the weather would be a particular way. When you got there and pulled the ATIS, it was something different. The forecast didn't play out exactly and they were running the RNAV instead of the ILS you expected. Ok? So you pivot and fly RNAV if you're legal to, or you divert. To be honest, this aligns pretty well with the real world. What it doesn't sound like is your "typical" checkride scenario where they brief you soup-to-nuts on how the day will go and then you go about checking off the boxes. I guess you can call it a curveball, but it sounds to me like a perfectly realistic one. And not a very big deal if you can get past deviating from the checkride profile expectations. The tapping out thing is difficult. In general, that sounds like BS to me. You're a crew, fly as a crew. However, I have been in situations where the right seater was fireman carrying the left seater through the ride, and the examiner finally has to say "bang you're dead" to accurately evaluate the other guy's performance. It's a tough balancing act for everyone.
Here's another thing I picked up on from your posts. You seem very adamant to emphasize that you have
never busted anything ever. You hold your clean training history in high regard, which is very understandable. But it almost sounds like a chip on your shoulder that is ultimately harming you. Case in point, you were so insulted over not performing well during training that it lead you to badmouth the program openly enough that you got fired. And now here you are on a public forum, continuing to disparage the SY training department because they withheld a gold star from you, mrgoodguy, who has
never had
any training difficulties
ever! I'm being dramatic of course, but that is how it comes across. So reflect on that a little as you move forward.
You sound like a smart cat. I've had my share of bad examiners too and don't find it hard to believe. I also don't subscribe to the endless self-flagellation of a bad checkride. Most times the applicant screws up, but sometimes you get a pinhead examiner who got a speeding ticket that morning and for whatever reason, they set out to share their misery with you. Of course you must never suggest that in an interview, but everyone knows the truth. I sincerely mean this to be constructive. Be careful not to trip over your own ego.