Mx241

I’m not interested in being an attrition statistic. 135 recommendation noted. Would i benefit from going to a ATP written class with the motion simulator or is that a waste of my money?
Thanks

Soxfan1

Awa will pay for it if you need it (no atp) and you will be getting min guarantee pay during those two Weeks. AWA uses the same CRJ 200 that we use for training and with line pilots. 10 hours free in the same sim you will do your training in. If you drop 4-5k at an off the street school you will not be in a 200 for sure. Some use ac no longer common such as DC9s, early generation 737s ect.

Paying for an atp course is not recommended by me at all. I’d guess that that would be true across this board.

DarkSideMoon

Not to mention the ATP/CTP course involves next to no maneuvers/procedures you’ll use to pass a checkride. I agree, waste of money.

Mx241

Thanks for the information

6shooter

With the rate of training failures in this company, >50% per class, get the best quality time you can.

Soxfan1

Is it really that high? I mean I have heard lots of rumors of our rate being higher than others but never heard it was that high. Is this number published anywhere?

I know my large class a little less than 2 years ago was 25%. It was the 135 guys that struggled (not all but most). The CFI, Part 91, corporate, previous or returning 121 and military all passed.

pitchtrim

I don't think it's 50%. They only give everyone all the time and resources in the world to succeed. The problem is people want it either spoon fed or handed to them, or after 5 trips and 100 hours still can't land the plane when they end up on my schedule.

Cessnaflyer1213

It's not 50%. 10% maybe. It takes work. Hard study. Reading .... a lot of reading. ATP/CTP, Indoc, and Systems classes all have a good learning pace that anyone can do. Starting in Cockpit procedures the learning curve goes straight up. You get 4 days to memorize FO and Captain checklists, callouts, and sequences. It's not that you can't learn it, it's just compressed into such a short time in the name of saving a buck. I read ahead on the syllabus and knew the expectations before I got there. I was practicing and memorizing weeks prior. Simulator training was also fast paced. It was recently lengthened from 2 to 3 weeks because most people could not get proficient in the 2 week footprint. Heck, in the 2 week model they were still introducing maneuvers the day before your checkride.

I had a small class, but 100% made it to the line. My Cockpit procedures partner was from a prior class and didn't make it through the sim. He had issues with the high volume of information and struggled processing at 250+ knots. My sim partner also was from a prior class. He had 2200 hours from a Florida flight school but didn't know which way to put his ailerons in a crosswind. He lacked some basic airmanship that was very evident in the sim. Those, and people who think the info is going to be spoon fed like Private Pilot ground school, are the people that don't make it through.

Folks are getting up to 4 weeks of sim time and 3-4 weeks of IOE to get through. The company is helping anyone willing to put in the work and shows promise.

Rotor2prop

Is systems training still "build the airplane" style? I remember reading that numerous time on here that they are still way back in the old school way with systems.

DarkSideMoon

Allegedly no but if you show our oral questions to someone that flies for any other -200 operator they’re dumbfounded.

The key takeaway is do not trust the training department. Get gouges for the oral, memory items, IAC, and flows/profiles long before you show up for class. They’ll tell you not to study ahead and that everything you need to know is in FCM volume two, which is an absolute falsehood. It’s not terrible if you know what their expectations are ahead of time but they do a terrible job of communicating that.

There are a lot of unnecessarily ruined PRIA’s out there for people who probably would’ve passed at airlines with more modern training departments.