Atlas Air Hiring
02-08-2014, 10:25 AM
#7851
On Reserve
Joined APC: Mar 2013
Position: Human Autopilot
Posts: 16
After I submitted my application recently I was second guessing myself WRT to EFIS qualifications. I answered that I had 0 EFIS time, but does anybody know if the T-6A can be considered EFIS? After all, it has an EFIS control panel... Unfortunately it has no auto pilot and all the glass gauges are just steam gauge replicas... I tried looking up the definition of EFIS but there was no one definition that really answered my question. Is this a deal breaker for Atlas? Also, I am guessing that Atlas favors the prior Heavy guys? I am a Navy guy with a C-2 background and most recently IP time in the T-6A, neither of which are very large...
02-08-2014, 10:30 AM
#7852
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2012
Position: Babysitter
Posts: 975
Originally Posted by Strut Jetstream
After I submitted my application recently I was second guessing myself WRT to EFIS qualifications. I answered that I had 0 EFIS time, but does anybody know if the T-6A can be considered EFIS? After all, it has an EFIS control panel... Unfortunately it has no auto pilot and all the glass gauges are just steam gauge replicas... I tried looking up the definition of EFIS but there was no one definition that really answered my question. Is this a deal breaker for Atlas? Also, I am guessing that Atlas favors the prior Heavy guys? I am a Navy guy with a C-2 background and most recently IP time in the T-6A, neither of which are very large...
https://ixquick-proxy.com/do/spg/sho...%2Ft6panel.jpg
02-08-2014, 10:35 AM
#7853
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: Hot tub for now
Posts: 1,203
Electronic flight instrument system - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I can't see it being a deal breaker. There were some old school pilots from Piedmont that went to US Airways and had a real hard time with the systems on the Airbus. I think a lot of it has to do with attitude. (no pun intended) Just do what the instructor tells you and you will be fine. Modern airplanes are not meant to be hand flown. They can, but then it can overload your partner. If you have been flying steam gauges for the past 20 years it is going to be harder for you to learn to fly with a computer screen in front of you. It's easier but you have to think before you start pushing buttons. There is a fine balance between being 100% reliant on the autopilot systems and being able to do hand flown, zero guidance visual approaches. As shown by Asiana. Learn with training wheels then take them off your bike has worked for years.
I can't see it being a deal breaker. There were some old school pilots from Piedmont that went to US Airways and had a real hard time with the systems on the Airbus. I think a lot of it has to do with attitude. (no pun intended) Just do what the instructor tells you and you will be fine. Modern airplanes are not meant to be hand flown. They can, but then it can overload your partner. If you have been flying steam gauges for the past 20 years it is going to be harder for you to learn to fly with a computer screen in front of you. It's easier but you have to think before you start pushing buttons. There is a fine balance between being 100% reliant on the autopilot systems and being able to do hand flown, zero guidance visual approaches. As shown by Asiana. Learn with training wheels then take them off your bike has worked for years.
02-08-2014, 11:13 AM
#7854
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2009
Position: What day is it?
Posts: 963
Originally Posted by seafeye
Electronic flight instrument system - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I can't see it being a deal breaker. There were some old school pilots from Piedmont that went to US Airways and had a real hard time with the systems on the Airbus. I think a lot of it has to do with attitude. (no pun intended) Just do what the instructor tells you and you will be fine. Modern airplanes are not meant to be hand flown. They can, but then it can overload your partner. If you have been flying steam gauges for the past 20 years it is going to be harder for you to learn to fly with a computer screen in front of you. It's easier but you have to think before you start pushing buttons. There is a fine balance between being 100% reliant on the autopilot systems and being able to do hand flown, zero guidance visual approaches. As shown by Asiana. Learn with training wheels then take them off your bike has worked for years.
I can't see it being a deal breaker. There were some old school pilots from Piedmont that went to US Airways and had a real hard time with the systems on the Airbus. I think a lot of it has to do with attitude. (no pun intended) Just do what the instructor tells you and you will be fine. Modern airplanes are not meant to be hand flown. They can, but then it can overload your partner. If you have been flying steam gauges for the past 20 years it is going to be harder for you to learn to fly with a computer screen in front of you. It's easier but you have to think before you start pushing buttons. There is a fine balance between being 100% reliant on the autopilot systems and being able to do hand flown, zero guidance visual approaches. As shown by Asiana. Learn with training wheels then take them off your bike has worked for years.
Get serious, man. The -400 is about as close to being a single pilot airplane as you can get, and if they had moved everything closer, they'd have tried.
Transitioning from steam isn't difficult if you clear your head, approach it logically and ask questions when you need to. Boeing builds airplanes for pilots to FLY, with computers to back them up. Anyone who sits back and lets the magic take over from 500' agl to rollout will be totally useless when the magic goes blank and they haven't hand flown the bird.
Taking a 747...or any other plane to cruise and then turning on the autopilot...or hand flying a descent...is not only easy, it's not "hard" on the other guy. And heaven forbid, it keeps your skillset sharp.
02-08-2014, 11:49 AM
#7855
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2005
Position: Left Seat
Posts: 466
Originally Posted by ATCsaidDoWhat
Taking a 747...or any other plane to cruise and then turning on the autopilot...or hand flying a descent...is not only easy, it's not "hard" on the other guy. And heaven forbid, it keeps your skillset sharp.
On the classic, more than a few times, I saw guys aviating to cruise and get so slow we had to descend to get on speed. Mind you, we were hanging on the props, even if on speed, but get behind, even by a few knots and you'd never accelerate.
02-08-2014, 12:16 PM
#7856
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2011
Posts: 249
Yeah, time and place for it. Some guys don't get that. Did a flight into remote Africa with a guy hand flying down from cruise. Runway change, 3 radios to play with, building approaches, setting his speed and heading bugs, building fixes for an arc, avoiding mountains. That was real safe.... But I'm sure the flying part was easy!
02-08-2014, 01:19 PM
#7857
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 548
I agree with ATC. I am typed in the 72 through the 76 and here at Atlas is the only place I have ever heard of overtaxing the PM by hand flying. Really? We, the industry have reached the point where we are turning the automation into a liability with, for some, the complete loss of skills. There is a time and place for both. We need to stress maintaining competency in all levels of automation, including NONE.
02-08-2014, 02:30 PM
#7858
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Position: 747
Posts: 1,290
This auto flight discussion should really be for another thread. This thread is for guys that want to get hired at Atlas.
As for the question about EFIS quals on the PAQ, there has been (to my knowledge) no guidance from HR regarding the definition of EFIS on the app.
Whatever you decide to do, simply being able to clarify your "EFIS" experience and explain the functionality of that system clearly should help if it comes up in the interview.
My "EFIS" experience was in a SF-340B. Probably not even as sophisticated as your plane. I included it, it never came up during the interview, and I was hired. YMMV.
8
As for the question about EFIS quals on the PAQ, there has been (to my knowledge) no guidance from HR regarding the definition of EFIS on the app.
Whatever you decide to do, simply being able to clarify your "EFIS" experience and explain the functionality of that system clearly should help if it comes up in the interview.
My "EFIS" experience was in a SF-340B. Probably not even as sophisticated as your plane. I included it, it never came up during the interview, and I was hired. YMMV.
8
02-08-2014, 06:34 PM
#7859
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2009
Position: What day is it?
Posts: 963
Originally Posted by Whaledriver
I have to respectfully disagree on this one. Hand flying up to cruise proves/provides nothing, as long as you have the FD up and running. In the departure environment, while you're playing pilot, the PM (pilot monitoring) is managing the radios, CDU, MCP and keeping more than an eye on the hand flying going on. Just my opinion.
On the classic, more than a few times, I saw guys aviating to cruise and get so slow we had to descend to get on speed. Mind you, we were hanging on the props, even if on speed, but get behind, even by a few knots and you'd never accelerate.
On the classic, more than a few times, I saw guys aviating to cruise and get so slow we had to descend to get on speed. Mind you, we were hanging on the props, even if on speed, but get behind, even by a few knots and you'd never accelerate.
The ability to hand fly without relying on magic goes directly to the heart of the issue. At the end of the day, you can train anyone to punch buttons and turn knobs. You can't teach them flying skills if they don't have a solid foundation in fundamentals.
Your point about guys who aviate to cruise and have to step the plane to get on speed goes to the heart of the matter. A pilot who doesn't see that in his climb and adjust to keep his speed in the climb is one who will not notice an autopilot that may be out of trim as fast as someone who has a good feel of the plane in all regimes. Consider the American Eagle ATR and the Continental Express Dash 8. Look at Air France. Over reliance on magic and lack of attention, coupled with poor inputs when the A/P became overtaxed, kicked itself off and said, "you fix it," is a fundamental problem in todays environment and one of the reasons the FAA is looking to see changes on training.
And in that regard, a person with limited EFIS time and more steam and stick time in the end, is likely a better qualified person in terms of experience than someone who has spent their career turning the A/P on at 500', mashing buttons and sailing along spending little time actually manipulating the controls.
It's like an old WWII and Korean war fighter pilot who flew with Yeager told me as a kid, "if you're not in the clouds, it's not IFR. If it's VFR at altitude, it's VFR on top, not actual IFR. Don't get lazy and count it or it will bite you in the can when you least want it to."
That said...good luck Strut!
02-08-2014, 07:38 PM
#7860
Line Holder
Joined APC: Dec 2013
Position: Chief Pilot
Posts: 47
Originally Posted by ATCsaidDoWhat
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whaledriver
I have to respectfully disagree on this one. Hand flying up to cruise proves/provides nothing, as long as you have the FD up and running. In the departure environment, while you're playing pilot, the PM (pilot monitoring) is managing the radios, CDU, MCP and keeping more than an eye on the hand flying going on. Just my opinion.
On the classic, more than a few times, I saw guys aviating to cruise and get so slow we had to descend to get on speed. Mind you, we were hanging on the props, even if on speed, but get behind, even by a few knots and you'd never accelerate.
With respect to DC8's post...this is a relevant discussion here as it relates to what is considered in an applicants background.
The ability to hand fly without relying on magic goes directly to the heart of the issue. At the end of the day, you can train anyone to punch buttons and turn knobs. You can't teach them flying skills if they don't have a solid foundation in fundamentals.
Your point about guys who aviate to cruise and have to step the plane to get on speed goes to the heart of the matter. A pilot who doesn't see that in his climb and adjust to keep his speed in the climb is one who will not notice an autopilot that may be out of trim as fast as someone who has a good feel of the plane in all regimes. Consider the American Eagle ATR and the Continental Express Dash 8. Look at Air France. Over reliance on magic and lack of attention, coupled with poor inputs when the A/P became overtaxed, kicked itself off and said, "you fix it," is a fundamental problem in todays environment and one of the reasons the FAA is looking to see changes on training.
And in that regard, a person with limited EFIS time and more steam and stick time in the end, is likely a better qualified person in terms of experience than someone who has spent their career turning the A/P on at 500', mashing buttons and sailing along spending little time actually manipulating the controls.
It's like an old WWII and Korean war fighter pilot who flew with Yeager told me as a kid, "if you're not in the clouds, it's not IFR. If it's VFR at altitude, it's VFR on top, not actual IFR. Don't get lazy and count it or it will bite you in the can when you least want it to."
That said...good luck Strut!
Originally Posted by Whaledriver
I have to respectfully disagree on this one. Hand flying up to cruise proves/provides nothing, as long as you have the FD up and running. In the departure environment, while you're playing pilot, the PM (pilot monitoring) is managing the radios, CDU, MCP and keeping more than an eye on the hand flying going on. Just my opinion.
On the classic, more than a few times, I saw guys aviating to cruise and get so slow we had to descend to get on speed. Mind you, we were hanging on the props, even if on speed, but get behind, even by a few knots and you'd never accelerate.
With respect to DC8's post...this is a relevant discussion here as it relates to what is considered in an applicants background.
The ability to hand fly without relying on magic goes directly to the heart of the issue. At the end of the day, you can train anyone to punch buttons and turn knobs. You can't teach them flying skills if they don't have a solid foundation in fundamentals.
Your point about guys who aviate to cruise and have to step the plane to get on speed goes to the heart of the matter. A pilot who doesn't see that in his climb and adjust to keep his speed in the climb is one who will not notice an autopilot that may be out of trim as fast as someone who has a good feel of the plane in all regimes. Consider the American Eagle ATR and the Continental Express Dash 8. Look at Air France. Over reliance on magic and lack of attention, coupled with poor inputs when the A/P became overtaxed, kicked itself off and said, "you fix it," is a fundamental problem in todays environment and one of the reasons the FAA is looking to see changes on training.
And in that regard, a person with limited EFIS time and more steam and stick time in the end, is likely a better qualified person in terms of experience than someone who has spent their career turning the A/P on at 500', mashing buttons and sailing along spending little time actually manipulating the controls.
It's like an old WWII and Korean war fighter pilot who flew with Yeager told me as a kid, "if you're not in the clouds, it's not IFR. If it's VFR at altitude, it's VFR on top, not actual IFR. Don't get lazy and count it or it will bite you in the can when you least want it to."
That said...good luck Strut!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
