rickair7777

I would say it's more about inconsistent training than anything else. Some airlines try to cut corners on training, which means a lot more of the burden is on the trainee and also the footprint is typically shorter than overseas. That works OK if the trainee has prior airline experience on a similar aircraft (ie glass jet to glass jet). It doesn't work as well for entry-level folks or folks from other aviation sectors.

In the old days, regionals commonly flunked 10-15% of new hires... they gave you very little extra training, figured it was cheaper to hire a new one than spend a lot on remedial training. That culture did have the fringe benefit of encouraging everybody to work hard. US regionals cannot afford to do that today, since training is cheaper than trying to replace a candidate, so they'll tend to bend over backwards to get you through now.

Instructor/examiner personality can be an issue too... they've *mostly* gotten rid of the real hard-asses, but I know there are still a few. We had one nicknamed "Terminator"... he was old-school, if you came prepared it was going to be a congenial atmosphere with a lot of training. But if you showed weakness, the gloves would come off. Best way to deal with those is always be prepared and don't do anything to rub them the wrong way. Be well dressed and groomed.

As far as the failure cause, it's *usually* going to be a combination of things, such that the examiner thinks the candidate is simply weak. You can of course fail for gross violation of basic mins and limitations but there's a little grey area on that stuff... if then airplane exceeds 250kts below 10K for a few seconds that's not going to be an automatic bust unless the examiner already decided you're no-go. Same for going a few feet below MDA as long as the approach and go-around were all conducted properly. Usually what gets people is they screw something up and then don't recover properly... such as too high on a NP approach and have to do a go-around that was unexpected and mess that up. Or mess up a hold and don't communicate with ATC. CRM can also fall apart when things go wrong... if you're yelling at your sim partner, that does not bode well.

That's for sim, for the oral (known as KV in AQP) they are now VERY standardized, so there will be NO surprises whatsoever (unlike the old days when it was often systems trivial pursuit with your job and career on the line). Many airlines don't even do an oral now, assuming you get a high enough score on the written test. If you screw up the oral (KV) in this day and age, you have no one but yourself to blame.

rickair7777

I agree that doing 135 before regionals could potentially build a track record of success, which would help to overcome the early busts. True that ten years at a regional with one type and upgrade on the same type is not much data to show that you've overcome the past.

But 135 can be a real crapshoot with training consistency, and there are always rumors of bottom-feeders intentionally busting people (and then subsequently passing them on the retest) to blemish their record and delay their inevitable departure for greener pastures. Definitely do your research if you go 135.

Another option along those lines might be go to a regional with multiple types and intentionally fly both as an FO to build a training record. Upgrade on one, and then if you haven't been hired by a major in about three years, switch to the other.

TiredSoul

Keep in mind that 135 operators usually source out their training (and testing) to providers like CAE and Simuflight.
They have no skin in the game and no benefits in flunking you.
I did initial PIC type rating, two recurrents as FO, upgrade and single pilot add-on.
That’s 6 checking events in two years.
I also really enjoyed flying 135 so don’t see it as punishment.

JohnBurke

If one moves on to ACMI flying, it's not that much different than 135 over longer distances, in bigger airplanes.