Airline Pilot Central Forums - Part 121 washout.

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- Career Questions (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/career-questions/)

- - Part 121 washout. (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/career-questions/125453-part-121-washout.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by PerfInit (Post 2926154)

Was the initial training/checking done under AQP (Part 121 Subpart Y) or traditional Part 121 Subpart N&O training program? I am not aware of any requirement for an air carrier to check visual approaches on an initial equipment 121.441 Sim PC or AQP maneuvers validation.

Was it perhaps a “no flap” visual approach without reference to the VGSI? “No Flap” approach & landing should be trained and checked if the aircraft’s FSB Report requires it.

Usually visual approaches are done with a check airman during IOE.

It's always been up to the airline whether they want to go "above and beyond" within their training program. It states in the FAA guidance for inspectors that the airlines can have higher standards than are listed there and in the regulation, those are just the "minimums", except you absolutely have to provide training on whatever you are checking obviously and it has to be a safe practice/mitigated. So if they wanted to train and check visual approaches...they could.

Quote:

(d) If the certificate holder's approved training program includes a course of training utilizing an airplane simulator under §121.409 (c) and (d) of this part, each pilot must successfully complete—

(1) With respect to §121.409(c) of this part—

(i) Training and practice in the simulator in at least all of the maneuvers and procedures set forth in appendix E to this part for initial flight training that are capable of being performed in an airplane simulator without a visual system; and

(ii) A flight check in the simulator or the airplane to the level of proficiency of a pilot in command or second in command, as applicable, in at least the maneuvers and procedures set forth in appendix F to this part that are capable of being performed in an airplane simulator without a visual system.

(2) With respect to §121.409(d) of this part, training and practice in at least the maneuvers and procedures set forth in the certificate holder's approved low-altitude windshear flight training program that are capable of being performed in an airplane simulator in which the maneuvers and procedures are specifically authorized.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes (Post 2926137)

Well here is a life lesson, if you are asked to do something on your checkride that you haven't trained on, you need to stop right there. Do not pass go. Bring it up professionally. Ask to speak to a manager right away and explain the situation. If they don't incomplete and "reset" you after accomplishing the required training, you need to take it as high as necessary to get it fixed. Younger guys often aren't as resourceful and aggressive with this (and I don't mean being condescending and argumentative), so unfortunately the get the short end of the stick sometimes when the department knows they couldn't get away with the same thing with someone a bit older. You should have training records as well, so you should be able to show them where you have NOT trained on a visual approach. You should be watching them fill out the forms/entries at the end of each event and if it doesn't match, then they are falsifying records and intentional falsification is a big deal.

The life lesson is that you have to look out for you. You need to be intimately familiar with the checkride and what is on it as far as tasks. You should have known ahead of time. Checkrides are not supposed to by mystery guessing games. At the time of the check they should have been able to show/tell you what is on the check as far as tasks. You should have known before you started the check whether you practiced all of the tasks and if you find something that you had not been trained on, you don't take the check, no matter how much you want to get it done. Errors and screwups happen, both in training departments and as the fault of the applicant, but not providing training on a checkride task isn't a small thing. Who would a reputable airline want to hire?, the one that "got away with it" and "made it work" or the one that didn't take the check because they didn't get training on the tasks in the check? That's like turning down a flight when the weather doesn't meet mins. I realize that not all regionals are "reputable" in this way, but eventually you might make it up to a big airline and they most definitely care about doing things the right way.

I made a huge mistake which might of potentially ruined my career. I should of stopped the checkride at that moment, I keep blaming myself for doing the checkride in the first place but at the same time I can’t go back in time. Now I have to look for other regionals that can give me a chance. Mesa turned me down so there’s that.....

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captelmo (Post 2926171)

Mesa turned me down so there’s that.....

If Mesa turned you down, then you have a huge problem.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riverside (Post 2926242)

If Mesa turned you down, then you have a huge problem.

Maybe not. Mesa is super fat on ejet Fo and unless you want the crj they can presently afford to be more selective. The original regional said reapply in 6 months. There were other training failures beside the ride. The poster said additional sims were used up. Normally an initial ride failure this far in would be retrain/retest just that task.

A visual? Unfortunately that sounds so basic it may be hard to explain.
Now a single engine, dual gen fail, no flap visual....easier to explain.

I foresee this becoming more and more common with inexperienced pilots getting ahead of themselves.
Go find a right seat 91/135 job and learn all you can.

Keep applying all places, all they can say is no. I know one guy who failed out of more than one regional and is a captain now somewhere. Is your career over, no way-that’s a bad attitude to have. You’re young, you messed up, learn from it and move on. You invested a lot to walk away just yet. Just don’t let it happen again, if you don’t feel ready or adequately trained in an area you need to speak up ahead of time.

Biggest advice is to be honest about the whole situation and don’t make excuses in future interviews. Not every candidate you’re competing with has a perfect record. Some guys may have checkride failures, some may have been fired, some may not even take the interview serious. There is hope especially when it comes to scoring a job at a regional. Once you get on somewhere work hard (no more checkride busts, volunteer, get into training department) so you can over shadow that blemish on your record for the majors.

Lastly, I don’t agree with some saying it’s going to be hard explaining why you messed up a visual approach. Actually that’s one of the more difficult things to learn in a jet for noobs for some reason. I see tons of brand new FOs and have even flown with some captains that have struggled with them and have heard it consistently from check airmen that give training. I know I struggled a little at them when I started. I know I’m not going to be the only one saying this either. Live and learn. Good luck.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mjm8710 (Post 2926516)

Thank you so much !! I’ve applied to every other regional there is. Hope I can reply from someone soon

I have trouble believing that something NOT TRAINED would be introduced on a checkride in a structured training program.
Now I’ve never been through a -121 program which I believe to be even more highly structured that the military/P135 training programs that I have been through. Is this a common occurrence?

I suspect it might be covered in a cursory manner. I’ve seen it often combined with the partial/no flap landing. Usually one failing item isn’t an “down the road” event, but others here know more.

Was this a Visual Approach or an approach in Visual conditions

I’m struggling with this one a little as we’re getting crumbs of information in every new post.

In real life when cleared for a “visual approach” it’s prudent to still use available lateral and vertical guidance.
So:
How exactly was this set up and what was the assignment.
I’m thinking there’s more going on here.