Mesabah

For some guys it's a debrief item, not for others, it all depends on who you get. All the guys have their own techniques. I'm hesitant to argue after the fact, especially if I passed, it's just not worth the trouble.

Bartok

Here's Pinnacle (original 9E) training:

Here's your books, now show me, no that's wrong, no that's wrong...........


After XJ training, OE was just like training except no emergencies.

Not at all at 9E. In groundschool the performance of the 200 was 5 minutes of discussion and 3 powerpoint slides and "You'll learn it on OE" catchall.

Maybe there is a reason the XJ training seems so "easy". Maybe afterward you are truly trained.

cencal83406

You aren't original Pinnacle if you don't agree that the stall training was absolutely CONTRARY to everything taught since private to commercial.

If I recall correctly, in private you recover from a stall, in commercial you recover at the onset, or first indications of it. In a transport category jet, that would be the shaker. We recover at the onset now.

But, the stall "profile" (love that there is a profile for stalling btw) that we used to have until the Colgan crash mysteriously made those pages disappear, stated, and in the sim we were told, to maintain altitude and remain in the shaker during the recovery, essentially powering out of the stall maintaining the angle of attack to hold altitude (within 100 ft).

"Pull back on the yoke respecting the pusher." If you don't remember that, you were sleeping through sims. If you got the pusher during the maneuver, you let it finish the push then pitch back up to maintain altitude respecting the pusher until the aircraft powered out.

I've been here for 6+ years, and only since the move to north campus has the training gotten better.

Btw, what's with all the bitter Pinnacle FOs saying they have to right-seat instruct or CA their Colgan counterparts. Or having to take the controls. I hope these guys realize that a terrible pilot sitting next to you, left or right seat, is entirely symptomatic of a bad training environment, culture, and the folks who allow them to get to the line. LCAs are the last line of defense, and if they sign them off, it's on them if the guy I'm flying with is a bad pilot and still sitting in the seat.

LCAs though aren't that great, I know. I flew with a guy recently who thought that he could still start the APU with the APU batt deferred. Never mind the systems or the MEL requiring both AC and DC power to start it. "Let me just try". Same guy is griping about the XJ ground school written "because he sucks at written tests" and he hasn't "done a real oral since CA upgrade" because there is a buddy buddy understanding that he knows his stuff since "LCA" is next to his name.

I studied hard for an oral once, and the two questions I got were "what's the predominant color of this aircraft?" and "how many wheels does the aircraft have?" (Which btw the answer is always at least 7 since these guys count the door wheel, some get fancy and include galley carts).

80ktsClamp

You're defending an indefensible position. Not once was it a case of "my airline is better than your airline," and if you wanted to make it that, you are putting words into my mouth. Neither Alaska nor myself were bashing individual instructors (I sure could if I wanted to- I didn't even name specific instances), but we were going after the culture and policies that continue to exist to this day.

I saw the way other carriers did stall training (not just DL) prior to the fed change, and it was far better than 9E even with the fed mandates that you are trying to use as an excuse. That's why I kept mentioning that a proactive and mature training department would do otherwise than just make excuses and blame stuff on the feds. Open your eyes and read what we are telling you without trying to make it into something personal.

tom14cat14

Mooney I do not think anyone is attacking you as an instructor they were just making a general statement about which training department is better. Both have good instructors and both have tool's Everyone does. How ever I do remember pre merger pretty much everyone I knew at 9e did not like the training department including some of the instructors/LCA's. I think you would have a hard time finding any Mesaba pilot's that didnt like our training department. For the 6+ years I have been here we always trained to pitch down and get the wing flying. I am guess that if the training department thinks it is better to do something they can go to the feds and say, "we want to recover this way and this is why"(Reference to the feds said to do it this way) So far I have really like all the instructor's I have had that are Legacy 9e so please do not take this as I think 9e pilots suck or are not as good as XJ. And to comment to 80knts XJ did have AQP on the 200 before we took the fences down.

hockeypilot44

I think it's safe to say that Delta is better than 9E in every single area imaginable including training. 9E needed to have strict training. They were putting 250 hour first officers in the right seat with barely an interview. Then 2 years later, they were upgrading these pilots. Delta hires mostly experienced pilots that have been flying for years. There is no such thing as a 2 year upgrade at Delta.

There is a large experience gap between any major and regional. It is what it is. Until you work for a real airline, you don't realize how bad everything is at a contract carrier.

Mesabah

The procedures, manuals, and QRH have a lot to do with it, they are poorly constructed all around. It's not the instructors. This is why Mesaba seems so easy, because it is. For the guys who have crossed over the fence or moved on to mainline, look at how much easier it is to find something in a manual, or use the QRH.
We have a couple guys on loan from Delta who are redoing the manual system right now.

dogpilot

Could not disagree more in regards to QRH and MEL stuff 9e is light years ahead of mesaba. The Mel at mesaba needs a massive overhaul. Training is the same, it is individual instructors that make it bad.

AlaskaBound

Why in the world would I say good things about an ineffective, out dated, immature, and unstandardized training department? It's exactly that and needs changed. I think it will change with the injection of the Mesaba instructors. It's been a good ol boy club for too long. I am not personally attacking any specific check airmen or PC examiners. I don't even know Mooney. I'm speaking generally. The training dept culture is the core of the problem. It's worn off on a lot of die-hard 9E pilots and it's unfortunate.

AlaskaBound

I can't figure out why the 9E culture focuses on difficulty level to determine effectiveness. It makes no sense. How does a "difficult" training event create a better pilot? A training dept should focus on effectiveness and quality over making the event as hard as possible and threaten failure at every turn. All you hear at 9E is "bust this, bust that, you'll probably bust, bust, bust, bust". That's one thing a lot of 9E pilots don't get if this is their first airline. They don't know any different. I've been through 3 airline training departments and I can say, unequivocally, that the XJ culture is conducive to proper learning. I think the proof is in the pudding. Look at the safety record of XJ/Compass. You can't argue facts.

9E uses the "threat of failure" on a daily basis and is a big problem. It creates negative learning and a poor training environment. It's intimidating, threatening and does not create an environment that is conducive to positive learning. You lose your confidence and makes it difficult to focus and stay positive. I am not only speaking for myself but every other pilot, that I have spoken to, which had previously gone through other airlines' training departments.