RE: AQP Changes e-mail

With the Systems Validation apparently no longer covering systems* is the KV test only going to cover certain systems depending on if you're in an r12 vs. r24? Or are we going back to the days of all systems being fair game on every recurrent?

Also, how is indoc these days? Over the past year I've talked about recurrent with probably 8-10 FOs who were getting close to their probie rides. Their systems knowledge ranged from passable to outstanding but every single one was weak on FM1 and performance stuff. I'm wondering if it's just not being covered well in indoc, or if people are brain dumping it to make room for what they learn during CBT/Ground and relying on the rumored "study guide" to get them through.



*Is it really a Systems Validation if it doesn't cover systems?

 

Who knows...but Performance definitely needs to be covered more so in depth than Systems. The Performance knowledge that both new FOs and new CAs have when they first hit the line is embarrassing.

 

The FM1 and performance stuff is glanced over in initial, and briefly at that. I feel like the ground instructors really lack any understanding of it themselves, so they just try to get through it as quickly as possible without caring if their students have learned anything or not.

At the end of the day, the responsibility lies with us, each individual pilot, to go out of our way to get help if we need it with any subject, this included. The problem is the understanding is so poor that I'm not sure many pilots realize how much they don't know. Performance really isn't that hard, you just have to know where to look.

 

Yes, the lack of performance knowledge IS embarrasing.
I try to go over, with my FO's, manual W&B, to include MLW & MTOW calcs using QRH for lndg runway limits and climb limits and well as VAA to go over takeoff runway and climb limit weights and QRH V speeds. I also go over Bingo fuel calculations, holding calcs, the difference between "Inflight landing distance" and "Unfactored landing distance". Some roll thier eyes when I ask if they would like for me to go over it, but most really appreciate it.
As Captains, it's up to us to pick up where the training center falls short (or simply don't have time). It's also in our best interest to make sure the people sitting next to us know how to jump in and help with these calculations when things get busy.

 

The KV is comprehensive, it covers all systems.

 

It would be a trivial matter to correct it.

In my former life, it was rather easy: the responsibility for dealing with ALL aircraft performance issues fell upon the captain. That isn't the case here with EWBS, TPS, and VAQ doing that work 99% of the time.

Checkride day always involved the crew doing a load manifest and calculating v-speeds with the QRH: ready to go in the sim briefing room. The new hires got plenty of practice actually planning flights beforehand in training, and for the recurrent crews--it was simply the paperwork that preceded any flight we made.

Of course...we had a FULL DAY of performance in class, complete with a review of Part 25 performance guarantees/constraints and the full catalogue of aircraft spaghetti charts.

Here, they could simply make every other IPT/CPT/sim flight a charter flight and add a FULL DAY for performance in class; that would SOLIDLY enforce an understanding.

 

The CRJ FO’s that have or will be upgrading are solid with performance. Those guys/gals know performance.

The First Officers (from my discussions) who need the most work are Embraer product First Officers, especially the wannabe heavy (175) First Officers/NHs

 

YES! I remember those days very well. Systems ground school instructor had new hires do a complete manual W&B every day before they could leave for the day.
Then every sim lesson started with a manual W&B & performance calcs to use in the sim. By the time we hit the line, we could do it with our eyes closed. Came in handy too, since EWBS went down a lot back then, and ferry / mx flights were the norm on reserve. This, of course was on the CRJ. EMB performance isn't really even taught during training anymore. We had to figure that out on our own.
But I do hear there's an app coming out that does all the w&b and pref calcs!

 

I commend you for doing that to a degree however, we aren’t check airmen and it isn’t our job to do it. If it was then we would all have an extra fed ride and be qualified to teach, but we aren’t. When a line captain starts teaching in the cockpit unprovoked, it will come across as an insult in most cases. Chances are, this is exactly why those guys roll their eyes. You’re basically telling them that you automatically assume/believe they have no knowledge of anything and are weak.

It is my experience that some guys do have a decent understanding of performance but most have almost none. Heck some that come out of the training center don’t even really know what they’re looking at with the TPS besides what speeds to plug into the MFD. I’m always more than happy to answer anyone’s questions or provide assistance to understanding topics for those who want to learn. But I will never just start teaching to someone who hasn’t asked first.

 

I always welcome a lesson from the captain, as long as it isn’t in an arrogant tone. The captain’s role has always been a mentor. The FO, as we’ve all heard before, is a “captain in training”.

As an FO, you can’t expect to crawl into the seat and not take in the experience from the guy next to you. In fact, it is ignorant not to do so. No, the captain doesn’t have to pull out a syllabus and lesson plan, but I appreciate and almost expect to be taught something from the guy or girl with more experience than me. A simple “here, let me show you something” is all it takes.

If an FO is insulted by this, they have no business flying. A lot of new guys just get their type and think they are 50 seater sky gods.