pattupilot

Hi All,

I am developing a training program for new first officers in our company which consist mostly of Caravans. It is completed, however I would like to compare with another training program.

Would someone with similar experience share training manual with me? It would be for new hires without rating.

Thanks.

Aviator89

New hires without a rating for what? Do you mean no pilot licenses?
If you are training student pilots in a caravan, you are making one big mistake.

GucciBoy

The Air Force does it in a T-6...it makes a Caravan look like a 182. Caravan: 8750 lbs./677 HP -- T-6: 6500 lbs./1100 HP. Sometimes the student performance makes you beg for a swift death, but they get it figured out in less than 100 hours. You could do worse than teaching primary in a Caravan. In my opinion they are easier to fly than a 172. 10 degrees of flaps up to redline, a fat prop that makes descent planning a complete waste of effort, and gear you can't forget to lower. If it weren't for the possibility of overtorquing/overtemping, it'd be pretty much foolproof.

Toonces

So does the Navy. I learned in the T-34, but even now in my relatively docile 200hp machine, I am begging for something with more power and a bit more weight. It's just easier to fly. The learning curve is steeper, but the extra power at the bottom is a nice security blanket.

Aviator89

In my experience (non-military) using faster, complex airplanes really prolongs initial training. Sure, just like some of the pilot mills you can memorize and recite a bunch of procedures, call-outs and limitations but that doesn't mean anything until you put it together into the comprehension, application and analytic level. With the typical accelerated flight school style, a learning plateau is encountered almost immediately due to how its structured. The student can recite and explain limitations as he/she was instructed to do so just before training, but simply cant handle the aircraft like some one who "understands" such limitations until many hours are spend just flying and getting a feel for it. So adding torque limits, over temps, higher speeds, flaps etc just adds to that plateau. Not having a retractable gear is good, but all the others things combined would hinder a student i think. Most trainers like archers or 172's really only have flap speed limits.(and u really gota dive to mess that up) Sure, rpm's oil temps and pressure are there, but nothing like turbine engines.
What takes 50 hours to complete an entire PPL in a C172 might just take 10-25hours to get accustomed to a faster more complicated airplane procedures like a caravan before any further learning can occur.

We still dont know from the OP what this is for, but to me the first post just sounded like they were hiring people with no time, training them, them putting them to work.

JamesNoBrakes

Maybe, but the caravan really isn't these. It's like a brick flying through the air and I would say the engine is no more complex than a regular piston with carb heat. Sure, it works differently and you operate it a little differently, but if you "start" with that airplane it's probably no more difficult to learn than any smaller piston engine. The caravan is one docile machine.

No, way. It depends on how they are taught. Poor teaching can lead to flap overspeeds all the time, I've seen it. Good teaching and it never comes into play. Doesn't really matter if we are talking about a 172 or a 737.

pattupilot

sorry guys.

I must elaborate. I am running a training department for an airline with mostly Cessna Caravans.

Pilots we hire are mostly without Caravan experience (but with CPL) and we need to train them up so they are qualified to fly the Caravan. Our current training also adds couple of days grounds school with SOP, COM, OPSECs etc.

Im new to this role, and thinks 3 weeks of ground school (what we have right now) is a little too much and I am working on getting it down to 2 weeks. I would really appreciate a training program from another operator to compare.

I have been in direct touch with some institutions and got their training programs. They do 4-5 days of grounds school, however they are only training institutions and not airlines.

I would appreciate if someone from for example Mountain Air Cargo contacts me.

Thanks.

Aviator89

True its possible, but what i should have said is the archers and 172's i flew cruised just hardly faster the first notch of flaps speed limit. Heck, some of them couldnt even get past 110 with full fuel, 2 people and summer temps haha.

cjgreen91

Not sure how much info I can give, but here's some of my experience.

I work for a 135 company that flys both multi and single turbo props. The single being the caravan. Most pilots will fly the twin first. Two pilots required. Then transition to the caravan for a while. Most pilots new to the company this is their first turbine.

However, the transition to the 208 is fairly short. Usually four to five days. Maybe 6-8 hours of flight training and a minimum of 10 hours of IOE. Most the ground training was straight out of the POH. Another day with a G1000 simulator.

Once again this is usually after a week of initial systems on the twin where a good amount of time is spent on the PT6 because most don't have turbine time.