XOJET TRAINING AND CHECK RIDE Failures up!
11-09-2021, 03:05 AM
#11
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Posts: 285
Originally Posted by chase
Not sure if other 135 operators are or no moving to AQP type training t but it is a good thing IMHO.
Will get a you a specific a answer, give me a few days. I start rotation tomorrow. ThanKS for asking.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
11-09-2021, 04:57 AM
#12
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2019
Position: Poolside
Posts: 534
Originally Posted by ASACapt
Netjets is the only Part 135 operator doing AQP. They just started it last year. It’s taken about 10 years to get there. There are a lot of lengthy steps to become AQP.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
11-11-2021, 06:27 AM
#13
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2008
Position: Upright
Posts: 601
Originally Posted by chase
To readers/lurkers of this thread,,
It is pretty common for those who read forums regularly to know how some persons will lay out statements that come with an air of certainty.
Then the follow on is to build around those "truth statements" a conspiracy that leads the reader to begin to question the professionalism of the individual or in this case a company.
Why persons do that is unknown but it can be for many reasons, none of which benefits the reader who is only trying to ascertain facts, not rumors.
The taint of having bounced from one type of operator to another and finding little professional satisfaction can be one reason or a genuine dislike of a company for whatever reason but to the reader, you don't care why they post what they post...just paint a realistic picture for me without personal motivations as to why something is truthful/fact based or not.
For a poster to attach "intent" to professional evaulators as a means to screw a pilot's career and implying that could be in play at XO or any company without FACTS should tell the reader/lurker something about the original poster and whether you should suffer through their ramblings.
Yes, personal opinions can be shared and speculation is certainly permissable on forums but for those trying to avoid the "gossip", "conspiracy theory" side of aviation and simply looking for facts to help you make decisions about career, know which sources to believe and which ones to avoid.
Wading through the "muck" of postposts that muddy the waters is one of the biggest combines of those who visit these forums. Just be wise enough to assess who are the purveyors of facts versus myths, conspiracy theories.
It is pretty common for those who read forums regularly to know how some persons will lay out statements that come with an air of certainty.
Then the follow on is to build around those "truth statements" a conspiracy that leads the reader to begin to question the professionalism of the individual or in this case a company.
Why persons do that is unknown but it can be for many reasons, none of which benefits the reader who is only trying to ascertain facts, not rumors.
The taint of having bounced from one type of operator to another and finding little professional satisfaction can be one reason or a genuine dislike of a company for whatever reason but to the reader, you don't care why they post what they post...just paint a realistic picture for me without personal motivations as to why something is truthful/fact based or not.
For a poster to attach "intent" to professional evaulators as a means to screw a pilot's career and implying that could be in play at XO or any company without FACTS should tell the reader/lurker something about the original poster and whether you should suffer through their ramblings.
Yes, personal opinions can be shared and speculation is certainly permissable on forums but for those trying to avoid the "gossip", "conspiracy theory" side of aviation and simply looking for facts to help you make decisions about career, know which sources to believe and which ones to avoid.
Wading through the "muck" of postposts that muddy the waters is one of the biggest combines of those who visit these forums. Just be wise enough to assess who are the purveyors of facts versus myths, conspiracy theories.
Your statement is true, but it is also common for company stooges to come on and paint a rosier picture than the reality. I hope you won’t take that as an accusation, but it is abundantly clear to me why failure rates would go up with training being completed in house. It’s also not nefarious as another post suggested, nor is it a slight to your pilot group by me.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
11-11-2021, 03:04 PM
#14
Disinterested Third Party
Joined APC: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,001
I have seen pilots that were not even borderline-competent pass Flight Safety and Simuflite courses, up to and including type ratings.
It's very possible that a substandard pilot who has passed a Flight Safety course may go on to fail other training, and not unwarranted, either.
In-house company training isn't exactly revolutionary, unwarranted, or a "gotcha." The unsupported original post suggests that something improper or untoward was at play, but "Guard" never returned to back up his blind accusation.
In fact, nobody with any inside insight has come forward to back that up. Interesting.
It's very possible that a substandard pilot who has passed a Flight Safety course may go on to fail other training, and not unwarranted, either.
In-house company training isn't exactly revolutionary, unwarranted, or a "gotcha." The unsupported original post suggests that something improper or untoward was at play, but "Guard" never returned to back up his blind accusation.
In fact, nobody with any inside insight has come forward to back that up. Interesting.
11-12-2021, 04:56 AM
#15
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Sep 2018
Posts: 313
Originally Posted by chase
Consequences of a failed checkrides at XO is like it is at any reputable operator.
1. Retrain the pilot with focus on the problem area.
2. Redo the area that was deficient to a satisfactory standard.
Anybody can have a bad day so termination on a single failure is not likely. Sufficient training to get back to standard is what one could expect if faced with that situation.
Hope that a answers your question.
1. Retrain the pilot with focus on the problem area.
2. Redo the area that was deficient to a satisfactory standard.
Anybody can have a bad day so termination on a single failure is not likely. Sufficient training to get back to standard is what one could expect if faced with that situation.
Hope that a answers your question.
11-12-2021, 05:05 AM
#16
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Sep 2018
Posts: 313
Originally Posted by JohnBurke
I have seen pilots that were not even borderline-competent pass Flight Safety and Simuflite courses, up to and including type ratings.
It's very possible that a substandard pilot who has passed a Flight Safety course may go on to fail other training, and not unwarranted, either.
In-house company training isn't exactly revolutionary, unwarranted, or a "gotcha." The unsupported original post suggests that something improper or untoward was at play, but "Guard" never returned to back up his blind accusation.
In fact, nobody with any inside insight has come forward to back that up. Interesting.
It's very possible that a substandard pilot who has passed a Flight Safety course may go on to fail other training, and not unwarranted, either.
In-house company training isn't exactly revolutionary, unwarranted, or a "gotcha." The unsupported original post suggests that something improper or untoward was at play, but "Guard" never returned to back up his blind accusation.
In fact, nobody with any inside insight has come forward to back that up. Interesting.
They have every right to fail whoever they want, just noting since going in house failure rate has got from 3% to 40% (XO internal numbers, upgrade is almost 50% wash out) They are putting very strict standards in place. If your at netjets making $150K second year I see it, but not for no vacation and 17 day on work schedule with a PIC type so you got two physicals and two checks a year for maybe half that!,
11-12-2021, 07:54 AM
#17
Disinterested Third Party
Joined APC: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,001
You're a 27 year military pilot (in the national guard, was it?). Joined Net Jets three years ago, couldn't say enough great things about it, until you were gone in what, ten months, and then couldn't stop badmouthing netjets. Now at XO, you were delighted to be there just under two years ago, and now are doing what you've done for NJA, SWA, and others; spreading unsubstantiated rumors and badmouthing the company.
Which were you, then? Upgrade failure, or didn't make it through a proficiency check?
Internal numbers, you say. Certainly not external numbers, and certainly not something that the rest of your compatriots are discussing here. Lone voice in the snowstorm, you. Why?
You throw it up to see what sticks, nothing to support it, and then?
What has requiring two physicals a year go to do with the price of tea in china? You threw that out there because...what?
Which were you, then? Upgrade failure, or didn't make it through a proficiency check?
Internal numbers, you say. Certainly not external numbers, and certainly not something that the rest of your compatriots are discussing here. Lone voice in the snowstorm, you. Why?
You throw it up to see what sticks, nothing to support it, and then?
What has requiring two physicals a year go to do with the price of tea in china? You threw that out there because...what?
11-12-2021, 03:49 PM
#18
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2015
Posts: 201
Originally Posted by Guard
Wish this was true, they end check ride immediately, require entire recurrent for retraining and new check from scratch usually a month later, some are sent home twice for weeks. Sims at Dallas CAE are way over crowded so you can wait weeks for your 297 check to turn into a 293 week of training. Guys fail in first 30 minutes of ride, Failure rate for Upgrade its now 40%. Not paid enough in my opinion to deal with this, go jets pays its FO's better!
Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk
11-13-2021, 04:06 AM
#20
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2019
Position: Poolside
Posts: 534
Originally Posted by HalinTexas
Sounds like TSA in the '90s.
From TSA’s website:
The Aviation and Transportation Security Act, passed by the 107th Congress and signed on November 19, 2001, established TSA.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
turk
Flight Schools and Training
29
01-13-2012 05:58 AM
