HercDriver130

99.9 percent sure I work at the same airline as Ghillis....

AQP can def be failed
Overall AQP can be a good thing

I recently changed fleet types and went thru our recently FAA certified AQP Full Qual course it was laid out as such

5 days Home study..... i.e., 18 CBTs to complete and submit testing for
Week 1
Days 1-3, 4 hour in the morning in classroom, 4 hours in afternoon in FTD or SIM with GS instructor called "system Integration"
Day 4- 2 Hour one on one Oral exam with check airman, NOT open book
Day 5 - misc req videos and door and emergency equip training
Weekend off
Week 2
Days 1-4, 4 hour FTD sessions with instructor major emphasis on checklist usage, flows, profiles etc...
Day 5 is a PV = Procedures Validation given by check airman
Weekend off
Week 3
Days 1-4, 4 hours SIM sessions with instructor, all the normal stuff, V1 or V2 cuts, EPs, approaches, etc...
Day 5 is a MV = Manuevers Validation (like an old style PC)
Weekend Off
Week 4
Day 1 - Flight Operations Brief , various req topics, Bulletins, emphasis areas, etc, 8 hours in classroom
Day 2, 3 and 4 are LOFT sessions treated as real flights with all the paperwork and required company and ATC calls etc... various issues will arise
Day 5 is a LOE (Line Oriented Evaluation) - Basically a graded LOFT and the end of which your type certificate is issued.

Of note: FOs are fully PIC typed, Nearly all of the FO training is done from the right seat EXCEPT you must do a graded V1 cut from the left seat and taxi the aircraft from the left seat AND LOFT 2 the FO acts as PIC and flys the entire sim session from the left seat. The only eval that is a "pink" is the final LOE, but other validation or eval failures are still considered for internal purposes training failures.

Its an ongoing process which has potential.

HercDriver130

Oh...someone above asked about managed and non managed NON-ILS approaches....

These are what we would have called NON precision approaches in the past yet because we have VNAV capability are now called NON ILS..

Southerner

Definitely can be failed. The LOE is less about technical ability and more about threat and error management. How well do you deal with distractions and threats? Do you know what resources are available? Do you play nice in the sandbox?

The MV is technical ability. Stick and rudder skills.

AirRabbit

Very informativeHercDriver130, thanks. The area that draws my attention is whether or not the crewmembers going through training are provided an opportunity to see, attempt, be corrected if warranted, and eventually feel comfortable with understanding and actually performing all the in-flight tasks (“maneuvers,” if you will) in the regulations or testing standards, such that everyone is ready to go out and do it “for real?” And then, I'd have the same questions on the same issues throughout recurrent and transition training sessions. As for specifics, I know that there were some AQP operators who did not require crewmembers to be "exposed" (trained or tested) to Approaches to Stalls and Recoveries from same ... at all, and instead focused on Windshear Exposures. When asked directly, the instructors answered that “…it requires essentially the same kind of control application, so it is a legitimate substitution.” It seems to me that “substituting” one in-flight task for another in-flight task on the basis of having “essentially the same kind of control applications” is a bit “wishy-washy” (uh … that’s a technical term, in case you were wondering). Is this typical? Do you see that kind of thing at your carrier, or other carriers?

A306pilot

Are any of you Line operations quality evaluation auditors? My (UK)airline is implementing this and I would be interested to talk to anybody performing this role.