|
Originally Posted by Timbo
(Post 2104621)
Look at all the F16 pilots hired by the airlines over the years, how much 'Multi Time' do you think they had when hired?
I remember some who had to get the 'Centerline Thrust' restriction removed when they checked out as F/O's! |
Originally Posted by galaxy flyer
(Post 2105421)
Old F-100 Boldface for the fire on take-off, Timbo, said, "maintain take-off thrust until safe ejection altitude. If on fire, eject". Point being, do NOTHING quick, Mr F-15 should have known that, apologies to Jeff.
GF A fighter pilot in a multiengine jet also doesn't perform a 4-segment takeoff in the event of an engine failure, either. The term "v1", or "v1 cut" also doesn't appear in the lexicon of a military fighter guy. Does all that make him some kind of idiot? No, it just means that different aircraft types in different environments have differing procedures that are appropriate to that aircraft and that environment. Pilots don't magically know what to do and how to do it in a new aircraft and new industry. If only there were a process by which pilots could be taught what to do when such a change happened.... |
Originally Posted by Hacker15e
(Post 2105679)
Pilots don't magically know what to do and how to do it in a new aircraft and new industry. If only there were a process by which pilots could be taught what to do when such a change happened....
In G/A through Multi Crew Transport Category Aircraft operations, rushing during emergency situations can and have lead to disastrous results. |
Originally Posted by captjns
(Post 2105693)
There is... and its not magic. It's called ground school, CBT, CPT, and FFST.
In G/A through Multi Crew Transport Category Aircraft operations, rushing during emergency situations can and have lead to disastrous results. None the less, the point of the comment was that pilots aren't born with aircraft- and sector-specific skills and knowledge. All of us only knows what we've been trained and what we've experienced in our own small sliver of the aviation world. Many pilots -- including both 121 and military aviators -- don't have the understanding that in other sectors of aviation in which they've not participated, there are other standards/methods of flying that are not the same as what they're accustomed to. More importantly, they don't understand that those differing methods are "separate but equal" in that what is quite appropriate in one sector may not be appropriate in another. The other methods are not any better or worse, just different. So, while here on a forum where the topic is airline flying, it is all fun to bust on a military fighter guy who doesn't know the local customs. The opposite is just as true; in my time teaching both UPT and Fighter Lead-In, it was hilarious/ridiculous to see guys coming from airline experience and not understanding that the "new" methods they were taught in military ground school were, in fact, supposed to supplant whatever techniques/procedures they'd used in the airlines. Works both ways, for better or worse. The same is true for guys coming out of ag flying, or bush flying or corporate-to-airlines, or what have you. A smart aviator knows that there are differences, and learns/performs in accordance with the local customs, even if they differ substantially from what they're used to. |
Hacker, well said
There are lots of little differences, and I was not shy about telling the first few captains I flew the line with that I'm new to the industry and am still learning the culture, techniques, contract, etc, that aren't taught in training. Timbo, My first go around in the sim I rushed to get the gear up right away (after positive rate) because in a T-38 if you don't do that, you will overspeed them...in an Airbus...not so much. My first engine fire in the sim, I too was leaning too far forward. Lesson learned on both accounts and it only took messing up once to learn it. Some of the biggest challenges were on the ground...ramp control? EDTC's? I had no clue about that stuff. |
Hardly anyone gets to their level of experience and knowledge without instruction. The Wright Brothers and Boelke were 100 years ago. They had to. Most of us learned from many others.
Watch AB guys transition to Boeings, or vice versa, and you'll realize the truth in Hacker's comment - guys need to be exposed to different techniques and procedures to develop the skills for their new job. The guys who do well in one area tend to do well in the next but it's not a given. And the worst is watching guys take old techniques and apply them to new circumstances when it's negative transfer. Like watching guys put full aileron controls in a airliner for crosswind takeoffs, or pumping the stick like they're trying to hit the 3 wire dead on centerline, slamming th speed brakes in or out, or chasing every knot of airspeed, pulsing the rudder like it's a tail dragger in a gusty crosswind, etc, etc. |
Meh, if you're not kicking up rooster tail, 20' high at DER standing up the Iron Cross, you're nobody. You tell Cappy that's how we did "diverse departure" back at the squadron. Negative transfer that! :D
|
Originally Posted by Hacker15e
(Post 2105702)
Was it not obvious that my statement about training was sarcasm?
None the less, the point of the comment was that pilots aren't born with aircraft- and sector-specific skills and knowledge. All of us only knows what we've been trained and what we've experienced in our own small sliver of the aviation world. Many pilots -- including both 121 and military aviators -- don't have the understanding that in other sectors of aviation in which they've not participated, there are other standards/methods of flying that are not the same as what they're accustomed to. More importantly, they don't understand that those differing methods are "separate but equal" in that what is quite appropriate in one sector may not be appropriate in another. The other methods are not any better or worse, just different. So, while here on a forum where the topic is airline flying, it is all fun to bust on a military fighter guy who doesn't know the local customs. The opposite is just as true; in my time teaching both UPT and Fighter Lead-In, it was hilarious/ridiculous to see guys coming from airline experience and not understanding that the "new" methods they were taught in military ground school were, in fact, supposed to supplant whatever techniques/procedures they'd used in the airlines. Works both ways, for better or worse. The same is true for guys coming out of ag flying, or bush flying or corporate-to-airlines, or what have you. A smart aviator knows that there are differences, and learns/performs in accordance with the local customs, even if they differ substantially from what they're used to. |
My son is at an Aviation University as we speak, and the minimum Multi-time is 50 hrs for the restricted ATP (which he qualifies for). He received about 18 hrs ME for his MEL, and has been lucky enough to fly a twin during the summer for a gentleman that owns a C-310. Multi time is not an emphasis item once you've met the mins..the emphasis is on building time towards the magic 1000 hrs (restricted ATP).
On a side note, HackerF-15 shacked it! I remember back when I was attending UPT during the T-38 phase, I went home for Christmas break. My best friend was at the local airport flying a "hot" little GA plane called a Varga Kachina. He asked me if I wanted to fly with him. We lined up on the runway, and he says "your aircraft". I proceeded to firewall the throttle and release the brakes, at which point he slams the throttles back to idle and screams ***!! I was used to flying the -38 and that's how we did our take offs...as Hacker said, you know what you know until trained otherwise. |
Originally Posted by Timbo
(Post 2104981)
We all know 'more time' is better than 'low time', but how much multi time is enough? The new FAR requires 1500tt, but no minimum of multi time, right? I'm guessing the training department is responsible for getting a guy with very little multi time up to speed on V1 cuts, as has always been the case.
Here's funny story for you. When I checked out as a 727 F/O, my sim partner, also checking out as a 727 F/O, was also a guard F15 pilot. On our first take off, I'm flying, the IP gives me an engine fire just past V1. As I'm rotating, my sim partner is doing the memory items for the engine fire, to include pulling the fire handle and rotating to fire the bottle, as we are just lifting off the ground! To say he had 'fast hands' was an understatement. Well I was flailing wildly, with the sudden lost thrust, so at about 200' the IP hits the freeze button. He then looks to my sim partner and says, "What are you doing?". "I'm doing the Engine Fire Boldface!". IP says, "In an F15, maybe you do it that fast, but here, we wait until we have the airplane under control. Tim probably would have liked to have had that thrust right now, at least until we got to 1000'. These engines are on a pylon, you aren't sitting on top of them like in an F15." So there was some 're-education' required in the transition to airline ops, even for a 'multi engine' F15 pilot with a few thousand hours of 'Multi Time'. |
Analyze the situation
Take the appropriate action Land as soon as conditions permit Controls rls Throttle idle Flcs reset Mpo switch ovrd and hold Stick cycle in phase Booya! Still got it. I would argue there are no real bold face except maneuvers in the 7er. Everything can be talked about, confirmed, and slowly implemented. |
Back to the original thread , 1987, 520hrs TT , 12 multi, into a DC-3 freighter, but it was a 2 year apprenticeship till captain, all night, all weather, with seasoned captains, I had my type ride and ATP 2 years later at 1800 hours TT, LOVE, LOVE, the 3.
|
Originally Posted by Hacker15e
(Post 2105702)
Was it not obvious that my statement about training was sarcasm?
None the less, the point of the comment was that pilots aren't born with aircraft- and sector-specific skills and knowledge. All of us only knows what we've been trained and what we've experienced in our own small sliver of the aviation world. Many pilots -- including both 121 and military aviators -- don't have the understanding that in other sectors of aviation in which they've not participated, there are other standards/methods of flying that are not the same as what they're accustomed to. More importantly, they don't understand that those differing methods are "separate but equal" in that what is quite appropriate in one sector may not be appropriate in another. The other methods are not any better or worse, just different. So, while here on a forum where the topic is airline flying, it is all fun to bust on a military fighter guy who doesn't know the local customs. The opposite is just as true; in my time teaching both UPT and Fighter Lead-In, it was hilarious/ridiculous to see guys coming from airline experience and not understanding that the "new" methods they were taught in military ground school were, in fact, supposed to supplant whatever techniques/procedures they'd used in the airlines. Works both ways, for better or worse. The same is true for guys coming out of ag flying, or bush flying or corporate-to-airlines, or what have you. A smart aviator knows that there are differences, and learns/performs in accordance with the local customs, even if they differ substantially from what they're used to. During Basic Indoc., the instructor(s) introduce and instill the importance of company's culture. This is where new hires start to embrace said culture. At the end of the day, memories and bravado maneuvers are for the bar, not for the classroom. |
CFI, then CFII, then Bonanzas flying bank checks at night, then various light followed by heavy twins, then turbo-prop cargo before going 121.
A product of the.... https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images...6/IRVseiAR.png Not all of us got to play Maverick and fly on the gov't dime, with my respects to those who did. |
Besides being a line trainer, some of my happiest days in aviation were delivering crop dusters to S.A. Oh wait... There were Stearmans, Wacos, Pitts's, Beech 18s, Christain Eagles, Cubs, Swifts, with nothing more than a Rand McNally map in my lap. How many remember wearing battery heated gloves and socks during the winters? I would never trade a Tomcat for a real plane like an open cockpit Stearman.
|
Here’s the Major Crisis the Airlines Are Facing Now (R)egional airlines now have a big problem: many can’t find qualified people to fly their planes. The new hourly requirements made it more expensive to become a pilot in the first place. Prospective pilots pay roughly $150,000 for the requisite training, hours and college degree. Entry-level salaries at regional carriers, a popular jumping-off point for new pilots, hover around $20,000. That difficult financial calculus is increasingly keeping would-be pilots out of the cockpit. “At present, the problem of pilot supply is endemic throughout the regional airline industry,” said a spokesperson for the RAA in an emailed statement. “While base salaries for new hires have increased steadily (the current unweighted first year, first officer pay average has increased to $27,350) and many airlines have even offered signing and retention bonuses to attract and retain pilots, the number of qualifiedapplicants for jobs at regional airlines remains far below demand. ...the aviation industry and regulators have started contemplating a more radical idea. There is mounting evidence that it’s time to reconsider whether a pilot’s total hours is representative of their skill level. One recent study called that link into serious question. “Hours can reflect experience, but they’re not a good yardstick to measure pilots’ abilities,” says Dr. Dan Macchiarella, dean of the College of Aviation Studies at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University. “Somebody could go tow banners for 10,000 hours and be less prepared to be a first officer than a graduate that came out of a program like ours that perhaps had 500 or 750 hours.” http://time.com/4257940/pilot-shortage/ .......................... |
The airlines and politicians are giving the traveling public what they're yearning for in which is a US transportation system without a regional airline system. I say give the people what they want!
|
Originally Posted by captjns
(Post 2106954)
I would never trade a Tomcat for a real plane like an open cockpit Stearman.
|
Originally Posted by captjns
(Post 2106954)
Besides being a line trainer, some of my happiest days in aviation were delivering crop dusters to S.A. Oh wait... There were Stearmans, Wacos, Pitts's, Beech 18s, Christain Eagles, Cubs, Swifts, with nothing more than a Rand McNally map in my lap. How many remember wearing battery heated gloves and socks during the winters? I would never trade a Tomcat for a real plane like an open cockpit Stearman.
|
Originally Posted by trustbutverify
(Post 2107608)
Prefer cockpits requiring battery heated gloves and socks over a Tomcat? That was referred to as "bad head work" and likely would have taken you out of the running for anything the Navy flew, so probably wasn't a choice you would have had to make.
https://blog.hipchat.com/wp-content/...at-300x168.png Ummmmmmmm.....yeeeah. How much do you know about the Tomcat's AC? I'm gonna go ahead and say very little, so it probably wasn't a choice you had to make. |
Originally Posted by SayAlt
(Post 2107610)
https://blog.hipchat.com/wp-content/...at-300x168.png
Ummmmmmmm.....yeeeah. How much do you know about the Tomcat's AC? I'm gonna go ahead and say very little, so it probably wasn't a choice you had to make. |
FWIW, I was hired at a year ago in my mid twenties with 1600TT and 50.0 multi. Went through training just fine and adapted to line flying relatively quickly as well. I think the emphasis on multi time is a bit exaggerated. Maybe more multi time would have given me more SA but I don't think multi piston to multi turbine skills transfer over that much.
|
Originally Posted by captjns
(Post 2106954)
How many remember wearing battery heated gloves and socks during the winters?
|
Originally Posted by tomgoodman
(Post 2107626)
How many remember needing a sweater in the 727, but only on your outboard side? :D
filler |
Waste not...
One 727 F/O cut an old sweater down the center and wore the right half, saving the other side for when he upgraded. :cool:
|
Originally Posted by Timbo
(Post 2104981)
Here's funny story for you. When I checked out as a 727 F/O, my sim partner, also checking out as a 727 F/O, was also a guard F15 pilot. On our first take off, I'm flying, the IP gives me an engine fire just past V1.
As I'm rotating, my sim partner is doing the memory items for the engine fire, to include pulling the fire handle and rotating to fire the bottle, as we are just lifting off the ground! To say he had 'fast hands' was an understatement. Well I was flailing wildly, with the sudden lost thrust, so at about 200' the IP hits the freeze button. He then looks to my sim partner and says, "What are you doing?". "I'm doing the Engine Fire Boldface!". IP says, "In an F15, maybe you do it that fast, but here, we wait until we have the airplane under control. Tim probably would have liked to have had that thrust right now, at least until we got to 1000'. These engines are on a pylon, you aren't sitting on top of them like in an F15." So there was some 're-education' required in the transition to airline ops, even for a 'multi engine' F15 pilot with a few thousand hours of 'Multi Time'. The gentleman in your story must not have been a "pure-bred" F-15 pilot (i.e. flew something else at some point). The F-15C never had "Boldface" or memory items and unless there have been some radical changes in the last 7 years, it still doesn't. For the first 30 years or so the F-15 was operational, the checklist for engine failure on takeoff read (WT F is a V1-cut?:D) 1. Throttle(s) - as required. 2. Climb to a safe altitude and investigate. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:46 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands