Excargodog

You see allegations on the threads of a number of the regionals that the washout rates for new hires have taken a dramatic spike. This is variously attributed to more reliance on CBT, shortened training periods, weeks (and sometimes months) of delay between training blocks due to sim or other equipment availability. Others seem to believe that the quality (or work ethic) of current applicants doesn't meet historical standards and this accounts for the training attrition. Some claim that the trainers themselves are at fault.

The first issue, I guess, is to find out if this perception is even real. If you recently got your first type-rating at a regional, would you share with us what the attrition was in your class? Just how many started and how many successfully finished. You needn't share any more than that - just the facts - since you are all on probation your first year and we don't want you getting in trouble.

For you trainers who have been doing this a few years, do you think recent washout rates have been higher than historic norms? And if so, why do you think that is?

rickair7777

It's definitely higher across the board at regionals. At SKW for example they used do a pretty rigorous screening at the interview, for both personality defects and fundamental flying skills (including technical interview and sim). This ensured a very high pass rate in training. About three years ago they decided that it was worth wasting some training $ if there was even a chance they could get more folks on line, so they literally a adopted a "hire them all and let the Training Dept. sort them out" approach. Outcome...

More washouts in ground training, usually due to work ethic issues which they used to sniff out at the interview.

More washouts in Sim, due to lack of ability, lack of currency, work ethic, or attitude. They'll work with slow learners, and folks who are out of currency, as long as they're showing progress.

More washouts in IOE, due to basic flying ability, ie can't adapt to real world, slam dunks, visuals, etc if ATC doesn't follow the SOP sim profile.

Once they got online, I saw new-hires sometimes needed more time than historical norms to get solid on the plane, and some had a notable lack of urgency about it. I also observed some bizarre personalities in my last year... hard to fix that.

prex8390

I’ve been to two regionals now. And I passed both with no extra training at both of them. At my first one, I can recall from a class of about 13, I wanna say 3-4 washed out and from my second class of 25, I think like 1-2 as well washed out. I remember both, those that did always seemed a little overwhelmed with the pace of training. A lot of guys get all their training done in the late 90s, take an office job and do an occasional BFR over the years, then catch the flying bug in their late 50s and decide to apply at a airline; or a lot of guys just do single pilot vfr type operations and come in with just kind of leisurely training Over the years. They come to 121 without really having any fast paced learning in a long time and they just get a little too over their head too fast.

There is always stories of guys heading right to the bar after class and not studying, but those are rare and not the biggest issue. I’d say the biggest issue is just keeping up with the Pace of things for most people, the guys that worked in a office for 30 years and then decide to fly 5-10 years before they turn 65 and haven’t so muched picked up a PHAC in 10 years, or just not making progression throughout their training and not seeking help.

Though also my first regional has a very inconsistent standards department, some guys would grill you on a oral for 4 hours and others would talk about motorcycles for 45 minutes and hop in the sim. So that doesn’t help. It’s a mixed bag. Regionals are so desperate now for bodies in the door they are just taking every candidate they can get and then washing them out later in training when they should be screening then better at the interview. People are being asked next to nothing now. Brief an approach, read a METAR, point out markings. Etc.

Knobcrk1

The influx of helicopter guys I’m sure doesn’t help the ratio. They’re basically 200 hour pilots. They get through academics just fine but flying the sim is another matter.

Nyflier

I’ve been an instructor at a regional for several years. I’ve spent the last 7 years in the sim, the past 4ish years as an APD. Prior to the sim, I flew the line as a line check airman. My opinion is I think it’s a combination of everything.

First off...the state of the industry, which is driving the hiring standards at the regional level. People that wouldn’t even get looked at 10 years ago are now being welcomed with open arms. Also, people that quit flying are now returning due to pay increases, bonuses, etc. and are getting hired with very little recent experience. Someone mentioned helicopter guys/girls entering the market, and there is probably some truth to lack of fixed wing time contributing to training failures.

Regional training culture...supply and demand has dictated that training departments give extra training far beyond what was historically given to try to push people through. Applicants know this, so there can be a potential lack of effort. This is compounded by that, nowadays, you can basically pick which regional you want to work for. There is very little effort required to get a job and that can translate to the effort level in training, especially if you expect to be spoon fed everything. I’ve unsatted applicants in the past for basic instrument flying stuff that they should know well before the airline level.

Quality of regional instruction...now that majors are hiring, instructor turnover is high. Check airmen get taken by majors so airlines’ training departments are a revolving door. Lack of training experience can/does contribute to an applicant’s success, or lack there of. Instructors are human beings, so it takes a little time to get in your groove. We were all new once and probably all had some growing pains.

Fixnem2Flyinem

I’ve been through two regional initial training evolutions in the last 18 months. First one was SkyWest.. About 16 new hires on the ERJ in my class and I only knew of 2 not making it. That course was well done and the plane was very pilot friendly. The written exam tried to trick you in reading comprehension and answer selection more than the subject matter being difficult.

At Horizon on the Q, 4 out of 8 of us passed initial. That program was high quality as well. I was in one of the last classes that had the original footprint and not the shortened CBT style of training. I think the higher fail rate had more to do with complicated company procedures and the SPT/FMS lab being pretty fast paced with the volume of information presented. Horizon expected us to learn a lot more about the plane and memorize more things in general. The Q has a lot of procedures that come along with Cat3 and RNP approaches. The flows were overwhelming for the people without prior airline experience for sure. Now since they started the CBT garbage, it just doesn’t prepare people well. That isn’t on the new hires, that is on the company. Again CBTs covering ERJ systems were easy because the plane was easy and everything was auto. So maybe on the ERJ side it is working. With the Q, not a good idea. Too much to learn that if you don’t know it will show once on the line and mistakes will be made due to lack of knowledge.

I am sure if I hadn’t gone through ERJ school just 9 months prior to my Q ground school, I would have had a harder time with it. Kudos to the CFI’s that make it through that one! 😁

AirlineMerc

My own experience in training:

My first 121 training was at TransStates. The indoc and Systems ground training were excellent, due to having good instructors. The flows and callouts were very much a figure it out yourself type of approach. Their ground training devices were utilized to teach systems called Systems Integration Training (SIT for short, but the elongated version has an H in there somewhere). It was my presumption that it was at SIT that flows and callouts would be solodified and mastered. Nope. Off we went to sims. They divided us up and sent half of us down to Houston and the rest stayed in St. Louis. Those went to Houston were taught by FlightSafety instructors who don’t necesarily know TSA flows and callouts, and they ended up receiving extra sim sessions, many bringing the number of sim sessions they received from 9 to 16. My sim partner was taken away from me and sent to Houston. I was assigned a sim partner Who was a retrain candidate and I didn’t know him. He lasted two sessions before he quit. The next retrain candidate I was assigned lasted one session and then he quit. I then had instructor seatfills for the remainder of the sessions. On the one hand, this was nice as they knew their Captain flows. On the other hand, each one had a different idea on how to fly the 145. In the 11 sims I was given, I had four different instructors. In the end, I needed another sim session or two as it was an extremely steep learning curve between how things were run, my own faults, and little standardization. But I was then deemed outside of the training footprint and dismissed rather than allowing me to bow out gracefully.

My experience there was not unusual, and many classes were experiencing attrition rates of 30-50%.

Then came PSA. Night and day difference between the two training programs. Indoc is indoc. Systems was a combination of CBT and classroom work, much like you would expect to read a textbook and then discuss in class. The real differences happened after systems. IPT involved multiple sessions in front of a ground trainer and it was there almost exclusively to solidify your flows, callouts, and FMS programming skills before you hit the sims. As I was bound and determined not to make the same mistakes I made at TSA, I was very grateful opportunity to learn standardized flows and callouts in this environment. I then had 9 sims all with the same sim partner, which helped tremendously, and two different instructors which is by design. Between my experience (good and bad) at TSA and a standardized training program at PSA, I was ready for my PC on time after the standard 9 sim sessions.

Out of 27 in my class, 8 didn’t make it through to the end. None of them washed out in IOE. It was all in the sims, or for double failing their PC. Several of those 8 were Rotor to Wings program candidates. I won’t speculate as to whether being helicopter pilots to fixed wing had anything to do with it.

I would say I was lucky as I was given a second chance at what I have discovered to be a superior airline on superior equipment. While I have presented simply factual information here, I of course have my opinions.

captande

Of my class of 30ish. 4 didn’t make it to IOE. One quit for another job, 3 failed out of sim. We’ve kinda lost track of each other since then but I haven’t heard of anyone else failing out of that.

2 of the guys were rotor guys and just had trouble keeping up with the speed. The other guy wouldn’t adhere to company SOP. He had his own way of doing things and that just didn’t fly. (Pun intended)

I hear a lot of poor things about the RTP guys and overall the strongest guys in my class were all prior army helo guys. All of the CFIs made it except that one who couldn’t cooperate/graduate.

Coming from a bigger 141 school one thing I’ve noticed is the attitude is terrible. A lot of guys go into indoc thinking that they deserve to be there just because we get a degree and come from a renowned school. Also how the regionals headhunt every chance they can. Try to get a kid to sign up for their cadet program or whatever they’re offering. Make the numbers look good and sometimes locking these kids who don’t want to give the effort into groundschool where they chewed up and spit out.

Knobcrk1

I don’t think you’ve made the case of TSA training being bad, just a bunch of excuses. It sounds like you finally had enough sim experiences to be able to pass an airline training. I guess 20 between TSA and PSA. I’ve done the FSI training too at TSA and completed it in time. All you’re doing on the checkride is taking the plane from the gate to the runway and doing a few approaches.

AirlineMerc

I don’t think that’s a fair assessment at all. I gave a factual accounting of my training experience at TSA. As a matter of fact, I distinctly recall saying I made mistakes that I made not knowing better that I wasn’t going to make again at my new airline. TSA training has a reputation in the industry and it doesn’t need my help to reinforce or refute it.

As far as suggesting it took me 20 sims in order to be ready to pass airline training is idiotic. Two different programs, two different aircraft. Are you saying that when I go to American that it’ll take me 30 sims to be ready to pass airline training? No, it’s a different aircraft and you go through their program regardless of your past experience. So, no, it didn’t take me 20 sims to be ready to pass airline training, I passed Within the footprint of the training program.

I congratulate you on passing on time. What’s your background before you went to TSA? When/if you go to your next training program at your next airline, presumably when you flow to Frontier, I think you’ll be in a good position to compare training programs.