Depends on the event as well. PC vs MV VS LOE vs initial type vs. AQP initial. Lots of fine differences in how much leeway an examiner has.

 

Yeah worst case is probably PC + type + ATP.

 

Q1 - Seems like some familiar shenanigans that happened at certain HK owned regionals. I knew some guys first hand that were seemingly screwed at various training events, and flew with a concerning number of guys that told stories of busting PC's for nitpicky items, or given unreasonable scenarios for a PC with multiple concurrent system failures. Almost seemed like there were some personal vendettas against some. My perception was it was something that was happening more several years in the past, and at the time that carrier did not have AQP for these training events and it seems easier to hose someone on a PC than it would have been in an AQP footprint. ( Iono if that carrier ever got AQP or if the sister company has AQP yet either)

I've thankfully been out of the regional gauntlet for a couple years now, and the regional whose dubious practices i was acquainted with is now RIP as of 2020. However, the sister company is still kicking with the some the same upper level managment and a weak union and seems it could be plausible.

 

nah he had that reputation before the rotorheads arrived

while I have no idea what is or isn't true, there's the old maxim that there's a bit of truth in every lie...

I had him sit seat support for me, his mannerisms were extremely distracting and quite unprofessional. Based on that experience I'm very thankful to not cross paths again. I've heard similar stories from friends.

 

Seems like a couple of different conversations going on. One question was do APDs fail people to retain them. Another is, would an airline have and use a training syllabus that is insufficient for some new hires to be able to succeed with without any unsats.

I don’t believe any APDs unsat people who should sat, if anything they sat people who should have been unsat, and then news spreads for what went wrong on a ride and the pilot still received a Sat. That modified expectations of future students.

I recently told an FO that he should not take a job at Atlas that he was offered. Being offered the job does not mean you will succeed in training without a blemish. His RJ energy management that I saw didn’t seem anywhere close to what it would take to operate a 747. He had so much pride that he scored the job offer that he wanted to disregard what I was trying to say to him.

 

I dunno, maybe busting a bolded limitation might have something to do with it?

Section 4 of the POH is pretty explicit on the things that need to be done before referencing the QRH, so there’s that too.

Glad you were able to move on, but all three of those busts were you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

We’re in the realm of opinion here. I am of the opinion that not only are you wrong, you’re dangerously wrong. Limits are important, yes, though there is a need to understand when they’re important.

If you speed through a checklist you will sooner or later miss something. I have a cadence that I go through every checklist with. Whether it’s an EP or a start checklist. I won’t change that, with very very few exceptions. Fast hands in a flight deck have, can, and will kill people.

Also, as I said, the EP manifest completely differently from training and it didn’t appear as the starter was on. The eng start advisory went out.

 

Seems fishy that you would bust for exceeding the limitation by 2 seconds. I am guessing it had to do with you not recognizing a bad start. Wasn't there a pneumonic that they teach and a limitation? TEMS or something like that? It's been awhile, but don't you just remove the fuel and ignition and let it motor?

 

Here’s how it went. Regular start, starter indication on the advisory went out at 50 seconds. My hand goes off from the button to stop a starter. Sometime between my hand moving from the stop button and the other hand stopping the clock I get a caution. I forget the exact verbiage but it was something like air start valve open. I had never seen that in training. Saw hot/hung/no and starter remains on, advisory still on, starts.

As I had never done that I announced the caution and went to the qrh. I complete the qrh which has me hit the stop button and the caution extinguishes. The APD asks what is the clock at and I state 92 seconds.

Not sure that it matters. I had chosen to be PM for the first leg out. Everything went fine with that, kind of hard to mess that up. Only real thing that had happened on that was a hold and had to determine how much time we had available in holding before diverting.

 

What I seem to understand and what you're missing is piping bleed air at potentially several hundred degrees into a starter on a multi million dollar jet engine that has a bolded limitation to avoid such activity past a certain point, be it time or turbine speed, aint gonna end well, either for your ride, and potentially the engine.

The caution msg you referred to above is actually referenced specifically in section 4 of the POH in the engine start section, where the related section starts with the following line: "It is imperative that starter cutout be observed at 50% N2," then proceeds to tell you exactly what to do to solve the problem prior to referencing the QRH / QRC should you see the NO STRTR CUTOUT or STRT VLV OPEN messages. It is a scenario that is usually covered in training while doing an external air start, but could also occur on an APU start. While perhaps what you say on your bust was maybe not exactly what you had seen in training, apparently the APD assumed enough transfer of information in other parts of your training had occurred that you would be able to respond well, not to mention the specific situation was referenced in the POH. I guess he was mistaken.

But hey, at least you have a cadence.