Crash Courses for the Crew
 

Crash Courses for the Crew - WSJ.com

Training is expensive, but it can pay off handsomely. The military has show that training can't replace experience, but it can certainly bring pilots up to speed very quickly and much more ahead of their civilian contemporaries with more flight hours.

The recent accident with Colgon might have an icing component to its cause. How many airlines practice icing scenarios in the simulator?

At Eagle, they did a fair amount of icing stuff in the sim on the ATR. They gave us the Roselawn scenario, as well as making just about every other flight icing conditions requiring icings speeds, protection, etc.

Current employer--none of that, although the airplane I'm flying now hasn't had an issue with ice. Or hadn't at the time.

The simulator .... well let's just say it can be reset rather quickly with the push of a button.

I don't know about initial, but I know for a fact during upgrade training they GRILL you on in-flight icing procedures for the Saab

Did you just say that? yeah, its amazing civilians are allowed to fly at all.

I'm sure every airline practices icing scenarios.

Exactly generally speaking civilian pilots have more experience with flying "in" weather as opposed to their military counterparts.

Course civie's only have to dodge ice etc. Milly's dodge bullets and worse.

Not when the sim thinks you have "crashed" into the ground/terrain or bodies of water! Once it exceeds the proper operating positions for the hydraulic supports, your (Canadian) goose is cooked. The only thing that can get the sim "reset" at that point is a full restart and initialization, often requiring the assistance of a sim tech.

Some of the more vigilant sim instructors will pay close attention during V1 cuts etc, with a hand ready on the "flight freeze" button. Much easier to reposition after a flight freeze and debrief, rather than having to do a complete reset after the hydraulics come crashing down. :eek:

Simulators are smarter than that. If your simulator behaves that way, the software needs to be improved, period. Why would the sim 'exceed the proper operating positions for the hydraulic supports'?

I've had trouble with the motion on the sim, and software problems on the sim, though. It's usually due to a software problem or a hydraulic leak.

As far as icing stuff for training. I think it was zero. Then again, the ERJ has an all automated ice system. Probes detect ice, the anti ice turns on by itself, the pilot doesn't do anything. Nice system but no doubt it makes the pilots very complacent to icing.

Military pilots also hand fly in the soup, deal with emergencies that have lengthy, sequenced memory items, have a myriad of checkrides and constant evaluation.

At my airline I had a double engine-failure scenario that ended in an emergency landing. It might not have been the real deal, but it sure got my blood pressure up! Oh, I greased it on too. :D

I just don't see how anyone could ever make this argument. Why do you think civilian guys have more experience flying "in" weather as opposed to military guys? We fly through the same airspace you know ...

I'm just back from sim refresher in Europe on teh Q and for those who know the airplane, the INCR REF SPEED was on 95% of the time. That's our "safety" net giving an extra 20KTS margin to the SPS to account for potential icing. AFM says this button should go OFF when out of icing and when wings are clean (or look at the spigots on the windshield wipers).

Sound more than right to say that we all fly through the same weather ;).
But there might be some differences in training between mil and civs tha migth be usefuol to all (?)

I would say the difference in training is that the military trains probably 10 times more than the typical civilian airline pilot. Only Uncle Sam has that kind of resources.

In my last aircraft, the pilots and engineers had two emergency and procedure simulator sessions each quarter. They were designed so that after a year of training, the pilots and engineers would have seen (in the sim) every major system on the aircraft and the associated emergency procedures (engines, gear, brakes, hydraulics, electrical, icing systems, windshear, tcas RAs, etc). Each pilot would be given an abort, V1 cut, two-engine landing and go-around, single engine landing, and holding. Each pilot would get at a minimum a precision, non-precision, and RNAV approach.

This was just the "flying the airplane" stuff and doesn't include the training missions were you actually fly the airpane. Also, this doesn't include the tactical and mission oriented procedures, emergencies, and procedures.

I'm not saying one is better than the other ... military pilots just have *a lot* more training.

That's interesting KC. On our side, the training program is such that we are every 6 months in the sim and the entire program is over 3 years to review all the emergency situations and checklists. We do not have the same money as Uncle Sam so we are trynig to keep our neurons in good shape:
Hypothetical CVR: "hey I kinda remember I had something like that in the sim 3 years ago. What did we do again?" :eek:
I wished we would train more like mils. I does make you more at ease and I personnally enjoy those hard sessions in the sim. I just would like to be sure that if (hope not) a big one happens to me I'll be more than ready for it.
Fly safe.

DO NOT turn this into a Mil vs Civ debate ... that is pointless. Both sides bring valuable assets to the table. Enough said ...

GENERALLY SPEAKING ... I agree with the poster that civilians have more experience flying "in" weather.

BUT to clarify, I would go on to say that GENERALLY SPEAKING when comparing civilian to military, if two 35 year-old pilots land a job at a major airline ... the civilian will have at least twice the amount of flight time (and then some) as the mil bubba. Thereby having twice as much time "in the weather" so to speak, since it is all the same airspace as you say ...

That's been my personal experience thus far ... twice. :(

:)

I'm not making this a mil vs. civ argument. My point is, how can you ever say something like that without any hard evidence?

It's been my experience (and my log book shows) that when I fly at my civilian job, I *rarely* ever fly IMC (unless on takeoff or approach) because it usually creates too many bumps for the passengers and we spend a lot of time trying to find clean smooth air for passenger comfort. In the mil, we could care less about the clouds and bumps unless they became a hazard to the mission. In some cases, flying in the weather is good because it provides protection from the bad guys on the ground that are just itching to randomly shoot at something. Of course, this is airframe dependent as I would not expect a fighter pilot to have a lot of instrument time since they seem to like VFR conditions for their operations (just one less thing to worry about when you're single seat flying 400 knots). Additionally, I have flown an overwhelmingly percentage of my mil flights at night, much more so than my civilian job (because I'm not an overnight cargo operator).

Good point.

And as we know, the problem for the airlines is training cost$ versus returns.

And to a degree, 10 times more training could be a waste if it hasn't prepared you for the present emergency in the current conditions.

Somewhat of a catch 22 ...

:)

The argument Military versus civilian is stupid. Every Pilot's experience is different. Day/Night, VFR/IFR, Hot and Humid/Cold and Dry. Even Pilots who work at the same airline during the same time period can have vastly different experiences. One pilot bids all red eye lines and has a ton of night flying. One senior pilot bids reserve and hardly ever flys. Another bids northeast trips in the winter, while another bids Florida and Mexico. My point is everyone's experience is different. Move on to another argument.

I guess not all sims are equal.;)

Look not trying to start something here but that is because you fly a jet. Talk to the peeps who fly for someone like Ameriflight then you will know what I mean.