Originally Posted by galaxy flyer (Post 1150577)

Saw one in KEYW last week.

GF

Originally Posted by Silverwings (Post 1150394)

No, but some things are different.

Where I learned to fly if you had an engine failure in IMC (or simulated) you would fly the plane first and then after control was regained you would worry about shooting an approach to land, even if the failure was during an approach.

When I took my check-ride the examiner simulated an engine failure right when I was getting established on the LOC coming at a 30 degree angle.
So I did as I was used to, flew the plane, performed the procedures and then I worried about navigating to a fix where I could resume/restart the approach from. I didn't know at the time that I was supposed to keep tracking of the approach while performing the single-engine procedures.

The examiner told me I had failed and the reason why. We set up a date to go fly again the following week, which we did, and I passed the second time.

What's funny is that when I took the same check-ride abroad for the first time, the examiner's critique was that I should have just flown the plane first before worrying about the approach, he said to keep my a$$ in one piece and then navigate to an airport to land. So keeping that in mind made me fail here, oh well, just another learning experience!

Originally Posted by Wingtips (Post 1150331)

Back in my day, you had to be a graduate from space camp to get a regional job. 510210501240921 hours total time, and be able to down 5 beers in 10 seconds while hanging upside down. I had to go out and CFI for 10 years, then fly night freight in a plane that flew by me flapping my arms all night, in ice, with no boots, and rabbit wolves in the cabin. After 25 years of that, you might get hired by great lakes.

Guys these days just are not ready for the RJ life. Not sure how guys under 1000 hours have been hired for over 12 years now to fly RJs. Its such a shock to me that it has begun to happen.

Originally Posted by FlyJSH (Post 1150789)

Because they were hired to fly a transport aircraft straight and level. I might add, those RJs were designed to be flown by 250 hour pilots: little system knowledge required (when compared to a 707, 727, or DC8). Everything is great until something unusual happens (due to CAT, CBs, wake turbulence, etc): think of AF 447 or Colgan 3407.

Experience teaches us how to recover from being in a bad place (either man made or act of God). It isn't fool proof, but it does give us more tools.

Originally Posted by Wingtips (Post 1150904)

why? over time we can just keep making the plane smart enough to get out of it??

Originally Posted by pete2800 (Post 1151047)

See Air France.

And to the above post about RJ's being much simpler systems-wise than a DC-8, 707, or 727..... of course they are. So is a 777, 747-400, 767, 757, 737, 717, A330, A340, A380, A320, and every other modern transport category airplane. Automation advances in 50 years.... enough to eliminate a crew-member.