Pinnacle First Officer ATP Checkride Failures
01-06-2013 | 07:59 AM
#141
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,244
Likes: 0
From: CL-65 captain
Command ability, judgement, and decision making should be part of an ATP ride.
Company-specific flows and FOM knowledge is not in the PTS.
The ATP doesn't give you anything more than an SIC-type, which should be to ATP flying standards anyway. You can't be a 121 CA without completing company PIC training.
You can't even impress women with an ATP...nobody's ever heard of it, the public thinks a "Commercial Pilot" means airline pilot.
Company-specific flows and FOM knowledge is not in the PTS.
The ATP doesn't give you anything more than an SIC-type, which should be to ATP flying standards anyway. You can't be a 121 CA without completing company PIC training.
You can't even impress women with an ATP...nobody's ever heard of it, the public thinks a "Commercial Pilot" means airline pilot.
01-06-2013 | 10:22 PM
#142
Day puke
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,865
Likes: 0
From: Out.
Exactly my point.
01-07-2013 | 06:39 AM
#143
Line Holder
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,257
Likes: 5
I'm astounded a pilot wouldn't study his butt off and prepare like mad for one of the most important check rides in their career.
If you show up to your garunteed interview as poorly prepared as it sounds some were for this check ride, will you sue as well when you are not hired and complain they asked totally irrelevant questions?
If you show up to your garunteed interview as poorly prepared as it sounds some were for this check ride, will you sue as well when you are not hired and complain they asked totally irrelevant questions?
01-07-2013 | 08:06 AM
#144
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 447
Likes: 0
From: More Drag
correct.....but if they win Powerball they could buy a CL-65 and legally just jump in the left seat with a fresh AMEL ticketed buddy in the right seat and just blast off......or convince a naive corporate dept that they were in fact PIC. Back in '05 or so the MEM FSDO started yanking the CL-65 type ratings of some pinnacle captains that couldn't pass IOE for this very reason.
"No certificate holder may use a person nor may any person serve as a required crewmember of an airplane unless the person has satisfactorily completed, on that type airplane and in that crewmember position, the operating experience, operating cycles, and the line operating flight time for consolidation of knowledge and skills, required by this section..."
Sure, the type is on the ticket, but without completing the company's upgrade program, the FO is still an FO, just with a PIC type.
The FAA who removes the PIC type of an upgrade applicant who completes the type ride but not OE does this not to prevent him or her from renting or buying a CRJ, as you say, but because he or she DID NOT complete the course. This is the same logic as an individual who went to Higher Power for the B737 type (with no time in type) to snag a PIC job with it. Ain't gonna happen. The logbook is the key.
Yeah sure, a CRJ PIC type looks great on the back, but without the PIC time in the book it is only a "placeholder."
01-07-2013 | 08:18 AM
#145
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,244
Likes: 0
From: CL-65 captain
It's not an upgrade program, it is a PIC type. Many airlines give PIC types to their FO's during initial. Many here, including you, are confusing the issue. A PIC type (or SIC type for that matter) is not the end all be all, don't forget 14 CFR 121.434:
"No certificate holder may use a person nor may any person serve as a required crewmember of an airplane unless the person has satisfactorily completed, on that type airplane and in that crewmember position, the operating experience, operating cycles, and the line operating flight time for consolidation of knowledge and skills, required by this section..."
Sure, the type is on the ticket, but without completing the company's upgrade program, the FO is still an FO, just with a PIC type.
The FAA who removes the PIC type of an upgrade applicant who completes the type ride but not OE does this not to prevent him or her from renting or buying a CRJ, as you say, but because he or she DID NOT complete the course. This is the same logic as an individual who went to Higher Power for the B737 type (with no time in type) to snag a PIC job with it. Ain't gonna happen. The logbook is the key.
Yeah sure, a CRJ PIC type looks great on the back, but without the PIC time in the book it is only a "placeholder."
"No certificate holder may use a person nor may any person serve as a required crewmember of an airplane unless the person has satisfactorily completed, on that type airplane and in that crewmember position, the operating experience, operating cycles, and the line operating flight time for consolidation of knowledge and skills, required by this section..."
Sure, the type is on the ticket, but without completing the company's upgrade program, the FO is still an FO, just with a PIC type.
The FAA who removes the PIC type of an upgrade applicant who completes the type ride but not OE does this not to prevent him or her from renting or buying a CRJ, as you say, but because he or she DID NOT complete the course. This is the same logic as an individual who went to Higher Power for the B737 type (with no time in type) to snag a PIC job with it. Ain't gonna happen. The logbook is the key.
Yeah sure, a CRJ PIC type looks great on the back, but without the PIC time in the book it is only a "placeholder."
01-07-2013 | 08:23 AM
#146
Day puke
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,865
Likes: 0
From: Out.
It's not an upgrade program, it is a PIC type. Many airlines give PIC types to their FO's during initial. Many here, including you, are confusing the issue. A PIC type (or SIC type for that matter) is not the end all be all, don't forget 14 CFR 121.434:
"No certificate holder may use a person nor may any person serve as a required crewmember of an airplane unless the person has satisfactorily completed, on that type airplane and in that crewmember position, the operating experience, operating cycles, and the line operating flight time for consolidation of knowledge and skills, required by this section..."
Sure, the type is on the ticket, but without completing the company's upgrade program, the FO is still an FO, just with a PIC type.
The FAA who removes the PIC type of an upgrade applicant who completes the type ride but not OE does this not to prevent him or her from renting or buying a CRJ, as you say, but because he or she DID NOT complete the course. This is the same logic as an individual who went to Higher Power for the B737 type (with no time in type) to snag a PIC job with it. Ain't gonna happen. The logbook is the key.
Yeah sure, a CRJ PIC type looks great on the back, but without the PIC time in the book it is only a "placeholder."
"No certificate holder may use a person nor may any person serve as a required crewmember of an airplane unless the person has satisfactorily completed, on that type airplane and in that crewmember position, the operating experience, operating cycles, and the line operating flight time for consolidation of knowledge and skills, required by this section..."
Sure, the type is on the ticket, but without completing the company's upgrade program, the FO is still an FO, just with a PIC type.
The FAA who removes the PIC type of an upgrade applicant who completes the type ride but not OE does this not to prevent him or her from renting or buying a CRJ, as you say, but because he or she DID NOT complete the course. This is the same logic as an individual who went to Higher Power for the B737 type (with no time in type) to snag a PIC job with it. Ain't gonna happen. The logbook is the key.
Yeah sure, a CRJ PIC type looks great on the back, but without the PIC time in the book it is only a "placeholder."
You are confusing an employer's common sense with the law. Yes, it is highly unlikely, but the fact remains an ATP is an ATP. And any ATP can be PIC of an aircraft that requires an ATP.
01-07-2013 | 08:27 AM
#147
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,630
Likes: 0
From: Up Front
correct.....but if they win Powerball they could buy a CL-65 and legally just jump in the left seat with a fresh AMEL ticketed buddy in the right seat and just blast off......or convince a naive corporate dept that they were in fact PIC. Back in '05 or so the MEM FSDO started yanking the CL-65 type ratings of some pinnacle captains that couldn't pass IOE for this very reason.
01-07-2013 | 08:29 AM
#148
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 45,164
Likes: 803
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
Careful with how you interpret that FOM knowledge is not applicable. There are some things in there that are totally legit, such as when do I need an alternate and how do I derive alternate mins? Questions about grooming, hat usage, and when is my medical due to my base manager shouldn't be included.
Even though some of it is not technically required I have no problem with, and any applicant should assume, that any and all FAR, SOP, and FOM knowledge is fair game in a 121 setting, even for an FO ATP.
The issue under debate is how FO's can get an ATP without necessarily doing all the usual upgrade stuff (flows, etc). A 121 operator can hand out FO ATP's by meeting minimum PTS requirements, or they could require full upgrade training and performance, or anything in between.
If they are are requiring full upgrade level performance, but are not providing the training that WE all got as captain applicants, that's not really fair.
But if people are whining about book knowledge, you don't need three weeks of groundschool to bone up on FOM/SOP...just a highlighter and a non-MEL'ed autopilot.
01-07-2013 | 08:34 AM
#150
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,244
Likes: 0
From: CL-65 captain
FOM knowledge which mirrors FARs is certainly applicable.
Even though some of it is not technically required I have no problem with, and any applicant should assume, that any and all FAR, SOP, and FOM knowledge is fair game in a 121 setting, even for an FO ATP.
The issue under debate is how FO's can get an ATP without necessarily doing all the usual upgrade stuff (flows, etc). A 121 operator can hand out FO ATP's by meeting minimum PTS requirements, or they could require full upgrade training and performance, or anything in between.
If they are are requiring full upgrade level performance, but are not providing the training that WE all got as captain applicants, that's not really fair.
But if people are whining about book knowledge, you don't need three weeks of groundschool to bone up on FOM/SOP...just a highlighter and a non-MEL'ed autopilot.
Even though some of it is not technically required I have no problem with, and any applicant should assume, that any and all FAR, SOP, and FOM knowledge is fair game in a 121 setting, even for an FO ATP.
The issue under debate is how FO's can get an ATP without necessarily doing all the usual upgrade stuff (flows, etc). A 121 operator can hand out FO ATP's by meeting minimum PTS requirements, or they could require full upgrade training and performance, or anything in between.
If they are are requiring full upgrade level performance, but are not providing the training that WE all got as captain applicants, that's not really fair.
But if people are whining about book knowledge, you don't need three weeks of groundschool to bone up on FOM/SOP...just a highlighter and a non-MEL'ed autopilot.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
