If an airline consistently had a 95-99% pass rate, would the Feds crack down on the training department? Is there a unheard quota of failures each airline training department tries to meet?

 

You know it!

 

Uh I mean, that seems a bit conspiratorial. I'd say that the "pass rate" varies by each class at each airline and that honestly, most instructors will try their best to get you through if you show that you are putting in the work. Honestly, most people who don't get through class do it to themselves in one way or the other. Just how it goes. I don't see the need for an airline to have some "quota" or percentage of people it needs to fail.

 

Agreed. What do you think the pass rate is at the Majors? I am guessing 99.9% Believe me, they are not really better pilots than those at the regionals. Maybe just a better training department with a better program and a train to proficiency attitude?

 

The FAA conducts ongoing oversight activities of all air carrier training programs. When they identify specific issues in an airline's program, they work with the air carrier to address the issues. Having "too high" of a pass rate is not a problem in and of itself and they certainly don't look for ways to increase the failure rate if there are no underlying issues.

 

Correct, but look at it in the micro-sense. Sim check airmen don't want to be put under the scope for being too "lenient" either. It surely does happen. Not a conspiracy theory, but human nature.

 

As an APD/Check Airman, I've never been told my personal pass or fail rate is too high. I keep detailed notes of all training events/orals/checkrides. I've had some months with a 90+% pass rate and other months with a 50% pass rate. It is what it is...it just comes down to the applicant. If I am questioned about my pass fail rate, I'll bust out my notes.

 

I found this interesting. In the latest internal update from SkyWest's SAPA, they are saying that because of the marked increase in hiring at the company they are expecting training failures to increase.

The memo also cites SkyWest's training failure rate to be historically at 2.4%, compared to other regional airlines still at 15-25%. Not sure where they are getting this data.

 

To the contrary, the FAA seems to get concerned if our pass rate is too low...they consider that a reflection on the training department, not the applicants. SKW new-hire pass rate is historically well north of 95%, although I suppose that can fluctuate with the quality of applicants.

The worst bottom feeders provide bare-minimal training, and let the trainees pay the price...if their CMO will let them get away with it.

 

It does depend on what statistics they are looking at. I know at my airline right now about 18% leave between day 1 of indoc and by the end of IOE. That might seem high, but if you actually compare things equally, you will find our training failure rate to be less than 4%. The rest either leave for other jobs or personal reasons. Some decide to go to the training department (which pays a lot more) and don't finish IOE, so that counts against the pass rate as well. We also have been hiring a large percentage of pilots with 5+ years in 121 or military, and they are moving up to the LCC's and majors before they finish IOE. Those count as people leaving as well.

Actual check ride failures are about 2-3%.

Skywest has a history of comparing apples to oranges to try to make themselves look better. And honestly, after seeing all of these forums and all of the crap that SkyWest is pulling against it's non-unionized pilots, it is hard not to look at SkyWest a newly emerging bottom feeder.