Training Failures
 

As a 1900 driver two decades ago, I am wondering how the new crop of regional aviators are doing passing training on the RJs. With 1500 hours of mostly CFI and little multiengine time, how successful are those pilots in passing all stages of training including IOE. Thanks.

Additional question...

In the last two or three years...How has initial training changed to suit these new hires?

You can either do it or you can't. If you have 1500 hours and 1900 time flying boxes, I'm going to go ahead and say you can do it.

To the other guy, initial training hasn't changed, but with AQP the testing has gotten much more forgiving.

I wouldn't think of CFI time as a negative. From talking to my companies line check guys, and our training department both former and current, 1500 hour CFIs usually do just fine.

For what it's worth (with sample size bias, obviously) the only guys to fail out of my regional new hire class were not CFIs. Every instructor made it through.

I’ll chime in here and say it is all over the board as far as getting through training at a regional, my SIM partner was an Army retire who bought a plane flew the 1500 hours in his plane came to a respectable regional (is there one??) with a good training program and failed his PC check. I was sitting next to him and he flew an above average check ride. I don’t think it was a failure but the 80 year old examiner had a quota according to other instructors.
I’m not a believer in the new flight for requirement but I am a believer in the "quality of the flight hours.” A lot of instrument flight is better than 1500 hours of VFR to a long runway.

just my humble opinion

The only folks we lost or almost lost were older folks with a lot of hours, who struggled to adapt to a new plane/technology/etc. The folks with a fresh 1,500 and a CFI had a learning curve on the jet stuff (V1 cuts, single engine ILS, etc.) but they tended to catch on to the FMS and other tech stuff pretty quickly, which makes a big difference. Just my own observations of a small sample size.

Some trainees may be requiring additional sims or ground training but I haven't heard of a mass failure rate any regional. Companies want people to pass these days and provide the resources to make it happen. Also, instructors aren't so inclined to sign people off that in their opinion aren't ready. So I guess the stats to look at are enrollment to graduation completion numbers and of those that don't complete, what was the reason.

I skipped the CFI route and did survey work, built my hours, then flew single pilot freight for awhile. Now at a regional but the freight was the best experience ever. You don't get that flight instructing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Flying a jet just really isn't that hard. 121 training should not be difficult for anyone with good fundamental flying skills/study habits.

Something stinks there. If you know you passed, you raise hell and take it up as far as you need to. A professional pilot knows what the standards are, so the checkrides aren't a mystery or guessing game. There are no "quotas", so something is fishy. If you know you are right and don't take action, then I guess you might lack the required assertiveness that comes along with the job of being an airline pilot.

With the benefit of a few years in a jet, with hindsight, I'll agree with you. I look back now and wonder why I ever thought training was hard. I now find flying piston GA to be harder than flying the jet (weather is much more of a threat, the airplane is much more susceptible to turbulence and is far less capable than the jet, you actually have to do all the flight planning instead of looking at a release, etc etc.)

But I have to tell you, halfway through my initial Systems class I thought my head was going to explode. And I have two master's degrees from a rather well-known university in the UK that's been around for about 800 years. Nevertheless, initial Systems was the hardest I've ever had to study for anything. Not trying to sound arrogant, just pointing out that drinking from the firehose is startlingly difficult if you've never done it before. I guess it could also be that I entered regional training 20 years after getting those fancy degrees, so I suppose my brain was a bit mushy...

(It probably didn't help that apparently I took Systems wayyyyy too seriously since I got 100 on the test and found the test to be a breeze. But halfway through the class I thought I was going to flunk out. They train you to a much higher standard than they actually test you. Wish I'd known that!)

Most of the regional training programs were originally designed for 250 hour FO's to be successful. In most cases, the training programs are the same. In theory, any 1500 hour pilot should have no issue in training.

The biggest difference between success and failure has been instrument flying. Those that have had a good amount of instrument flying tend to be very successful. Those that go to 141 schools that do not allow flying in actual IMC are not as likely to do well. Same goes with the private pilot that will never fly in actual IFR.

The requirements of 10 years ago are long gone. The new AQP ride is much more lenient and therefore the training leading up to it is more forgiving. The old checkride was about a 45-60 min ride where you had to nail it. No retraining or do overs. Now with most AQP programs you are able to redo two items once or one item twice with no "teaching" in between. The sim events leading up to the checkride used to be much less forgiving because the instructors knew that the standards were so tight at the checkride. Upgrade type rides at my old company had a 30-40% pass rate before AQP and before all FO's were required to have an ATP.

Systems has also gone from overkill, gee whiz knowledge to "what can I manipulate in the cockpit" in those same ten years. I know what bus bar powers it but does it actually help me when I am rifling through a QRH anyway?

People saying that training isn't that hard is pretty incredible because it used to be a world of suck. I have seen more than a few grown men brought to tears from the older programs. Your initial training will be pretty straightforward if you relax and listen to your instructors. Fast and dirty way to do well: Study what they say, forget your last airplane/company and don't compare procedures, eat/sleep/workout to stay healthy, and look over whatever you are doing the next day the night prior. A good attitude and a little book work is all that is needed now.

In addition to the above, minimize all outside distractions from home or elsewhere. You'll be mumbling callouts in your sleep. That's when you know you're immersed in it. Like another poster wrote above, I, too, have a master's degree but I am older and the memorization ability faded over the years so it took more effort. I found initial training to be less focused on airmanship and more emphasis placed on rote memorization. If you can memorize well, training will be easier. IOE, however, will require more airmanship and less memorization as you're operating in live theater as a required crewmember. Plus, you have to land the real airplane. :D

in the two companies I have worked for the guys who struggle the most are the ones who have their ratings and then take a desk job doing whatever for 20 years and decide to "give the airline thing a shot" later in life when they're over 45. Those guys and the guys who do single pilot vfr type flying. It just ends up being to fast of a training environment for them. But to answer the question id still say the average washout raw is probably 10-15 percent. Whether it be can't handle it or just the guys who get all the way though ground school and then decide they don't like it. I've done it with AQP and non AQP type training. I'll agree AQP is a lot more lenient and don't have to know all the mind boggling numbers and limitations that don't apply to a pilot much. The days of engineering the airplane are over.

When I went through upgrade at SkyWest, a year and a half ago they showed us data that indicated more new hires were washing out.

They attributed that to not being able to be as selective about who they hire.

There are no official quotas, but I know of one 121 outfit which recently came under pressure from their CMO due to very high pass rate on AQP recurrent. Naturally recurrent got harder after that.

ask question
 

Not every training program is the same. The program at Envoy (and I think Endevor as well) is set... If you arent ready for your checkride by the end of the program, you are not recommended. Other airlines (Skywest and Expressjet) will continue to work with you as long as you are making progress. It's not a level playing field out there.:(

This is wrong, about Endeavor at least. I know plenty of people given extraordinary amounts of extra sims and patience to get through.

There are a lot more training failures now but mostly attributed to the airlines being less selective. Let's say half of those interviewed years ago got a job, today prob 90% that are "qualified" get the job.

Biggest issue is this, attitude! You do your part and put in your time you'll be fine. Being an airline pilot is not a "participation trophy"

I know envoy will give extra sim time. But it's a 3 strike policy. So if you failed the systems test and the oral.

You'd have to be 1) an idiot or 2) not be trying to fail the oral, which is also the systems test -- there is no written test. So for someone to have "two strikes" before sims would be awfully impressive.

This is untrue, unless something has changed with AQP recently. There is a "written" (I.E. multiple-choice) test at the end of ground school.

Attitude counts a lot. We lost a guy who failed two validation events, but acted like it wasn't his fault. He was not given a third chance.

The test is the KV that you take open book at home. 80% to pass.