PSA help

That was recently posted online at : Getting Ready For Airline Training? Here Are 3 Areas Where New Hires Struggle. | Boldmethod

This article quotes pilots and hiring managers for 3 of the major regional airlines and what they are looking for in new pilots. It also give some keys to being successful in training.

From what I have experienced, this article is very well written and any new hire or pilot going for an interview would do well to read this.

Since so many new pilots come to this thread to get information on a daily basis, I thought that this was a great place to put it.

======================================

Higher compensation, fast upgrades, and increasing benefits have made it possible for many people to switch careers and become airline pilots, even as late as 50 or 60 years old. Despite all of the opportunities, regional airlines are noticing areas where some of their new hires are struggling.

We spoke to Brooks Butler, Chief Pilot of PSA Airlines, Eric Graser, pilot and recruiter at ExpressJet Airlines, and Taylor Hinckley, pilot and recruiter at Envoy Airlines to find out more. Here are 3 of the biggest reasons why new hires are having a hard time with training.

1) New Hires Are Struggling With Instrument Procedures
Yes, you still do DME arcs in a CRJ.

The single biggest problem every airline mentioned was a lack of instrument procedure knowledge in many new hires. One of the airlines mentioned that they hadn't seen a 100% on their multiple choice ATP test in months. Missed questions usually dealt with simple instrument approaches and holding. That said, at one particular airline, the test essentially hasn't changed in years. The question bank is the same, and many forums and gouges hold thorough reviews of the test questions.

Their advice: study, and use the online test gouge. There's nothing wrong with it. In fact, many airlines recommend it. They want you to pass.

During the technical portion of their interviews, prospective pilots are missing basic instrument questions, like these:

You're going missed on the approach and fly to the published holding fix. What kind of entry should you expect to fly?

You've been told to continue the approach. Can you follow the descent profile of the approach?

If you're cleared for the approach, are you cleared straight-in or for the procedure turn?

You're cleared to climb via the SID. How high should you climb?

Questions like these should be easy to answer. Don't walk in unprepared just because you think they're desperate for pilots. Each of the airlines we spoke to had turned away pilots for those very reasons. In extreme cases, they've even turned away regional pilots from other airlines. In one case, the pilot struggled to describe how to fly a localizer-only approach.

2) Jeppesen Charts
Most students and instructors use FAA instrument charts. But the airlines use Jeppesen charts. This is consistent problem for new hires coming into the airlines. While the front of the charts are similar, notes and other information found on Jeppesen airport pages are a common point of confusion. The solution? Study the Jeppesen chart glossary and legend. It's a free, simple way to get ready to read Jepp charts for your interview, and your training.

3) Getting Used To A Standardized Training Program
For students leaving Part 141 training environments, this isn't usually an issue. They've been taught in structured training environments, often similar to what's expected at airlines. Where airlines find problems is with pilots leaving smaller operations, many of whom haven't been in a formal training environment before. If you think you might be in this spot, try taking an instrument refresher course, or an ATP preparation course taught by a reputable Part 141 training school nearby.

Even if it's not information you think you need to learn, just getting your head back into the classroom is a great first step before drinking the firehose of airline training.

Airlines Don't Have The Time (Or Money) To Teach Instrument Flying
The lack of instrument knowledge is far reaching and concerning for a few reasons. First, if you don't adequately know instrument procedures before stepping into the regional jet simulator, how do you expect to re-learn instrument flying AND learn a new, complex, fast jet at the same time? It just isn't possible for most pilots.

Second, if you're not passing your simulator flights on time, you create a backlog of training for everyone behind you. Simulators at regional airlines are almost always booked, so even a few added lessons creates big problems. Finally, not knowing your instrument procedures is a great way to set yourself up for a failed Part 121 Checkride. We'll dive into why that's so important later.

DO NOT Fail Your Part 121 Checkrides
So why is all of this so important? In today's market, regional airlines are going to try their hardest to help you pass training. But if you're not performing to standards, you're setting yourself up for a failed Part 121 Checkride. And that's a pretty big deal.

Whether it's an initial checkride, a captain upgrade, or even a recurrent 121 checkride, you'll have a much tougher time moving from a regional airline to a major airline with Part 121 training failures. Major airlines will look at your application and ask, "Why are we going to spend tens of thousands of dollars on a pilot who's had a history of Part 121 training failures, instead of any other candidate?" Take this seriously and study hard. A lack of preparation heading into your first regional airline job could cause serious problems down the road.

How To Be Instrument Prepared, Prior To Airline Training
The saying "if you don't use it, you lose it" couldn't be more accurate, especially for instrument flying. You need to maintain and continuous, conscious effort to keep your instrument flying skills fresh. This might mean flying with a CFII or doing an IPC ride to test your knowledge. Continue studying your charts, procedures, and regulations. Work on perfecting your instrument scan pattern in the airplane. It's one of the best ways to stay proficient before heading to an airline.

Above all else, remember that training at your first airline is supposed to be about learning the airplane and company procedures, not how to fly IFR.

Bravix

Alright, lemme give em' a shot.

You're going missed on the approach and fly to the published holding fix. What kind of entry should you expect to fly?

Depends??? Is there supposed to be a chart accompanying this? Unless there's some standard that I don't know of, it'd depend on the missed approach.

You've been told to continue the approach. Can you follow the descent profile of the approach?

Who's saying this? Center or tower? If tower, you aren't cleared to land yet, but can continue following the descent profile down to DA/MDA and should expect to hear a clearance to land before then. I haven't personally heard center use this terminology. But I'd assume it'd be similar, just aren't cleared past the FAF.

If you're cleared for the approach, are you cleared straight-in or for the procedure turn?

Vague question, depends? If there's a hold in lieu, you aren't being vectored-to-final, and aren't coming from a transition with NoPT, then you have to do the procedure turn (or request a straight-in if you haven't already).

You're cleared to climb via the SID. How high should you climb?

The top altitude or clearance altitude, so long as the clearance is above the minimum of course (can't imagine why it wouldn't be).

HeyOneTaco

I'm guessing these questions are associated with an approach plate. If not, the interviewer is an idiot, and I'd miss the questions because I'd walk out of the interview

NMuir

And herein lies one big problem with the idiotic 1500 hour rule... pilots are no longer fresh on their book knowledge by the time they get to 121 world. This costs the airlines money.

2StgTurbine

That is not true. When I started at the airlines, they could still hire low time pilots and some struggled with instrument procedures too. Over the years, I have determined that there are two types of pilots.

One type retains most of what they learn as the gain experience and understand why the information and skills are important. These pilots never have any major issues in training. They don't need to study instrument procedures before their first 121 job because they have spent years actually performing or teaching these procedures.

The other type crams for the test and then dump everything after the checkride. They get nervous about BFRs and interview sim evaluations. They struggle with their first airline training. V1 cuts are harder for them because they dumped the basic aerodynamics information they learned for their private pilot certificate. They are confused during IOE when the check airman criticizes them for going above 200 KIAS in class D airspace because they forgot that once they passed their written.

Going to an airline too early prevents you from valuing the fundamentals that got you your first 250 hours and from developing as a pilot. Some made it, but a lot have huge gaps in their aviation experience that shows on the line. Many of the weakest pilots I have worked with got a job in a jet shortly after their commercial checkride. If they had to build time to 1500 hours, they might have either learned that the stuff the learned for the first 250 hours applies to every flight or they would have washed out of the industry before they got to a jet.

I bet you the few struggling through their first 121 training event these days are the same ones that come on APC and post about how dumb it is that they have to get 1500 hours. They will post threads saying instructing isn't for them and want others to tell them what else they can do to get the time. They might log lots of "safety" pilot time or do extra long runups. Pilots with that kind of attitude wouldn't be any better at 250 hours, so I wouldn't use this article as proof that 1500 hour pilots are worse than 250 hour pilots.

HighFlight

Don't even try to use that excuse. A pilot not staying fresh on their knowledge and skills is a personal failure, not one you get to blame on the industry.

NMuir

Ask any airline training department and they will tell you that the 1500 hour rule has caused an erosion of knowledge out of flight school. If you don't use it, you lose it. That's just human nature and an unintended consequence of government meddling.


Of course, but this is more of a problem now because of the time gap.


Right, because banner towing, aerial survey, sight seeing, etc all rely heavily on IFR flying?

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/false-cause

PSA help

I think that the point is, you should not be losing it because you should be using it.

Proficient pilots practice their skills often. If you are not flying approaches often, you will lose it. If you do not study often, you will lose it.

You must practice and study.

The point of the 1500 hour rule is so we have proficient AND experienced pilots. It is your job to stay proficient.

I would argue that a bigger problem right now is the kids coming out of flight school and having never flown actual IMC. There are 1500 hour flight instructors that have never been in a cloud. You are hurting yourself if you get to 1500 hours without a good amount of experience. If all you have done is tow banners or instructed private pilots in a 172, then you are missing the point of the rule.

A professional pilot does not lose his or her skills.

2StgTurbine

Then they shouldn't hire people who have only done banner towing, sight seeing, or local aerial surveying. Most pilots don't build time this way. Most still instruct.

2StgTurbine

Do you work in a training department? I have actually been involved with training in both piston and turbine aircraft. I have personally had to teach pilots who got hired at 250 hours and pilots who spent a couple of years building some experience before getting in a jet. I was able to fly at the airlines BEFORE the 1500 rule and after. Some of my first captains were former 250 hour FOs and it showed.

If you are a check airman or sim instructor who has experience teaching 250 hour pilots and 1500 hour pilots and have flown with former 250 hour pilots, please provide some specific examples. If not, then you sound like some angry kid with SJS who is mad at the world that they had to fly a 172 for 1500 hours.

Also, I wouldn't trust what a regional has to say about the 1500 hour rule because they have a biased view of it.