Ethiopian 737 MAX 8 crash
#351
How are “SAT” scores relevant in Europe?
Cheaper, no way.
Have you seen the selection process for European major airlines? It’s a multi day event with multiple psych evals, aptitude tests, interview panels, crm excercises etc. Chances of getting in with a fresh fATPL outside their ab initio programs are slim.
And in many cases, the airline pays for your training. Cheaper, heck no.
It’s a different training philosophy, most of the safest airlines in the world use it, so clearly it is working.
Cheaper, no way.
Have you seen the selection process for European major airlines? It’s a multi day event with multiple psych evals, aptitude tests, interview panels, crm excercises etc. Chances of getting in with a fresh fATPL outside their ab initio programs are slim.
And in many cases, the airline pays for your training. Cheaper, heck no.
It’s a different training philosophy, most of the safest airlines in the world use it, so clearly it is working.
The safest airlines in the world are in the US with very few exceptions.
The best system would be to take experienced GA pilots and train them through the elaborate foriegn model. But that costs even more money. If the choice is between experienced pilots or pilots who can draw circuit diagrams of their avionics and teach graduate-level meteorology theory, I'll take the experience.
#352
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2018
Posts: 579
I suppose it would depend on the contract structure, and I am not EU pilot CBA expert...but lowering the amount of time a pilot spends on your list (delaying the entry to the tables), limits lifelong cost. Hiring young pilots who will be on the list for 40 years would be more expensive over their career than hiring middle aged pilots to be on the list for 20.
#353
In a land of unicorns
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Position: Whale FO
Posts: 6,406
What they do is cheaper than paying for their pilots to accumulate real airplane time in general aviation. Or paying to attract experienced pilots from other parts of the world.
The safest airlines in the world are in the US with very few exceptions.
The best system would be to take experienced GA pilots and train them through the elaborate foriegn model. But that costs even more money. If the choice is between experienced pilots or pilots who can draw circuit diagrams of their avionics and teach graduate-level meteorology theory, I'll take the experience.
The safest airlines in the world are in the US with very few exceptions.
The best system would be to take experienced GA pilots and train them through the elaborate foriegn model. But that costs even more money. If the choice is between experienced pilots or pilots who can draw circuit diagrams of their avionics and teach graduate-level meteorology theory, I'll take the experience.
Not sure where you get your stats from. Top 20 safest airlines are all foreign, apart from a few US exceptions.
#354
And I’ll take the pilot who was trained in an airline environment since the first hr, has 100+ hours of turbine time, usually over 100 hours of multi time, over the 1000 hour 172 CFI guy with 5 checkride busts who was never vetted for ability nor aptitude.
Not sure where you get your stats from. Top 20 safest airlines are all foreign, apart from a few US exceptions.
Not sure where you get your stats from. Top 20 safest airlines are all foreign, apart from a few US exceptions.
Actually here's some foriegn media reporting which "proves" your point... of course they are gleefully and blatantly lying with grossly misrepresented statistics since their data is total accidents, NOT normalized for the actual number of flight hours or departures. Who would have thought that mexico was so much safer than the US
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-a6718281.html
This document provides a more holistic tally of airline safety, considering not just raw accident data, but data adjusted for the actual amount of activity as well as compliance. Pages 22-26. This data is representative of what I have observed by following this sort of stuff for about the last 20 years.
http://www.skybrary.aero/bookshelf/books/3297.pdf
#355
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2018
Posts: 165
I can't fathom how any experienced, competent pilot would see any undesired trim movement, especially with the A/P off, and not immediately think "runaway trim," continuous or not.
Apparently, a jumpseater on Lion Air was able to figure it out, but the crew the next day was completely clueless.
#356
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: B-737NG preferably in first class with a glass of champagne and caviar
Posts: 5,886
I suppose it would depend on the contract structure, and I am not EU pilot CBA expert...but lowering the amount of time a pilot spends on your list (delaying the entry to the tables), limits lifelong cost. Hiring young pilots who will be on the list for 40 years would be more expensive over their career than hiring middle aged pilots to be on the list for 20.
Some new entrants to other carriers may start at the equivalent of a regional, then matriculating to their mainline carrier while retaining their seniority from date of hire.
Overall cheaper in the long run. Company training is complete... essentially same company SOPs throughout the various fleets too. Training limited to new aircraft types.
Disciplines of pilots outside the US are far different. Essentially training continues, usually wihtout a break from day one through the issuance of their Frozen ATPL and beyond during line training, which is based on a minimum number of sectors versus the usual 25 hours in the US.
It’s not a question of whose better, but rather culture outside the U.S.
Last edited by captjns; 03-21-2019 at 11:36 AM.
#357
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2018
Posts: 579
Unlike the US, for example, a Dutch pilot joining KLM at an early age will be a lifer, versus US pilot going from airline to airline to airline.
Some new entrants to other carriers may start at the equivalent of a regional, then matriculating to their mainline carrier while retaining their seniority from date of hire.
Overall cheaper in the long run. Company training is complete... essentially same company SOPs throughout the various fleets too. Training limited to new aircraft types.
Disciplines of pilots outside the US are far different. Essentially training continues, usually wihtout a break from day one through the issuance of their Frozen ATPL and beyond during line training, which is based on a minimum number of sectors versus the usual 25 hours in the US.
Some new entrants to other carriers may start at the equivalent of a regional, then matriculating to their mainline carrier while retaining their seniority from date of hire.
Overall cheaper in the long run. Company training is complete... essentially same company SOPs throughout the various fleets too. Training limited to new aircraft types.
Disciplines of pilots outside the US are far different. Essentially training continues, usually wihtout a break from day one through the issuance of their Frozen ATPL and beyond during line training, which is based on a minimum number of sectors versus the usual 25 hours in the US.
#358
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: B-737NG preferably in first class with a glass of champagne and caviar
Posts: 5,886
So how is it cheaper? Looking for your insight because you clearly know more about European Ops than I do. If you can keep a bulk of your list on the lower end of the scales (US style) versus lifers residing in the top end of the scales (EU style) intuitively I would think that the EU style would be more expensive. Are the scales more elongated with lower starting wages and smaller steps? That would definitely change my assumption.
I guess you’re a team player wanting to save. Your airline money... Go ahead... move from your airline, mid seniority range, to another at the bottom of the heap. Guess I’m not savvy to your U.S. airline pilot way of thinking.
#359
In a land of unicorns
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Position: Whale FO
Posts: 6,406
We'll have to disagree on that (I hope you're not in North America, or fly here much).
Actually here's some foriegn media reporting which "proves" your point... of course they are gleefully and blatantly lying with grossly misrepresented statistics since their data is total accidents, NOT normalized for the actual number of flight hours or departures. Who would have thought that mexico was so much safer than the US
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-a6718281.html
This document provides a more holistic tally of airline safety, considering not just raw accident data, but data adjusted for the actual amount of activity as well as compliance. Pages 22-26. This data is representative of what I have observed by following this sort of stuff for about the last 20 years.
http://www.skybrary.aero/bookshelf/books/3297.pdf
Actually here's some foriegn media reporting which "proves" your point... of course they are gleefully and blatantly lying with grossly misrepresented statistics since their data is total accidents, NOT normalized for the actual number of flight hours or departures. Who would have thought that mexico was so much safer than the US
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-a6718281.html
This document provides a more holistic tally of airline safety, considering not just raw accident data, but data adjusted for the actual amount of activity as well as compliance. Pages 22-26. This data is representative of what I have observed by following this sort of stuff for about the last 20 years.
http://www.skybrary.aero/bookshelf/books/3297.pdf
A more holistic tally? You’re kidding, right?
That’s one year of statistics, and it bundles half of Russia and all of the old Soviet bloc countries into Europe.
Also, if you would add some Part 91 flying in the mix, stats would look different. A lot of Part 91 or 91k is considered CAT under EASA.
Now, if you look at page 26 you’ll see in 2013 per million sectors, US has over twice the hull loss rate compared to Europe. If we carve out Western Europe, things would look even more different.
One single event will skew these results because they are so rare.
The point I’m trying to make is, that both training philosophies can produce results that are equally safe. The big issue in the US right now is, that people will find bottom feeders who will hire and train anyone, no matter if they really belong in the cockpit or not, as long as they have enough pencil whipped hours in their logbook.
#360
In a land of unicorns
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Position: Whale FO
Posts: 6,406
So how is it cheaper? Looking for your insight because you clearly know more about European Ops than I do. If you can keep a bulk of your list on the lower end of the scales (US style) versus lifers residing in the top end of the scales (EU style) intuitively I would think that the EU style would be more expensive. Are the scales more elongated with lower starting wages and smaller steps? That would definitely change my assumption.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post