Originally Posted by rickair7777

It's also 200 hours in turbine aircraft doing forms, etc. But once winged, they are not going to be flying airliners for a long time if ever...

You could make a very good civilian ab initio program modeled on the military program. Selective screening, unforgiving performance requirements, and training in turbine aircraft. But it would cost a lot, and the payout would have to be worth it to attract quality applicants... if you don't have that, then it's hard to be selective.

Originally Posted by pangolin

It’s one elephant but there’s another in the room. Why are AOA sensors failing so frequently on a new aircraft?

Originally Posted by sailingfun

The left AOA sensors on many aircraft take a beating from jetways and power cords. I rarely see a failure on the right side.

Originally Posted by dera

That sounds like a few European ab initio programs. The one I'm most familiar with does your multi commercial in a Phenom 100 and your upset recovery training in an Extra 300. And it's free for the candidate. And yes, they are very selective. In 2017, 4200 applied, they accept around 100.

Originally Posted by rickair7777

You could make a very good civilian ab initio program modeled on the military program.

Originally Posted by Diesel8

The following is a bit of opinion, and in no way meant to impugn the character of anyone. It is an observation.

Experience:

Things have changed dramatically in the last 10+ years in gaining flight experience.

4000 hours TT represented a lot more actual flying experience back in the old days than those 4000 hours mean today.

It used to be that you built your time instructing, flying cargo, charter, anything that you could do just to get to at least 1200 hours so that you could go to work for an IFR 135 operation, where you would build more experience. This was all done in aircraft that did not have a lot of automation. You actually flew the aircraft, as such building up a level of airmanship. The "commuters" as they were called were flying turboprops that had no autopilots at all.

So, what we have now is people with minimal flight experience getting into heavily automated jet aircraft. Building flight experience now is usually and nearly exclusively behind an autopilot. There is no bank of actual "flying" experience or development of airmanship. What you have now is not pilots, but system operators.

Everything is fine in this scenario until you have a breakdown of the "system" (aircraft automation). If you do not have the requisite skills to actually fly the aircraft, the results can be dramatic. The lack of that bank of knowledge, that real world flying experience can be a severe detriment in its own right. This is what we are seeing more and more of now.

It gives me deep concern.

Originally Posted by nfnsquared

First time I've seen anything seeming to confirm what the software update will entail, which is exactly what I would expect:



https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/...ells-as-extras

Such an easy fix, can't believe it wasn't incorporated from the start...

Originally Posted by pangolin

No memory items? There are certain emergencies that require immediate action. A take off abort has memory items. You are telling me you’ll pull a checklist for that?

Originally Posted by atpcliff

It WAS incorporated from the start, IF you paid EXTRA for the system to be connected to both of the AOAs. The base package only included one AOA to be connected to the MCAS.

Originally Posted by atpcliff

We don't have a checklist for a Rejected Takeoff. It is a flow. We also removed the After Landing Checklist, and changed it to a flow.

There are no memory checklist items (obviously, we have flows that are memorized). Engine Fire, Engine Failure, Rapid Decompression, Evac, Airspeed Disagree, Engine start problems, all of those checklists have no memory items.

We have 6 checklists which are considered critical. They are on the back of our Normal Checklist Card (for those aircraft without an Electronic Checklist). When the time is appropriate, we call for those checklists, and do the "Immediate Action Items" by following the Quick Reference Checklist. Then, we get out the QRH and complete the full checklist (minus the Immediate Action Items, which we have already accomplished), when it is appropriate.

Originally Posted by Adlerdriver

I really don't think you can. Can you make one better than some of the other ones out there using the methods you mention? - Sure. But in the end, it's still a program designed to put a zero hour candidate into an airline cockpit with minimal experience. A far different goal than building a military pilot who is then going to spend years perfecting his craft, with most actually flying and not monitoring an autopilot while performing missions significantly more complex than A to B without spilling the coffee.

I've said it before here. Once a pilot enters the 121 world, he's done developing core skills. An ab-initio graduate hasn't even begun to do that to any significant degree. He's learned some of them, but putting them to use and gaining real experience? - Not even close. And once he gets into a highly automated Airbus or Boeing, it won't happen.