PDT News and Rumors

Subscribe
206  256  296  302  303  304  305  306  307  308  309  310  316  356  406  806 
Page 306 of 1123
Go to
Quote: 6 of 10 new hires washed out today, thanks to 2 exams written by a lawyer for lawyers, so i heard from one of them. Guess the training dept. still needs some work...

Quote: Buddy of mine just interviewed at PDT with 260 TT and 13 Multi!! And got offered the job! Scrapping the bottom of the barrel it seems ( if he gets through AQP)

Also, he was told that the company hasn't totally ruled the mesa 200's out. And are seeking Q400's
When you hire experience like this what do you expect?
Reply
Your exactly right. Its not the new guys fault. Why bring them in for training(2 months) to just send them home after all that work? Seems like a numbers game to me.
Reply
It's disgusting those because most of those people quit other jobs to go to PDT and now what? Trying to get a job nowadays is so tough!
Reply
Quote: When you hire experience like this what do you expect?
Piedmont has a history of hiring low timers, and getting them through the course. The training is difficult, but not impossible. It takes a dedicated low experience guy to make it all the way. Experience is necessary as well as valuable, but it has been proven all over the world that you can hire a guy with zero hour and train them to fly Airbus and Boeing. At the end of the day, it all depends on who you get. Some of them are ready to take such a challenge, because of good prior training and study habits, and others just need more time outside the 121 environment before they can do it. What I have to say is, all the low timers that made it through the piedmont training are outstanding pilots. Experience or no experience, that training is tough. I know for a fact that you can bring any mainline glass cockpit drivers into our sim, and it will take them a minimum of four sessions to get caught up with that thing. Most of them forgot how to enter a hold without the FMS.
Reply
Quote: Piedmont has a history of hiring low timers, and getting them through the course. The training is difficult, but not impossible. It takes a dedicated low experience guy to make it all the way. Experience is necessary as well as valuable, but it has been proven all over the world that you can hire a guy with zero hour and train them to fly Airbus and Boeing. At the end of the day, it all depends on who you get. Some of them are ready to take such a challenge, because of good prior training and study habits, and others just need more time outside the 121 environment before they can do it. What I have to say is, all the low timers that made it through the piedmont training are outstanding pilots. Experience or no experience, that training is tough. I know for a fact that you can bring any mainline glass cockpit drivers into our sim, and it will take them a minimum of four sessions to get caught up with that thing. Most of them forgot how to enter a hold without the FMS.
I was an IP and DE for PDT back in a day...... When I was there it took 2500/500 just for an interview. The dash isn't a hard aircraft to fly, in fact it is one of the easiest and most forgiving aircraft I have flown during my career. But when a company takes guys that have ZERO experience you can expect to have a low success rate.

The other part of the equation is what experience does someone with wet ink on a commercial ticket bring to the line? There is a lot more to being an airline pilot and good FO than just making it through training..... Having knowledge, judgement, and decision making skills are very prudent for the well being of the flight.

You are correct that in other parts of the world companies take zero timers and check them out in a transport jet. But (and heres a bid thing) the screening process and training is much different and extensive than what we do in the US. Here we pretty much do the minimum! I was just over in Tokyo last week and met a pilot that was from the USA and was working for ANA. His checkout was 9 months long for the 767 and he was already typed in the aircraft.

As for your statement about "knowing for a fact that you can bring any mainline glass cockpit drivers into our sim, and it will take them a minimum of four sessions to get caught up with that thing. Most of them forgot how to enter a hold without the FMS"....... Well this would undoubtedly be very accurate. But by the same regards taking someone who has been flying steam gauges for years and throw them into a glass aircraft and you have the same learning/re-learning curve. Both types of aircraft presentation systems and FMS require one to be proficient.
Reply
Quote: I was an IP and DE for PDT back in a day...... When I was there it took 2500/500 just for an interview. The dash isn't a hard aircraft to fly, in fact it is one of the easiest and most forgiving aircraft I have flown during my career. But when a company takes guys that have ZERO experience you can expect to have a low success rate.

The other part of the equation is what experience does someone with wet ink on a commercial ticket bring to the line? There is a lot more to being an airline pilot and good FO than just making it through training..... Having knowledge, judgement, and decision making skills are very prudent for the well being of the flight.

You are correct that in other parts of the world companies take zero timers and check them out in a transport jet. But (and heres a bid thing) the screening process and training is much different and extensive than what we do in the US. Here we pretty much do the minimum! I was just over in Tokyo last week and met a pilot that was from the USA and was working for ANA. His checkout was 9 months long for the 767 and he was already typed in the aircraft.

As for your statement about "knowing for a fact that you can bring any mainline glass cockpit drivers into our sim, and it will take them a minimum of four sessions to get caught up with that thing. Most of them forgot how to enter a hold without the FMS"....... Well this would undoubtedly be very accurate. But by the same regards taking someone who has been flying steam gauges for years and throw them into a glass aircraft and you have the same learning/re-learning curve. Both types of aircraft presentation systems and FMS require one to be proficient.
Hello NWA320pilot,

It's good to see an ex-piedmont guy currently flying for the majors checking on their old stomping ground. I agree with everything you said! The dash eight is an easy and forgiving airplane to fly, except it takes a good stick to truly master how to smooth land it with consistency.

The bad success rate with low timers is also due to our AQP training program. Under a regular 121 training, guys can manage and keep up. Now you bring a zero experience guy, with an AQP program that is designed for guys with prior 121 or 135 experiences, you obtain a disaster. Piedmont knows they have to restructure their training with the level of experience they bring, but it means spend more money, and when more money is involved, it's a no go. They do however give new hires extra sim slots, but management usually pressure them on the issue, because the more sim time you use, the more it costs the company. I wish our training was more extensive like the other parts of the world for low timers, these guys all get type rated from the get go, with the frozen ATP until they build the remaining hours to get their full ATP. But in the US it means over qualifying the FO, because they can't pay you cheap for a while due to the fact you can get a better paying job overseas.
Reply
Is AQP basically computer based training?
Reply
Quote: Hello NWA320pilot,

It's good to see an ex-piedmont guy currently flying for the majors checking on their old stomping ground. I agree with everything you said! The dash eight is an easy and forgiving airplane to fly, except it takes a good stick to truly master how to smooth land it with consistency.

The bad success rate with low timers is also due to our AQP training program. Under a regular 121 training, guys can manage and keep up. Now you bring a zero experience guy, with an AQP program that is designed for guys with prior 121 or 135 experiences, you obtain a disaster. Piedmont knows they have to restructure their training with the level of experience they bring, but it means spend more money, and when more money is involved, it's a no go. They do however give new hires extra sim slots, but management usually pressure them on the issue, because the more sim time you use, the more it costs the company. I wish our training was more extensive like the other parts of the world for low timers, these guys all get type rated from the get go, with the frozen ATP until they build the remaining hours to get their full ATP. But in the US it means over qualifying the FO, because they can't pay you cheap for a while due to the fact you can get a better paying job overseas.
I have to agree that the AQP assumes you have a grasp of basic turbine aircraft systems, insofar as "what is a TRU, outflow valve, inverter, etc". Other than that, AQP is easier than the other training I've been through, and more thorough to boot. I know there have been changes since I went through but the basics are still the same. 3 written test, one covering indoc, another limitations, and another systems. Failing one of those could be attributed to AQP.

Failing out of the sim isn't though. Sim training doesn't differ much from non-AQP training other than having easier checkrides with less to cover. Washing out of the sim comes from either insufficient basic instrument skills, a lack of preparedness, not being ready for airline training, or weak skills. It's to be expected given the company hires low timers who have spent much of their training in glass cockpits.

I know that the last time I went through CQ in '07 there were new hires with 20 plus sim sessions before being set to SOE or home. 27 was the highest I heard. I also heard from a good friend in the training dept the overall attitude of newhires was going in the toilet. I can see Keen babying a weak pilot with a good attitude through 20 plus sessions (I DID see it), but I can also see him sending home someone with an attitude after 8 sessions. Cooperate and graduate is always the rule.
Reply
I agree...JK is not a good person to have running the training department. As I was leaving in 03, he was drumming up his plight of CQ fail. Does he still wear that silly mood ring. You could see that thing from outer space.
Reply
Where are the new hires being based?
Reply
206  256  296  302  303  304  305  306  307  308  309  310  316  356  406  806 
Page 306 of 1123
Go to