Spirit Training
01-01-2018, 11:22 AM
#11
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2016
Position: A320 CA
Posts: 707
So is it possible that Scaring Away Potential Applicants is the new, company baited Job Action, and we are once again falling into their trap?
I mean, they don't *really* want to reach a deal this week, they're just demonstrating good faith until they can hit us with another justifiable stall. There's been a lot of this recently, especially by first time posters like this.
I say be careful.
And now I'll remove my tin foil hat.
I mean, they don't *really* want to reach a deal this week, they're just demonstrating good faith until they can hit us with another justifiable stall. There's been a lot of this recently, especially by first time posters like this.
I say be careful.
And now I'll remove my tin foil hat.
01-01-2018, 02:23 PM
#12
Line Holder
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Dec 2017
Posts: 42
Originally Posted by Ed Force One
So is it possible that Scaring Away Potential Applicants is the new, company baited Job Action, and we are once again falling into their trap?
I mean, they don't *really* want to reach a deal this week, they're just demonstrating good faith until they can hit us with another justifiable stall. There's been a lot of this recently, especially by first time posters like this.
I say be careful.
And now I'll remove my tin foil hat.
I mean, they don't *really* want to reach a deal this week, they're just demonstrating good faith until they can hit us with another justifiable stall. There's been a lot of this recently, especially by first time posters like this.
I say be careful.
And now I'll remove my tin foil hat.
01-01-2018, 03:26 PM
#13
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2016
Posts: 612
Originally Posted by Kiwikid
I noticed you went from 1900, 145, then 320 airframes how did you find the transition? I’m a metro driver just trying to get well rounded replies to make an educated decision. Thanks
01-01-2018, 03:58 PM
#14
Line Holder
Joined APC: Apr 2005
Posts: 83
Originally Posted by AllOva736
Plenty of people came here from 135 and made it through and plenty of people have come here from 121 and failed. It's not a good training program and it's much tougher than it should be. There is no cut and dry reason people succeed here other than being very prepared on day 1.
01-01-2018, 04:11 PM
#15
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2016
Position: A320 CA
Posts: 707
Personally, there were certain difficulties in all of them. (I have a 737-200 type as well.) An airplane is an airplane, but going from Cessnas and Pipers to a 1900 was difficult because it was my first systems intensive airplane and they expected us to be able to build one.
Going from 1900 - E145, the glass and automation took some getting used to, but the information is still the same. (This is where you will slot in, coming from a Metro.) Mostly it was difficult because my sims were at 2:30AM.
The 737-200 was very primitive, but even though it was a shotgun cockpit, as opposed to the glass of the 145, you almost forget about it as soon as you start flying. I told myself, "I did it on the Beech, I can do it here."
The A320's difficulties (for me) were because while the cockpit is very similar to the E145, it's automation worked kinda opposite of the E145. I'd been on the E145 so long that it was hard to just memory dump it. Not having to un-learn an old automation philosophy, you might be at an advantage, but it could be the most difficult part of learning an Airbus, I don't know. Training for me was fine, but putting the new methods to work on the line, combined with lack of tactile feedback from the flight controls in landing, was where I struggled.
Going from 1900 - E145, the glass and automation took some getting used to, but the information is still the same. (This is where you will slot in, coming from a Metro.) Mostly it was difficult because my sims were at 2:30AM.
The 737-200 was very primitive, but even though it was a shotgun cockpit, as opposed to the glass of the 145, you almost forget about it as soon as you start flying. I told myself, "I did it on the Beech, I can do it here."
The A320's difficulties (for me) were because while the cockpit is very similar to the E145, it's automation worked kinda opposite of the E145. I'd been on the E145 so long that it was hard to just memory dump it. Not having to un-learn an old automation philosophy, you might be at an advantage, but it could be the most difficult part of learning an Airbus, I don't know. Training for me was fine, but putting the new methods to work on the line, combined with lack of tactile feedback from the flight controls in landing, was where I struggled.
01-01-2018, 05:35 PM
#16
Line Holder
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Dec 2017
Posts: 42
Originally Posted by Ed Force One
Personally, there were certain difficulties in all of them. (I have a 737-200 type as well.) An airplane is an airplane, but going from Cessnas and Pipers to a 1900 was difficult because it was my first systems intensive airplane and they expected us to be able to build one.
Going from 1900 - E145, the glass and automation took some getting used to, but the information is still the same. (This is where you will slot in, coming from a Metro.) Mostly it was difficult because my sims were at 2:30AM.
The 737-200 was very primitive, but even though it was a shotgun cockpit, as opposed to the glass of the 145, you almost forget about it as soon as you start flying. I told myself, "I did it on the Beech, I can do it here."
The A320's difficulties (for me) were because while the cockpit is very similar to the E145, it's automation worked kinda opposite of the E145. I'd been on the E145 so long that it was hard to just memory dump it. Not having to un-learn an old automation philosophy, you might be at an advantage, but it could be the most difficult part of learning an Airbus, I don't know. Training for me was fine, but putting the new methods to work on the line, combined with lack of tactile feedback from the flight controls in landing, was where I struggled.
Going from 1900 - E145, the glass and automation took some getting used to, but the information is still the same. (This is where you will slot in, coming from a Metro.) Mostly it was difficult because my sims were at 2:30AM.
The 737-200 was very primitive, but even though it was a shotgun cockpit, as opposed to the glass of the 145, you almost forget about it as soon as you start flying. I told myself, "I did it on the Beech, I can do it here."
The A320's difficulties (for me) were because while the cockpit is very similar to the E145, it's automation worked kinda opposite of the E145. I'd been on the E145 so long that it was hard to just memory dump it. Not having to un-learn an old automation philosophy, you might be at an advantage, but it could be the most difficult part of learning an Airbus, I don't know. Training for me was fine, but putting the new methods to work on the line, combined with lack of tactile feedback from the flight controls in landing, was where I struggled.
01-02-2018, 10:07 AM
#17
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Posts: 27
If you live in South Florida contact AeroStar, I believe they will let you observe an A320 sim training session for a few hundred $. Or if your company has a jumpseat capability, try and catch a ride on one.
Might be worth it, but as a previous poster suggested. Go to a regional especially one with E170/175's. I transitioned from C172 G1000 to Caravan G1000 to Embraer E175. I've jumpseated on older A320's and looks like my E175 FO job easier.
Might be worth it, but as a previous poster suggested. Go to a regional especially one with E170/175's. I transitioned from C172 G1000 to Caravan G1000 to Embraer E175. I've jumpseated on older A320's and looks like my E175 FO job easier.
01-02-2018, 11:41 AM
#19
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2017
Posts: 270
Originally Posted by brooklynboys
I know the E170/175 was mention as some what similar experiences..
What about guys with CRJ 200 experiences flying 121.
Does that translate to flying airbus at all?
What about guys with CRJ 200 experiences flying 121.
Does that translate to flying airbus at all?
01-02-2018, 06:55 PM
#20
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2017
Position: Discount Pilot
Posts: 183
Originally Posted by Kiwikid
I noticed you went from 1900, 145, then 320 airframes how did you find the transition? I’m a metro driver just trying to get well rounded replies to make an educated decision. Thanks
1900 to CRJ wasn't very difficult at all, much easier than I had expected. CRJ to Airbii was a lot less enjoyable and much worse than I had expected.
My 1900 to CRJ training program was top notch. My CRJ to A320 Powerpoint presentation was Spirit.
Go to a regional.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
