Advanced Airline Training Program

[Aviator_Bakeek]

Just curious to find out who here went through the Advanced Airline Training Program and did or did not get the job. Also would like to know how many hours you had when you went and if you had a degree or were working on it.
Thanks!

[DE727UPS]

PM Badco99

[launchpad]

and also do a search for "direct track"...same program.....lots of debate on here about that....

[Aviator_Bakeek]

Yes, lots of debate. I think personally there are too many people worrying about hours and pilot competency rather than remembering the captain in the left seat isnt going to be making the mistakes the "250 TT F/O" may or may not make. I think of it like this, many of us learned how to fly for the first time and know everything for our Private checkride in give or take 6 weeks. Why cant you learn to fly a ERJ in 6 weeks? The last time I checked, the regionals still fly airplanes. Yes, you are transporting people and have much responsibility for a low time pilot, but I dont see anyone else getting the experience of flying into DFW or ORD with their 172's (where I believe is the most crucial time to be on top of your stuff considering others around you are expecting you to know what your doing). The regionals are a learning process, hence the smaller aircraft and usually service to smaller airports (a stepping stone to the bigger airplanes). Personally, if I am going to spend $25k or however much these programs are, I am going to be paying attention knowing one way or another my @$$ is on the line.

Everyone has their own opinions on what they think is best, I just want to know who went through this direct track program and their credentials when given a COE.

[Cav]

Originally Posted by Aviator_Bakeek

Yes, lots of debate. I think personally there are too many people worrying about hours and pilot competency rather than remembering the captain in the left seat isnt going to be making the mistakes the "250 TT F/O" may or may not make. I think of it like this, many of us learned how to fly for the first time and know everything for our Private checkride in give or take 6 weeks. Why cant you learn to fly a ERJ in 6 weeks? The last time I checked, the regionals still fly airplanes. Yes, you are transporting people and have much responsibility for a low time pilot, but I dont see anyone else getting the experience of flying into DFW or ORD with their 172's (where I believe is the most crucial time to be on top of your stuff considering others around you are expecting you to know what your doing). The regionals are a learning process, hence the smaller aircraft and usually service to smaller airports (a stepping stone to the bigger airplanes). Personally, if I am going to spend $25k or however much these programs are, I am going to be paying attention knowing one way or another my @$$ is on the line.

Everyone has their own opinions on what they think is best, I just want to know who went through this direct track program and their credentials when given a COE.

Wow, you've got it all figured out don't you? Perhaps you are forgeting the value of experience. Personally I feel that as an FO you have a job to do from day one of flying the line. That job is to assist the captain not add to his/her workload. At the very least the passengers deserve TWO qualified crew members. From "qualified" I don't mean someone who has had all the right boxes checked by a sim instructor on a lesson plan. I mean a well rounded pilot.

[Aviator_Bakeek]

Originally Posted by Cav

Wow, you've got it all figured out don't you? Perhaps you are forgeting the value of experience. Personally I feel that as an FO you have a job to do from day one of flying the line. That job is to assist the captain not add to his/her workload. At the very least the passengers deserve TWO qualified crew members. From "qualified" I don't mean someone who has had all the right boxes checked by a sim instructor on a lesson plan. I mean a well rounded pilot.

Thanks for your opinion. Perhaps I do have it all figured out, but then again, if I did, I probably wouldnt be here. What you believe is "qualified" and what the regionals (and dont forget their insurace company) believe is "qualified" are different. There are also standards that the company has for chosing and KEEPING their pilots. If a pilot with the minimum times and proper training can hold to that company's standards, then he is proven himself just as competent to be in that seat as the next guy.

How many hours of experience do you think is necessary to become a F/O?

[Spbeyond]

HAHAHA! This is going to turn into everyone attackBakeek

Bakeek do you work in the industry? On what do you base your claims that a PPL holder would be able to SAFELY operate a RJ in any condition or emergency in 6 weeks? The captain is not there to baby sit the FO. And what if the Captain become incapacitated? There is a reason mostly all the PILOTS on this site generaly agree that experience is the most important thing.

Now personally I am afraid of this guys mindset. This is not driving a bus. If you want to be a Pilot and not that guy that got fired for being an idiot, open your ears and listen to the guys who know what they are talking about.

Any airline that would hire a person 6 weeks off his PPL is crazy.

Now be patient and do it right you will be a better person and a safer pilot for it. Oh and get your 4 year degree. Just my 2 cents.

[Cav]

Originally Posted by Aviator_Bakeek

Thanks for your opinion. Perhaps I do have it all figured out, but then again, if I did, I probably wouldnt be here. What you believe is "qualified" and what the regionals (and dont forget their insurace company) believe is "qualified" are different. There are also standards that the company has for chosing and KEEPING their pilots. If a pilot with the minimum times and proper training can hold to that company's standards, then he is proven himself just as competent to be in that seat as the next guy.

How many hours of experience do you think is necessary to become a F/O?

Bakeek, first let me appologize. I really don't want to sound as though I'm attacking you. As a FSI grad now RJ FO, I see things very differently now than I did before. After completing the program at FSI (except the CFI class) I too wanted to believe that perhaps being a CFI was a waste of time and that I could do this job without the experience because who wants to sit in the right seat saying more right rudder while doing pattern work right? Well perhaps I was lucky or at the right place at the right time but I found a job that allowed me to do a lot of different kinds of instruction...private, multi, lots of IFR instruction, and comm students all at a small part 61 school where I flew no less than 90 hrs in one month and over 100 hrs in every month minus one. I enjoyed it a great deal despite having little to no social life and a small bank account. In fact I beat ALL of my classmates from FSI to the right seat of an RJ and even a few of my former instructors. Not a knock on FSI because I think it is a very good school I just believe it's not the only way.

With that being said, looking back I don't think I would be a well rounded pilot had I not had the experience I did. As a CFI I learned how to be in command of an aircraft. To not only be a proficient pilot but a leader in the cockpit. You don't get that experience from fast track programs. Undoubtedly there are some good pilots at regionals who took a different path. Flychicaga is one and a coworker who I have a tremendous amount of respect for. But I am a firm believer that this profession is a lot better off if we keep the minimum requirements to become a RJ FO higher than where they are now. I believe this from a safety standpoint and a career standpoint. This CAREER is better off in the long run if it remains a challenge to attain because as soon as it becomes easy or "fast tracked" we all lose. You have to be able to look at this as a long term investment in your future rather than a short term bandaid to reach your goals. Should someone be able to put a price tag on your job?

As for your argument regarding company standards being the criteria for "choosing and keeping" pilots as you put it, I would argue that just being able to pass a training course and get through initial training is a poor guage of a pilots ability to act as a qualified crew member. Sure they can be rigorous and challenging to complete but I would be willing to wager that I fall back on experience more than what I learned in the training center. Quite honestly the standards set by the company should be looked at as the bare minimum for qualification. They've already spent time and money on you therefore they have a vested interest in your success. It pains me to say it but there's a bit of a conflict of interest there and to say that some don't slip through the cracks is well untrue.

[DE727UPS]

"I think personally there are too many people worrying about hours and pilot competency"

Yeah. That's why I'm so old school. Back in the day, competency as a pilot was considered important. These new jets are so easy to fly, it just doesn't matter anymore.

"remembering the captain in the left seat isnt going to be making the mistakes the "250 TT F/O" may or may not make"

Funny you bring this up. I'm a new Capt and I've noticed how my F/O's, so far, do a few things better than I do. I'm still pretty conservative about configuring for landing, so I'll slow up a bit sooner. A sign you really know the airplane is when you can come screaming in on a visual, configure at the last minute, and still be on speed at 1000 AGL. I fly with F/O's that do this better than me. Also, my F/O's (so far) know how to interface with the FMC and the automation, better. I've been on the plane a couple of years and still have less than 500 hours in it. Some of these guys have been on it 8 years. It's just a matter of experience. No big deal. I can work the box well enough to get by and certainly I was blessed by the UPS/FAA to be a 757/767 Capt. It's just nice/fun seeing a really good F/O do magic with the FMC. Which brings me to my point...

300 hour F/O's don't belong in jets. A 300 hour F/O can be babysat/trained in the seat and eventually he'll be fine, but do we want to lower the bar in this career to that level? Personally, I see no point in it. A Capt has to instruct a new guy enough as it is. He shouldn't be put in the position of having to work with someone with so little experience/background. Yeah, the guy got through training, so what. Ground school/sim isn't real world and never will be. A 300 hour guy won't have the balls, or enough experience, to speak up when he should.

It's been nice the last few months flying with such sharp F/O's. I know someday it won't be so easy and I'll be imparting knowledge rather than recieving it. That's okay, it's part of the job. I just thing we need to draw the line higher rather than lower, like I've been seeing over the last 25 years.

"That job is to assist the captain not add to his/her workload. At the very least the passengers deserve TWO qualified crew members. From "qualified" I don't mean someone who has had all the right boxes checked by a sim instructor on a lesson plan. I mean a well rounded pilot"

CAV. You're post is soooooo right on. I'd add that Chicaga didn't go straight into an RJ and that he did work as a CFI. He was also an intern at the regional he went to. People will laugh but but I'm more concerned about what experience a new F/O brings to the cockpit. I think being an intern adds to that in a non-flying sorta way. I guess it depends on what you're doing.

[launchpad]

Originally Posted by Aviator_Bakeek

Yes, lots of debate. I think personally there are too many people worrying about hours and pilot competency rather than remembering the captain in the left seat isnt going to be making the mistakes the "250 TT F/O" may or may not make. I think of it like this, many of us learned how to fly for the first time and know everything for our Private checkride in give or take 6 weeks. Why cant you learn to fly a ERJ in 6 weeks? The last time I checked, the regionals still fly airplanes. Yes, you are transporting people and have much responsibility for a low time pilot, but I dont see anyone else getting the experience of flying into DFW or ORD with their 172's (where I believe is the most crucial time to be on top of your stuff considering others around you are expecting you to know what your doing). The regionals are a learning process, hence the smaller aircraft and usually service to smaller airports (a stepping stone to the bigger airplanes). Personally, if I am going to spend $25k or however much these programs are, I am going to be paying attention knowing one way or another my @$$ is on the line.

Everyone has their own opinions on what they think is best, I just want to know who went through this direct track program and their credentials when given a COE.

Tell you what....whatever your feelings, my feelings, or anyone's feelings on the direct track program are....PLEASE get your head out of the sand about the companies that associate themselves with the program. As far as I know, ASA is no longer in the program, TSA is just a plain sh***y company, Eagle will let you sit in the right seat for 8 years (but it's a decent company), and express jet's future is still unknown. Why in hell would anyone want to spend 25 large to work for companies like this. If I was going to pay 25 large, I would at least find a company that has good labor/management relations, a stable future, and decent company practices .... like Mesa....Go check out the MAPD program....


and just for the record, flying around 50 people is the last place you need to be "learning"...regionals are as much airline as any major. The responsibility is the same and the gravity of the job is the same......just because it's small doesn't mean you don't need experience to fly it.


and to answer your question, most of the people I saw go through the program came straight out of the CIME program at FSI, so they had around 200 or so hours before they started the direct track program. Quite a few didn't get hired, and even more still have been sitting in a pool waiting for a class date for the last 6 or more months. I saw a combination of people who had a degree, or were working on it. Most people were doing the online degree thing.

[Aviator_Bakeek]

Originally Posted by Spbeyond

Now personally I am afraid of this guys mindset. This is not driving a bus. If you want to be a Pilot and not that guy that got fired for being an idiot, open your ears and listen to the guys who know what they are talking about.

Thank you for your character judgement, I think after 2 posts you can really justify a statement about a persons mindset.

If these direct track programs are turning out such incapable pilots as it seems everyone seems to think, why do they continue interviewing direct track students that have made no commitment to the training for their airline? If the captains felt that their direct track F/O's were incapable of acting as PIC in an emergency or are "baby sitting", why has their not been changes in minimum time requirements by conveying those concerns to the administrators of the airlines?

I appreciate the input, thats why I ask. I hear both good and bad about the direct track programs, which is why I tend to defend it since I have yet heard anyone on JC back it up. I can say that I want to be the competent one in the right seat no matter which direction I go in the end.

I think we can all agree that their are different options to go from "point a" to "point b" when it comes to becoming a professional pilot.

[SteveC]

Originally Posted by Aviator_Bakeek

If these direct track programs are turning out such incapable pilots as it seems everyone seems to think, why do they continue interviewing direct track students that have made no commitment to the training for their airline? If the captains felt that their direct track F/O's were incapable of acting as PIC in an emergency or are "baby sitting", why has their not been changes in minimum time requirements by conveying those concerns to the administrators of the airlines?

Because management & the bean counters make those decisions, not the captains.

[Aviator_Bakeek]

Originally Posted by SteveC

Because management & the bean counters make those decisions, not the captains.

From what I remember being told while I was in the Air Force, anyone that was someone in the top chain of command was a pilot. Too bad the pilots don't get more of a say for the better of the industry.

[DE727UPS]

"I hear both good and bad about the direct track programs"

Besides the schools marketing, where have you heard anything good?

[Spbeyond]

I appreciate the input, thats why I ask.

Atleast your asking questions instead of just blindly following the advertising like I am sure some people do.

You are going to get some strong opinions on here because the industry is in trouble and the country as a whole is collectively disvaluing Aviation. For some reason paying more for everything but Air travel is acceptable.

[Aviator_Bakeek]

Originally Posted by DE727UPS

Besides the schools marketing, where have you heard anything good?

3 flight instructors I know, and 2 graduates of the program. The graduates were obviously given their COE and went straight to their companies. A captain for a very respectful airline recently told me to do anything possible to get turbine or jet time.

I understand how everyone wants to do what is best for the industry. However, if you take away the F/O's gained from the industry gained by all the direct track programs, how would the industry be then? I know a few pilots who will/are going pro, but have no interest in the airlines and their regional counterparts. It has to have its place otherwise it wouldnt exist.

Also, (sorry one more reason for giving the direct track some support) how many flight instructors get the same experience of the 56 hours of ERJ training from the FSI program, not to mention the 80 hours of ground school. They would get it with the airline after being hired, but its just that much more experience. Sorry, thats one way I look at it, some may disagree.

[DE727UPS]

"It has to have its place otherwise it wouldnt exist"

Gulfstream academy exists yet there is no place for it? Not sure I agree with your logic.

"3 flight instructors I know"

Why would a CFI use direct track? I sure can't figure that one out. The whole point of direct track is to get to the shiny jet without wasting time as a CFI. If a guy has experience as a CFI and does direct track cause he's impatient, has the money, and thinks it's the best way to an RJ, I don't really have a problem with it as he's at least got a decent background. It's the 250-300 hour guys I worry about.

"experience of the 56 hours of ERJ training from the FSI program, not to mention the 80 hours of ground school"

You think that's worth 25K when you could wait and have the airline pay you to do the same thing? I hear a few guys say it's worth it to pay big bucks for a 121 ground school so they can "feel better" in the real thing. That's a lot of money to "feel better". Trust me, you're drinkin' from the firehose either way. If you can't cut it without doing it twice you should seek another line of work.

[launchpad]

Originally Posted by DE727UPS

If you can't cut it without doing it twice you should seek another line of work.

I think that this line should be stickied so that anyone with a direct track question can get their answer without making us type......typing gets harder the older you get ya know...

[DE727UPS]

Ummm....naw, it's too much of an unfair fight so far. Wait until ILS chimes in and we'll see how it goes....

[Aviator_Bakeek]

The flight instructors did not go direct track, they chose flight instruction because of financial reasons and will not go direct track. However, they had no issue with PFT or direct track programs and said it was a reasonable option if thats where I want to go in my career. Their main concerns were the guarantee of the job after spending $28K.

I find this humorous...
First, direct track isnt good enough because of the lack of experience. Then, direct track is a bad choice cause you would get the checkout for free after being hired. However, I keep hearing talk about experience experience experience and so if you pay for the experience and then have to go through it all over again...what makes that direct track person so bad in the end? You get more experience in a qualified aircraft that you had to pay for the first time and then get again for free. It almost sounds like you put the new hires that were flight instructors at a disadvantage because they do not have the experience of a direct track student that was trained in a similar aircraft. Which then brings another point, who would you rather have, the F/O that has 56 more hours experience with that type of aircraft or the guy who was just a flight instructor. The way I see it, its almost a wash either way cause the experience of the flight instructor vs. the direct trackee cancels each other out.

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE don't think I am trying to be sarcastic or argumentative. I am just bringing out every thought that is coming to my head to make the best decision. I have some time before I have to decide which way I am going to go. I have been very well informed of the benefits of being a flight instructor and totally agree with them, but I also want to challenge the other options so that I dont regret doing something else later.

Thank You for your comments and thoughts, I hope I can really make this thread one for the record books!

[DE727UPS]

"the F/O that has 56 more hours experience with that type of aircraft or the guy who was just a flight instructor"

Believe it or not, the guy who is "JUST" a flight instructor. The fact that you say it that way shows your bias. The higher time CFI is a more well rounded, experienced, aviator. 56 hours in a sim? I know it sounds good to you but I don't see that it counts for much outside the training enviornment. Yeah, direct track guys will find initial RJ training easier since they have already seen it once (at a price). However, they have less real world experience and seasoning. That's what's important to me.

Your CFI friends who think PFT is a good idea have a case of "the grass is greener syndrome". Did you PM Badco99 yet?

Seriously, dude, I don't care what you do. I just think direct track is a bad idea and I keep saying why over and over. Do a search. Let us know how it works out for you.

[Aviator_Bakeek]

UPS, thanks for the input again.

I am still wondering why then is it an option? Why do 4 or 5 airlines even bother taking direct trackee's? How would the industry realistically be effected without direct trackee's? And, has it been proven that direct trackee's are proven a poor resource in the cockpit (I am talking NTSB reports related to runway incursions, accidents, etc.)?

[DE727UPS]

"I am still wondering why then is it an option?"

Cause it makes FSA money?

There is no doubt there are direct trackers in the industry. The airlines don't care what warm bodies are in their 18K a year seat, as long as they meet the min standard. My view is more about what's ideal, as I see it, than how the real world works. It's called an opinion.

Can you prove that a direct tracker is a better resource in the cockpit than a CFI? Can you prove direct trackers have good performace in the cockpit via NTSB reports?

This whole argument, in fact, this whole website is based on peoples opinions. Some people are UPS Capts and some are just getting started. Your mileage may very....

[ananoman]

Originally Posted by Aviator_Bakeek

UPS, thanks for the input again.

I am still wondering why then is it an option? Why do 4 or 5 airlines even bother taking direct trackee's? How would the industry realistically be effected without direct trackee's? And, has it been proven that direct trackee's are proven a poor resource in the cockpit (I am talking NTSB reports related to runway incursions, accidents, etc.)?

First off, you will see later on after you have flown more, that 56 hours is nothing. The average airline pilot gets paid for 75 hrs per month even if they don't fly at all. So you better believe that once on the line, they are going to want you to fly at least this much. So, the question you are asking is, would you rather have a 1000 hr CFI who has flown the RJ for one month, or the 250 hr wonder that has flown an RJ for two months? Before you answer the question, you should know what sim training actually consist of. It does not especially tax your leadership or decision making skills. What you do in the sim is practice the flight profiles, check list and proceedures. It is really no different than a multi instrument checkride, with an oral over aircraft systems and limitations. You could probably train a 12 year old flight sim junkie to pass the flight portion of the sim.

What we are trying to tell you is that being a CFI makes you the 'Captain' of every flight you take with a student. You are the leader. You help the student conduct a safe flight and monitor everything they do. If they get behind, you should notice this and pick up the slack. This is far different than the pilot who just got a commercial rating, who has almost no instrument time, very little cross country time, and has been safely under the wing of a CFI for much of their flight time.

Passing an airline ground school and spending some time in a sim does not correct for the lack of experience. It just means you know how to program the FMS and put the gear up and down.

As for why the airline wants students from the direct track programs, I really don't know. Some of it is due to the fact that once you are hired, you will be there a while. If someone already has over 1000 hrs of flight time when they are hired, they can upgrade faster and leave for a better job. Meanwhile you are still stuck in the right seat waiting for the turbine PIC. The other reason is that if enough people with very low time are hired, it keeps wages down. Where else are you going to go? You can't even fly single pilot IFR in a Cessna 210 for a 135 freight operator. Kind of funny, the FAA won't trust you to fly single pilot freight in a piston at 250 hours. Maybe they know something you don't? If the captain is on the ball, then everything works out ok. It might be unpleasant for them, but no metal gets bent. The problem is what if they are not on the ball. It is far easier to bully a 300 hr co-pilot into doing something stupid, than it is for them to persuade a more experienced pilot that it really is 'ok' to overlook something important. It is also far more likely that a higher time pilot will speak up if they see the captain make a mistake, than the low timer who is unsure of themselves and does not want to look stupid by asking a 'dumb question'.

[Aviator_Bakeek]

Originally Posted by ananoman

What we are trying to tell you is that being a CFI makes you the 'Captain' of every flight you take with a student. You are the leader. You help the student conduct a safe flight and monitor everything they do. If they get behind, you should notice this and pick up the slack. This is far different than the pilot who just got a commercial rating, who has almost no instrument time, very little cross country time, and has been safely under the wing of a CFI for much of their flight time.

Its very ironic you posted this today. I acted as safety pilot today for a CFI/II/MEI with 1500 hours who had full scale horizontal deflection on an ILS approach and made more than standard rate turns. We fly together often, and I have learned much from him but I was totally shocked at his performance today (I also had no problem calling him out on his errors). I am by no means perfect and have had a full scale deflection in all axis'.
Just ironic...

I did enjoy that right seat time though, it's really making me consider instructing...but I still want to get in the airlines a.s.a.p. Thank God this isnt a decision I have to make right away.