Instrument profiles?

[nutz4life]

So I guess my instructor informed me on these new profiles we are now suppposed to be using. They are supposed to make the transition to the CRJ sim course a lot smoother for us and I dont really care for them. I knew UND was airline oriented from the get go, but seriously, this pretty much ties the final knot along with the new checklist procedures on before takeoff and landing. Everything performed in the airplanes is the "airline way". I feel so proud to be saying "to the line/below the line complete" and zooming down the runway at 55 kts and cruising maybe 110.

On a side note, whatever happend to opening up a international training center for the all those students? I heard it was supposed to be in Fargo or something.

[TXaviator]

good thing UND grads are going straight to the airlines!

[FlyMan07]

Do they still make you confirm that you put the gear down in the Warrior?

I'm surprised they just don't give everyone a CRJ checklist and say "not installed" on everything... That way you could really be prepared for the CRJ class!

BTW, the CRJ class seems even more pointless in today's industry. No UND grad is going to see a CRJ for 5+ years after graduation in today's market, especially if the 1500 rule goes through. Whats the point in spending all that money just to dump the knowledge for 5 years?

[pwttogfk]

Originally Posted by nutz4life

On a side note, whatever happend to opening up a international training center for the all those students? I heard it was supposed to be in Fargo or something.

Last I heard, the old terminal is supposed to become the international training center once the new terminal is opened.

[ScoutFlyer]

Originally Posted by nutz4life

Everything performed in the airplanes is the "airline way". I feel so proud to be saying "to the line/below the line complete" and zooming down the runway at 55 kts and cruising maybe 110.

I understand where you are coming from with this statement. However, it might be best to think about the profiles a little differently. I may not be correct, but I assume you are interested in becoming a professional pilot. Profiles are not flown solely by the airlines. A large majority of aircraft used in commercial operations, whether it be charter, freight, airlines, etc. are high performance aircraft, where you just can't "chop 'n drop." Yes, the airplanes we are flying the profiles in are capable of being "chop 'n dropped."

So are the profiles overkill...I don't know. Maybe they are, but I still think they have some merit. The profiles lead to a stabilized approach, which is not only professional, but is safe. As a commercial pilot entering the industry in whatever facet, you would most likely be expected to learn profiles, and not just for turbine aircraft. I've heard of corporations having profiles for aircraft such as the larger twin cessnas and the like.

Just because we don't train in those types of aircraft, what is wrong with training like we do if that is what we will be expected to do in the future. If you don't end up flying professionally or your company doesn't have established profiles, then so be it, fly the approach however you want. But if they do, wouldn't it be nice to have an understanding of what a profile is and have some experience flying one before you're expected to do it on a professional level.

And as for the checklist, that was done to shorten time holding short of the runway. It just happens that the new format parallels the CRJ checklist. The changes were not made for the sole reason of prepping for the CRJ course.

I apologize if this sounds like a rant, it definately isn't meant to be, just another perspective on the changes that have occurred.

[TXaviator]

whatever happened to mastering the plane youre actually in, instead of pretending its something else?

[FlyMan07]

Originally Posted by TXaviator

whatever happened to mastering the plane youre actually in, instead of pretending its something else?

No way, maaan! I want to pretend that the Warrior has a HUD and it's just MEL'ed all the time. Thats so cool! Lets taxi to 35L to drool at the shiny CRJ-900.

[TXaviator]

you know, here's whats wrong with doing things like that....

you're doing a disservice to the domestic students who are ABSOLUTELY NOT going to be jumping into a CRJ for their first job, IF they can even find a job when they graduate.

UND should be preparing well rounded pilots, not making a SJS monkey factory... for jobs that don't exist.

[FlyMan07]

Originally Posted by TXaviator

you know, here's whats wrong with doing things like that....

you're doing a disservice to the domestic students who are ABSOLUTELY NOT going to be jumping into a CRJ for their first job, IF they can even find a job when they graduate.

UND should be preparing well rounded pilots, not making a SJS monkey factory... for jobs that don't exist.

[nutz4life]

Originally Posted by TXaviator

UND should be preparing well rounded pilots, not making a SJS monkey factory... for jobs that don't exist.

Words I remember from the dean himself..."UND is a liberal arts college, to make well rounded students"......yep that is true but it doesnt make well rounded pilots, so if they think that works for both, it doesnt. Doesn't even work for the chop sticks but oh well.

[TXaviator]

hell im glad i learned to fly instruments on round dials... seeing as how 1) i got LUCKY and found a job out of school and 2) its flying a clapped out 1975 cessna 172M with all kinds of parts INOP'ed on it....

WHERES MY PINK LINE??? AHHH NO AUTOPILOT AND GPS IM GONNA CRAAAASHHHH!!!

[av8or91]

Like scoutflyer said, if you have plan on flying anything bigger than a piston twin, there are probably going to be profiles for it. I have Flight Safety manuals for the King Air 300, Falcon 900C, Citation XL/XLS, CL601-3A/R, Learjet 30 series, Learjet 60, and the list goes on... All have profiles in them.

I dont understand why there is a problem with them.

[FlyMan07]

Originally Posted by ScoutFlyer

A large majority of aircraft used in commercial operations, whether it be charter, freight, airlines, etc. are high performance aircraft, where you just can't "chop 'n drop." Yes, the airplanes we are flying the profiles in are capable of being "chop 'n dropped."

Originally Posted by av8or91

Like scoutflyer said, if you have plan on flying anything bigger than a piston twin, there are probably going to be profiles for it. I have Flight Safety manuals for the King Air 300, Falcon 900C, Citation XL/XLS, CL601-3A/R, Learjet 30 series, Learjet 60, and the list goes on... All have profiles in them.

I dont understand why there is a problem with them.

Learjet 60 ≠ Piper Warrior III

Students should learn about profiles in the Semi or CRJ, but when you're descending maybe 1000' from cruise to your MDA in the Warrior, I don't really see anyone chop 'n dropping. Profiles in such small aircraft just needlessly increase workload. UND standardization is enough for the Warrior/Cessna. Doesn't CRM start in the Semi course anyways?

Sure, familiarize students with profiles in higher level courses, but students shouldn't just know a profile.

[ScoutFlyer]

Like I said before, I can see both sides on this issue. I haven't determined if profiles in the Warrior are good or not, but I can see some merit in having them. I can also see the points made previously about not having them. I was a little skeptical at first. However, it's what we're dealt and I believe it falls upon the individual CFIs to fit them into training. I think a tactful CFI could present them and utilize them in a way that is very beneficial to the student. If the CFI just throws the student the book, saying "learn these profiles, they'll prep you for CRJ," now that is where I can start seeing some of the negative attitudes developing. Part of the idea of the well rounded pilot is getting experience in as many different areas as possible, letting you develop a preference.

[av8or91]

Originally Posted by FlyMan07

Learjet 60 ≠ Piper Warrior III

Students should learn about profiles in the Semi or CRJ, but when you're descending maybe 1000' from cruise to your MDA in the Warrior, I don't really see anyone chop 'n dropping. Profiles in such small aircraft just needlessly increase workload. UND standardization is enough for the Warrior/Cessna. Doesn't CRM start in the Semi course anyways?

Sure, familiarize students with profiles in higher level courses, but students shouldn't just know a profile.

So the main reason you dont want profiles is because they are too hard? Why not train that way from the beginning? Just in case you ever fly sometihng bigger and faster you will have done something similar before? If anything it gets you better at multi tasking and thinking ahead.

[FlyMan07]

Originally Posted by av8or91

So the main reason you dont want profiles is because they are too hard?

Actually, quite the opposite. One should be able to fly without being told what to do every second of the flight. Anyone can execute what a manual says. However, pilots must also have a brain and good ADM. This is why you don't see fully automated airliners without pilots. If airlines wanted robots, they'd buy them.

One should be able to fly a small aircraft as if it is actually a small aircraft! Save the profiles for planes that need them. Teach them at UND, yes, but to someone getting their first instrument training in a C172 that won't see a jet/high performance prop for 5-10 years, maybe not so fast. Save them for the Seminole/DA42/CRJ.


The only reason why UND is pushing this is because the administration boys need something to justify their jobs. They wrote the procedures once and are done, so when job security becomes a question, they better look busy.

Originally Posted by FlyMan07

Learjet 60 ≠ Piper Warrior III

[the_dmn8tr]

Originally Posted by FlyMan07

One should be able to fly a small aircraft as if it is actually a small aircraft! Save the profiles for planes that need them. Teach them at UND, yes, but to someone getting their first instrument training in a C172 that won't see a jet/high performance prop for 5-10 years, maybe not so fast. Save them for the Seminole/DA42/CRJ.

So basically you are saying they are new to you and you don't want to learn them? Trust me, you learn them now, you save money in the seminole. If you can learn to get ahead of an airplane now and increase you situational awareness (part of your ADM argument) then you will have a breeze in the seminole, especially since the arrow is gone for undergrads next year in 323. As far as your 5-10 years argument, 2 years ago I was in 222, now I fly a high performance twin with PLENTY of profiles.

The only reason why UND is pushing this is because the administration boys need something to justify their jobs. They wrote the procedures once and are done, so when job security becomes a question, they better look busy.

And you would know this how? It may seem silly, but the standards department does things for a reason.

[Farva]

To those who are complainning about the checklist. Do you have anymore time to waste. It is a serious waste of energy to be upset or angered by the use of a different style checklist. I have flown for a company who flys 182's with a similar checklist. Its just part of the game either accept it or quit.

[FlyMan07]

A little devil's advocate never hurt anybody.

[CRJDriver]

I'm just guessing here and really don't keep up on UND happenings anymore, but did they maybe implement the new procedures and profiles because of the foreign students? Don't they usually go back to their home country and fly 737s and stuff? I could see UND doing that.

Either way, don't matter what your fly, whether a Warrior or Lear, you got to do it their way. If you ever move on to an airline, corporate or whatever, there will be some procedures, profiles you might find silly, but it is either their way or the highway.

[the_dmn8tr]

Originally Posted by CRJDriver

Either way, don't matter what your fly, whether a Warrior or Lear, you got to do it their way. If you ever move on to an airline, corporate or whatever, there will be some procedures, profiles you might find silly, but it is either their way or the highway.

[ORDFlyer85]

Originally Posted by TXaviator

hell im glad i learned to fly instruments on round dials... !!

Amen to that, I am scared for all the people who learned in the glass.... scary. Glad that I learned in steam, made it a lot easier to transition to the glass for instrument work..

[ORDFlyer85]

Originally Posted by the_dmn8tr

So basically you are saying they are new to you and you don't want to learn them? Trust me, you learn them now, you save money in the seminole. If you can learn to get ahead of an airplane now and increase you situational awareness (part of your ADM argument) then you will have a breeze in the seminole, especially since the arrow is gone for undergrads next year in 323.

Woah I must be outta the loop since I am not flying this semester, what are the 323 students going to be using instead of the arrow...

[FlyMan07]

Originally Posted by ORDFlyer85

Woah I must be outta the loop since I am not flying this semester, what are the 323 students going to be using instead of the arrow...

The C172

[AngelFuree]

Ha! I hadn't gotten on the UND forums for a while, but I missed the pro-UND vs. anti-UND threads.

I seriously have no idea why anyone would even think about going to UND nowadays, especially with how crapped up our economy is.

As far as the checklists go...I look back and chuckle at how thick some of those checklists were. Oh well, like someone else said, it's their way or the highway, and I think most should be considering the highway right now. I wouldn't go to the UND with how it's becoming.