I got a bad feeling about this year...

[Big Pistons Forever]

You don't need good feet and hands to fly 757. you need managmant attitude, You are managing the flight. That is one thing that most pilots having issues with when switching from CFI/Bush to PM/PF on a 737

Absolutely......untill you, for example, hit a flock of birds and both engines flame out. Sully didn't save all his passengers with his superior "management attitude" he did it with his superior piloting skills......

[iflyforpie]

iflyforpie I am talking about milk taste and you are giving me all kind of cow types.
similar platform - 2 different things, focus on the subject please.

I'm sorry, your parable is lost on me. Cow types do affect milk taste though.

The 3701 event caused by 2 pilots trying to have fun with commercial jet. How many 3701 happened on earth? Irrelevant to this subject.

No, not irrelevant because one of the contributing factors was that the autopilot was set to maintain a 500 FPM climb which caused the aircraft to go on the back side of the power curve and eventually stall and plunge. The two pilots could not figure out why the aircraft got to its altitude but could not maintain it

About your other comment. What I am trying to say is simple; flying 2000 hours Cessna 206 VMC and maybe 15% IFR during the year gives only a minor advantage down the road when transitioning from bush to turbine SOP glass environment. In other words: “come up north and work your ass” belongs to the 80's[

You don't need good feet and hands to fly 757. you need managmant attitude, You are managing the flight. That is one thing that most pilots having issues with when switching from CFI/Bush to PM/PF on a 737

Tell that to the relatives of the passengers of Colgan 3407 or Air France 447. This idea that aircraft with complex avionics and systems somehow react differently to the laws of physics is a scary one. Any monkey can be trained to push a bunch of buttons, and it is becoming evident that many have.

On the other hand, the 206 pilot would always have his eye on the airspeed indicator and push forward at stall warning from years of having to do it..... because those two things could have saved those two aircraft.

[N1 Green]

You don't need good feet and hands to fly 757. you need managmant attitude, You are managing the flight. That is one thing that most pilots having issues with when switching from CFI/Bush to PM/PF on a 737

Absolutely......untill you, for example, hit a flock of birds and both engines flame out. Sully didn't save all his passengers with his superior "management attitude" he did it with his superior piloting skills......

One guy took a 767 and landed on a strip – good pilot. The other manages to glide A320 and everyone is alive – perfect pilot. Do we have more similar commando stories ?
An opposite example is American 587 with a first officer sharply maneuvering and excessive rudder input. the first officer had flown Shorts 360,Beechcraft 99, and DeHavilland DHC-6 airplanes in commuter and regional operations under 14 CFR Parts 121 and 135. He had accumulated 3,220 hours total flying time (taken from the report).
I am trying to take is case into a different direction:
Most fatal accidents are related to environment awareness, cockpit management, decision making and lately (10-15 years) poor automation management.
http://www.flightdeckautomation.com/acc ... lysis.aspx
If I am a captain on a 737 , I want my first officer to be 150% sharp on his FMC legs page and not putting /3500A instead of /3500B on the approach to Kelowna. It starts with basic when you program your DA40 G1000 and hit FD/HDG/ALT while leaving the controls and forget to hit AP button.

[AEROBAT]

A few months ago I flew into Cancun commercialy. Some broad drove us to Houston in a 737. She landed so long it was crazy, and bounced. I have never seen a 737 bounce like that, ever, and have had probably 50 trips in a 737. After landing the passengers broke into applause at the succesfull landing! Even my wife commented at WTF was going on.

From Houston to Cancun a young fellow was flying another 737, brand new plane, he gave a long disertation of the specs of the 737 and a bit about his flying career. Good guy. On aproach there was a horrendous crosswind, he put it down within a hundred feet of the numbers and exited no problemo. I was impressed at the landing. The other drones onboard noticed nothing of course and no clapping.

I suspect the broad had management skills and the young guy had hand and feet skills.

[N1 Green]

No, not irrelevant because one of the contributing factors was that the autopilot was set to maintain a 500 FPM climb which caused the aircraft to go on the back side of the power curve and eventually stall and plunge. The two pilots could not figure out why the aircraft got to its altitude but could not maintain it

that only proves my point, poor automation managment. Why? beacuse when you walk into an avarage flight school it starts with "Stay a away from the cloud". I dont say let's take a PPL guy and let him fly RNAV. but I am saying that 4 years up north with bush flying or CFI with 3 years is a minor contribution to the real IFR world 5-6 years down the road. So what does 3 years in the NWT does give a 20 years old ? - Experience on how to work in a commercial company which is not COBS Bread.

Tell that to the relatives of the passengers of Colgan 3407 or Air France 447. This idea that aircraft with complex avionics and systems somehow react differently to the laws of physics is a scary one. Any monkey can be trained to push a bunch of buttons, and it is becoming evident that many have.

NO! Not any monkey can be trained on how to push buttons! Automation Managment is a complex field! that is what I am trying to say here. And Because of that, a G1000 guy would notice Airspeed bug dissagremment faster than a bush guy that knows "2400 RPM should be fine".

Guys, I am not trying to bring 705 up and bush/CFI down. not at all. I am just saying that by doing A (flying CFI) that is not allways relevant to B (flying 705 for example).

[Cat Driver]

Guys, I am not trying to bring 705 up and bush/CFI down. not at all. I am just saying that by doing A (flying CFI) that is not allways relevant to B (flying 705 for example).

Thanks for clearing that up, I wish I had found someone as sharp as you decades ago because it would have made it so much easier to learn how to fly the magic boxes with the pretty pictures on them....

Next you take him and put him on Citation X and expect him to manage aircraft energy on a sharp STAR with n/o spoilers and with no VNAV assistant – good luck.

That is simply fuc.ing breathtaking.....how do I get to learn to do that...wow simply breathtaking.

Avcanada needs more like you...welcome aboard.

Us oldtimers can now retire from the internet knowing there is someone to keep aviation going.

[N1 Green]

That is simply fuc.ing breathtaking.....how do I get to learn to do that...wow simply breathtaking.

First by writting an adult comment , Especially when you are the guy with 16000 messages record. Not sure why you are writting like that.

What not to do:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dAEUTB2alOg

Avcanada needs more like you...welcome aboard.

Thank You Sir, I am looking forward to learn from other pilots experience.

[Cat Driver]

N1 Green, my comment was meant to point out that flying a modern jet is not exactly rocket science.

Modern airplanes and modern instrument approaches are designed to make the operation of airplanes easier than older technology, not more difficult.

My own experience with glass cockpit and fly by wire technology was that it was relatively easy to learn.

Mind you I had some of the best instructors in the business teaching me at the factory where they built the airplanes.

Personally I found big jets to be very boring at best.

Mind you there were nights flying over Europe when the sky was cloudless country after country when the view above FL 400 was quite spectacular......

But it was still a waiting game.....waiting for the next way point to go behind us and on and on and on...........

My only regret is I did not retire sooner.

[North Shore]

If I am a captain on a 737 , I want my first officer to be 150% sharp on his FMC legs page and not putting /3500A instead of /3500B on the approach to Kelowna. It starts with basic when you program your DA40 G1000 and hit FD/HDG/ALT while leaving the controls and forget to hit AP button.

Absolutely! I'm sure this guy would agree with you as well:

[N1 Green]

Cat Driver,

1.Thank you for coming back on track with your comments, a professional attitude would do only good for all of us, cynical comments will not.

2.Your Air Canada/Cargo jet 767 experiences are being appreciated. (The other FL400 Canadian registered over Europe would be something like corporate jet, I would assume you are a 76 one.. just for the fun of guessing that)

3.Watch the clip above. No it is not rocket since. But, the combination of advanced systems, large SOP’s and a “cube” way of working – makes this job boring like you mention. And when it’s boring, you forget to put 6000 feet initial on your MCP alt bug.


I started my first post talking about the advantages of flying Glass VS bush VFR. I have seen first officers with amazing situational awareness and automation management, most of them got their flying education on advanced G.A facilities.

Selecting the SID from the FMC, set the power, hit some LNAV VNAV at 400’ etc – that is the easy part. Your basics kick in when you stall a plane because you cannot identify some PFD disagreement, similar to the Turkish Crash on EHAM final. By training pilots to fly IFR Glass from their step 1, by managing the automation correctly and more, you create stronger basics of IFR down the road. And that is my point.


KLM, British Airways, Lufthansa, Raynair and many other airlines hire guys for their cadet with 250 hours. Some of them with 0 hours and train from zero to first officer.
That brings me to the fact that combination of good personality, especially assertive candidate with the mix of some glass cockpit experience may lead to a very potential excellent airline pilot.

[Cat Driver]

2.Your Air Canada/Cargo jet 767 experiences are being appreciated. (The other FL400 Canadian registered over Europe would be something like corporate jet, I would assume you are a 76 one.. just for the fun of guessing that)

Yes it was a 767 but it was Dutch registered and it was charter not cargo......not that it really matters.

I have not flown in Canada for decades.

True pilots are trained from zero to the right seat of big jets in Europe.

However when the magic disappears on the pretty screens a knowlege of basic hand flying comes in handy and when you get a crew that are computer slaves with poor flying skills you have what happened in the South Atlantic with AF 447.

[N1 Green]

Cat Driver,
(I feel stupid to call you like that, I wish everyone on this forum will use their real name one day.),

Anyway:
We call them basic skills because that’s what they are. Not arguing with this one. I am not saying that pilots should base their training on G1000 for solo circuits.
I just think that a safe Airline pilot is one that understands how to give/take from the Aircraft automation. The guy in the clip explains that perfectly.



almost every flight automation discussion we hear the 2 lovely words “What If?..” What if the screen goes black? What if all the info is gone?

And right after that we hear the great answer “That is why basic flying is important”.



Well, true – but not 100%. We need to assume that if pilot seats on a CRJ or 737 right seat, he is capable of executing stall recovery if needed… but, hold on! IS HE CAPABLE OF DOING THAT WHEN THE SPEED TAPE SHOWS 240IAS and backup instrument shows 150 IAS? Is he still capable of doing it when the stall horn is making noise, but no stick shaker and speed 220 while VSI show minus 1200 FPM ? in IMC?
So yes, a guy with 1500 hours on a 206 feels perfectly comfortable with a stall recovery on a 206, and even a stall recovery with a 757 on VMC. But what happened when you change his world? When you ask him to program the FMC for the new STAR.. you know what happened? 60% of his brain is caught with programming the FMC or any other advanced cockpit tasks, and 40% left for basic flying skills, in other words, your 2000 hr pilot is know so busy with understanding the platform that he became a 300 hour basic flying skills guy.


The Air France is a combination of Automation Fear and poor CRM. The first think every pilot says about this crash is “turn the dam AP off…soft disengage/ hard.. Whatever.. TURN IT OFF AND RECOVER!” If only the pilot was more confident with his A330 automation, He would stop trying to analyze and go basics right away.. But he kept trying to solve the automation quiz.

Cat Driver,
400 hr, 150 multi PIC IFR G1000 , or
1400 hr CFI C172.
Who would you pick as your F/O for your new C560?

[Krimson]

Well, true – but not 100%. We need to assume that if pilot seats on a CRJ or 737 right seat, he is capable of executing stall recovery if needed… but, hold on! IS HE CAPABLE OF DOING THAT WHEN THE SPEED TAPE SHOWS 240IAS and backup instrument shows 150 IAS? Is he still capable of doing it when the stall horn is making noise, but no stick shaker and speed 220 while VSI show minus 1200 FPM ? in IMC?
So yes, a guy with 1500 hours on a 206 feels perfectly comfortable with a stall recovery on a 206, and even a stall recovery with a 757 on VMC. But what happened when you change his world? When you ask him to program the FMC for the new STAR.. you know what happened? 60% of his brain is caught with programming the FMC or any other advanced cockpit tasks, and 40% left for basic flying skills, in other words, your 2000 hr pilot is know so busy with understanding the platform that he became a 300 hour basic flying skills guy.

Why do you think someone with 400 hours is going to know any better? With that kind of time they are still learning (a lot) and are not thinking ahead of the plane at all. Just because they have flown a G1000 172 does not mean they are wizzkids when it comes to 737 automation. The two are very different. Now add the speed, we're not flying at 90KTS anymore. If you take someone from the north or anywhere else really from a 208 with a few thousand hours under his belt the simple things become much simpler. You are still going to have to teach things like CRM/SOP/FMS/AP, things which a 400 hour wonder will not learn any easier, so why not have someone who has some hands & feet skills in case things do go south?

The Air France is a combination of Automation Fear and poor CRM. The first think every pilot says about this crash is “turn the dam AP off…soft disengage/ hard.. Whatever.. TURN IT OFF AND RECOVER!” If only the pilot was more confident with his A330 automation, He would stop trying to analyze and go basics right away.. But he kept trying to solve the automation quiz.

When you have cruise control on in your car and you are about to hit a pole do you try and play with the buttons or turn it off, get on the brakes and carefully turn away? Why? Because you know how to drive the car with your years of experience. Put a new kid behind the wheel, teach them how to accelerate/decelerate with the cruise control but avoid how to properly drive and they are more likely to crash when they have to take over.

An airplane is an airplane, large or small. Gear. Flaps. Pull back go up, push forward go down. I would rather someone who can handle it when shit hits the fan. I would be curious to see the younger folks at Ryanair go a few days without an autopilot.

Get your hands&feet doing what they should first and you can do whatever you want from there.

[Colonel Sanders]

It's funny how people can't tell the difference
between a button-pusher and a pilot.

This is a button-pusher:



And this is a pilot:



You can teach a pilot to push buttons. But I fear
that all too often, no one teaches a button-pusher
how to be a pilot.

N.B. A pilot is more than just someone that knows
how to wiggle the controls (skill). There's also this
little matter of judgement. A good pilot uses his
judgement to avoid having to use his skill, which
is always there if he needs it.

It saddens me somewhat that people set the bar
so low for themselves. They are content to be
button-pushers, and will never be pilots.

A pilot, for example, could deliver a supercub from
Anchorage to Caracas, which is my idea of a fun
way to spend a week (or two).

If I was making the rules, for the CPL I would require
a 1000nm x/c through three countries with at least
one 100nm overwater leg, with no autopilot, with
at least one hour of it being flown at night.

Say, Toronto to Freeport. What a great graduation
exercise for a 200hr fresh CPL.

[N1 Green]

Why do you think someone with 400 hours is going to know any better? With that kind of time they are still learning (a lot) and are not thinking ahead of the plane at all. Just because they have flown a G1000 172 does not mean they are wizzkids when it comes to 737 automation. The two are very different. Now add the speed, we're not flying at 90KTS anymore. If you take someone from the north or anywhere else really from a 208 with a few thousand hours under his belt the simple things become much simpler. You are still going to have to teach things like CRM/SOP/FMS/AP, things which a 400 hour wonder will not learn any easier, so why not have someone who has some hands & feet skills in case things do go south? .

An average F16 pilot in the USAF holds about 500 hours of flight time when he is going solo for air combat practice. Same with the Israeli Air Force which considered to be good one – 500 hours of training+/-
Their climb out speed is about 260-280, I believe they are ahead of the aircraft.
It is all about education/personality match to the mission; it is about your aiming point. If you want someone to be a good airliner, you train him for it, if you want him to be a fighter pilot, you do the same – train him for his final goal. If you want him to be a good bush DC-3 pilot, you train him to DC-3 in minus 40. Personality plays a big part here. For me a good pilot is 80% personality, 20% knowledge and skills, and let’s face it – you are only going trough real personality evaluation when you step into the big dog's house – AC, WJ and similar. Other 703 operators would interview you as a basic job interview, some simulator evaluation and that’s it. But that pulls me into a different subject. Personality of air crews which I am not going into it right now.

BUT

When you mix 2 platform of aviation, it does not really guaranteed that one platform contribute to the other one.
When I gave my initial example, I was not expecting a G1000 Cessna 172 guy to do a right seat on a C560. I was expecting a 400 hour guy with 150 PIC G1000 M U L T I time, to feel more comfortable with a right seat on a C560. I was talking about building his basics correctly and match them to 2013.


Here is a fact:
Many bush pilots and flight instructors are having major difficulties keeping their IFR current in Canada. They get their MIFR done at the age of 22 say, and for the next 2-4 years the only thing they do is maybe intercept a radial with a student or GPS themselves up north.
Now, let’s say I got my MIFR, 250 hours. Instead of going up north or getting my Class 4, I am investing 35,000 $ in the next 2 years to build 150 hours of MULTI PIC. – flying IFR only.

I am sorry my friend, but the second guy with 150 multi and some glass experience is what I am looking for. He is the one that would have no issues to talk to NorCal approach on a busy SFO morning and IMC down to the minima. He might not be super safe to put a king air 350 with 35 knots cross, but that is why I put him on the right seat, to learn. And yes, he got a LOT to learn. But for now, with his 400 hours of flying – I need him IFR/Cockpit managing sharp. The later will come with the time.
Agree or not, that is a solid fact in Europe. Many major Airlines train for the final goal. Just like I talked about the Air Force training at the beginning of this post. That is why working 206 for 3 years or instructing for 2 years not necessary contributes to their final goal – 705 pilots.
Cathy Pacific (Considered to be in the top 10 safe airlines) training air cadet as part of their program –they train them to manage 777, not to land a DCH-6 on a 2500 feet ice strip.

Many airlines, as part of their SOP, require pilots once in a while to go manual. BAW does that, I was observing it from the jump seat and it was great to see the F/O hand flying the 76 from FL260 down to the minima with no FD and the use of raw data only. No A/T.
In other words, it is super important to fly it once in a while. But it is also super important to know how to properly us it when going auto land CAT3 on a fast dynamic changing environment

[Cat Driver]

Cat Driver,
(I feel stupid to call you like that, I wish everyone on this forum will use their real name one day.),

I do and have been for years.

Anyway:
We call them basic skills because that’s what they are. Not arguing with this one. I am not saying that pilots should base their training on G1000 for solo circuits.
I just think that a safe Airline pilot is one that understands how to give/take from the Aircraft automation. The guy in the clip explains that perfectly.



almost every flight automation discussion we hear the 2 lovely words “What If?..” What if the screen goes black? What if all the info is gone?

And right after that we hear the great answer “That is why basic flying is important”.



Well, true – but not 100%. We need to assume that if pilot seats on a CRJ or 737 right seat, he is capable of executing stall recovery if needed… but, hold on! IS HE CAPABLE OF DOING THAT WHEN THE SPEED TAPE SHOWS 240IAS and backup instrument shows 150 IAS? Is he still capable of doing it when the stall horn is making noise, but no stick shaker and speed 220 while VSI show minus 1200 FPM ? in IMC?
So yes, a guy with 1500 hours on a 206 feels perfectly comfortable with a stall recovery on a 206, and even a stall recovery with a 757 on VMC. But what happened when you change his world? When you ask him to program the FMC for the new STAR.. you know what happened? 60% of his brain is caught with programming the FMC or any other advanced cockpit tasks, and 40% left for basic flying skills, in other words, your 2000 hr pilot is know so busy with understanding the platform that he became a 300 hour basic flying skills guy.

Flying a CRJ or a 737 is no different than flying any other type of airplane, they were designed to be flown by the average pilot in the industry and as time passes the people who design them produce smarter and smarter airplanes.

I worked with Airbus Industries for a couple of years and during my time with the designers and test pilots they went into great detail of the difficulty in designing a computer platform that would be as easy for pilots to operate as possible because these airplanes would be sold to many countries with diverse cultures and levels of pilot skills at the entry end.

The sad truth is at this point in time the industry is still behind the curve trying to design an idiot proof system because nature seems to produce a better idiot despite the designers best efforts.

So to make this simple once we sweep aside all the cool sounding acronyms and all the grandiose B.S. that pilots so love to spread a certified airplane is about as simple to fly as the industry can design.

The Air France is a combination of Automation Fear and poor CRM. The first think every pilot says about this crash is “turn the dam AP off…soft disengage/ hard.. Whatever.. TURN IT OFF AND RECOVER!” If only the pilot was more confident with his A330 automation, He would stop trying to analyze and go basics right away.. But he kept trying to solve the automation quiz.

As I recall from reading the accident report the computer turned off the auto pilot when it went from law normal to law alternate....the pilots were incapable of flying it from that point on.

Cat Driver,
400 hr, 150 multi PIC IFR G1000 , or
1400 hr CFI C172.
Who would you pick as your F/O for your new C560?

If I were hiring either of these people my decision who to hire would be based on many more factors than what you have listed.

As a matter of interest over the decades that I was in management in aviation I hired hundreds of pilots, and never ever asked to see their personal logs.

There are far more effective means of determining a prospective pilots worth than what the pilot wrote in a log book.

[Big Pistons Forever]

The first imperative for a pilot is to be able to control the aircraft, to be able to make it do what he/she wants. A properly done PPL is all about teaching foundation flying skills and introducing the basic pilot decision making skills needed to make safe choices. A properly taught CPL refines those foundation skills to a high level (eg I want to see the ability to fly the final approach flown with a constant attitude and airspeed plus minus 2 kts of the desired value with the ASI covered), and solid foundation in pilot decision making appropriate for A to B flying in a commercial environment.

In the PPL the attitude indicator doesn't exist untill the end of the course and we do the 5 hours of survival IF, as the attitude of the aircraft is determined solely by reference to the natural horizon. In the CPL the emphasis is on attaining a high level of accuracy in aircraft control when flying solely by reference to instruments and using GPS and the other radio aids safely and effectively.

Add a couple of hundred VFR hours of instructing or 702/703 VFR flying and the transition to IFR flying is not a big step as the aircraft control skills are there.

Just like VFR flying the best approach IMO is gaining experience by starting with the basics in a lower performance aircraft and then working your way up to bigger faster aircraft. This is the traditional path for airline pilots in North America and is I believe the reason that NA mainline airlines have a much better safety record than their European counterparts.

When you have a solid background in the basics and confidence in your ability, learning how to program the FMS or select the correct autopilot modes isn't a real big challenge.....

The US went to the zero to 250 hour hero route for their regional airlines and that is when the bad things started happening.

Finally Ryan Air had 2 tail strikes in one day. When was the last time a Canadian or American mainline airline has had one ?

[N1 Green]

Pilot Decision Making/Pilot Judgment/Pilot Personality/Crew Resources Management/human factors
Lots and lots of big words. Problem is; many pilots mixed all of them together.

Most people think that a pilot is a combination of:

1. Flying Skills/Experience

2. Knowledge

3. Personality


And it is. But it’s 20% for 1, 20% for 2, and 60% for the personality.

I am happy we are stepping into this big subject called personality; I can talk about it for hours and I know and seen in my life pilots with 6000 hours flying 737 that I would never trust them for all kind of reasons.

But let’s not go there for a second. Let’s assume that all low timers being hired in Europe and maybe in Canada are carrying great personality match for the position. (And read my last post above with the F16 example).
With proper training, - PROPER TRAINING – it is possible to create a safe pilot to work the final goals of 705 operation. Your learning curve and flying skills pass 500-600 hours up to 1500 hours is not going to change much if you do not expose to new items. It is a waste of time.
It is not 1975 guys. What is the point of working on the dam ramp and flying bush for 3 years?
Companies should screen their pilots based on the 80% personalty factor, and not on how long they work their ass up north or not. This attitude belongs to the old cold past!

Ryan air hit the tail… so? So as WesJet injured 10 people flying into severe turbulence.. the bottom line is simple: severe accidents are sourced at cockpit management mistakes which has direct connecting to the personality of the crew.
I just don’t see any reason for a king 350 operators to ask for 1500 hours FO position in Canada. Instead, they should send the candidate to a special personality evaluation and based their decision on other factors. One of my first posts here talks about age factor and personality.

[Cat Driver]

Companies should screen their pilots based on the 80% personalty factor, and not on how long they work their ass up north or not. This attitude belongs to the old cold past!

Here let me help you out with this issue.....

Airline companies ( for those of you in Canada we are speaking of 705 operations.

You are correct though with regard to the personality issue, it requires a certain personality to seamlessly work into the strict structure of multi crew airline flying.

So back to my thoughts on this......industry produces automation that requires computer operators to drive airplanes safely from A to B.

It stands to reason that personality trumps mechanical skills to operate these airplanes.

Finally we are in agreement on this issue and I can do something else.

[N1 Green]

Damm with you Cat Driver, I knew you would agree with me about the personality issue. Come on, we got to find something else to keep arguing about, please!

although pilot personalityit is a fascinating subject, I decided to go into this post saying/asking: Why not based our new pilots training on new technology. Like I said before – not to use G1000 for PPL solo, but to fly 100 hours Glass cockpit in multi piston as part of your 705 goal.
And I know, that if the 2 guys would come to you and ask you for a FO job, you would take the 400 guy with 200 MIFR Glass PIC cause you know it will make your like easier on the type rating process and beyond. (Again, based on the fact that both candidates are 250% personality match).
If you can properly train a guy to pull 6.8 G’s solo F16 after 550 hours. I believe that with the right guy you can train him to fly CAT3 767 into 24 at EHAM.
Ok, I got some work to do, AVCANADA is not paying me good enough , see ya later and tnx for your time

[Colonel Sanders]

With proper training, - PROPER TRAINING

Not much of that in Canada I'm afraid. It's all very
inefficient and unfocussed.

[triplese7en]

There are far more effective means of determining a prospective pilots worth than what the pilot wrote in a log book.

I agree 100%. As an instructor I have never, ever been able to assess someone's piloting ability by looking at their logbook/experience or even talking with them before the flight. My very first flight as an instructor was to do a checkout on a retired airline pilot with 30,000 hours. That didn't go well at all... I had to take control at 50' on landing due to excessive PIO.

I agree with the personality part of the pilot equation. I seem to think that if you can find a pilot who consistently strives to achieve excellence in the areas of flight discipline and airmanship, you will have a great pilot. The best way to assess this would probably be to have some sort of aptitude test where scenarios are presented and the candidate needs to choose what he/she would do. But I'm not a human factors specialist or psychologist!

[Shiny Side Up]

With proper training, - PROPER TRAINING

Not much of that in Canada I'm afraid. It's all very
inefficient and unfocussed.

I don't think there's a lot of it anywhere on the whole truth be told.

[Colonel Sanders]

The military tends to be very structured and
efficient about this sort of thing.

As I am fond of mentioning, the guy flying the
low-altitude aerobatics in the F-18 at an airshow
near you this year, almost certainly doesn't have
enough flight time to fly a king air from edmonton
to calgary. Straight and level must be pretty tough.

[mcrit]

I'm going to chime in on this one. The place that I am flying right now is kind of unique in that we will fly into high density IFR one day and into somewhere uncontrolled the next. We have an aircraft that is capable of a fairly high level of automation. Our pilot cadre is also uniquely diverse. Some of our guys are ex-airline guys who spent most of their careers flying automated heavies, others are ex-bush pilots. All are safe and proficient with hands and feet, but I have found some of the ex-airline guys tend to be at a little bit of a loss when they don't have a controller to talk to. Also, they tend to be very dependent on the box, (i.e. everything looks like a nail when the only tool you have is a hammer). I've not run across an ex-bush guy that had trouble with the box. Just my personal observations.