Generation creep.

[thirdtimecharm]

I have also noticed as well that there is a very large disconnect between what happens at a flight school and what happens in "real life".

Having spent some time screening 300 hour resumes, I often felt like I needed to double check what position we were hiring for. Newly minted commercial pilots often seem to have little understanding of the industry that they are getting themselves into.

That compared with the quality of Apprentice Engineers- they seem to know what they are going to be doing and how the industry works much better than pilots- makes me wonder if there should be some sort of apprenticeship for pilots? While pilots in training might not always have access to someone with Cat's background, spending time with pilots with five or ten years of real experience could go a long way.

I did most of my training at Harv's Air in Steinbach and found it to be more realistic then some of the other schools I went to but mostly there seems to be some strange environment where people are groomed for a life of fabulous riches and glamour.

I had a very illegal (but kind of helpful) experience at Spur Aviation in Yellowknife back in the day. While waiting for a 150 to be built for me in the morning I would sometimes get asked to throw on a flight suit and be the second pilot for a Government charter. It was cool at the time, but I had under 30 hours of dual, was 15 years old (and looked 12) and probably didn't fool any customers. But got to see what a real-life charter to Wrigley or Fort Smith was like.

[Johnny#5]

Ah yes...I left my heart in Wrigley....


Anyway, great post...totally right. Should definitely be some 'reality based training' infused into the flight school syllabus.

But I guess rampies and dock hands are doing their apprenticeship and learning the ropes - by the time they are ready to fly, they know the real deal. Only thing is their pay should be higher than is now(or was) standard. They should earn at least what an apprentice AME does...

[JMACK]

I wonder if they got rid of the DFTE's and went back to the MOT doing the rides. I did my instrument ride with a ex Saber/ 104 pilot. I have heard of people doing initial intrument rides with the auto-pilot engaged.

Come on dude I did my initial with Inspector #1(forget his name flew everything the airforce had) But our DFTE taught him how to fly in a T-bird. So good CASI's good DFTE's and vice versa.

Cheers.......J

[trey kule]

I realize your comments were directed to Aerobat, and I admire your use of the current lingo of referring to him as dude, but I think you are personalizing a much broader issue.

DFTE's introduce into the system the potential of conflict of interest, particularily if they are attached to an FTU for which they are working. No matter how much we all try, flight tests are a bit subjective. As a result a DFTE may be over leinient, or, conveserly overly strict, not as a matter of course, but to effect the aims of the FTU.
The mere fact that someone who flew this or that, or was trained by whoever, is really irrelevant.
And it may not, in fact, exist.(although in my opinion it does). But the possibility is there.
MOT folks are not immune to subjective decisions either, but they should not have a bias towards the student from familiarity, or derive their paychecks from the FTU whose student they are testing.