2003 cadets will be employed by Air North as First Officers on Brasilias
Nunc est bibendum
notrouble, you make the same mistake that a lot of others do when quoting a prang statistic with a 'cadet' in one of the seats and that is forgetting that prangs happen no matter who is in the seat. Can I quote you the statistics of the prangs where there were NO cadets on board? That'd be interesting reading. Non-assertive F/Os are not a new phenomenon. KLM and a whole bunch of others know that one and they are not certainly not restricted to cadet ranks.
On the other hand, I can actually relate a story of where a cadet S/O actually SAVED the day- whilst a highly experienced Captain, former GA F/O and ex military QFI S/O did nothing or were out of the loop. This isn't the forum for it however but check my history on PPRUNE and you'll see that I don't 'spin' anything!
Whether or not there is currently a need for cadet programs in Australia doesn't stop a lot of people from having a chip on their shoulder about cadets in general.
On the other hand, I can actually relate a story of where a cadet S/O actually SAVED the day- whilst a highly experienced Captain, former GA F/O and ex military QFI S/O did nothing or were out of the loop. This isn't the forum for it however but check my history on PPRUNE and you'll see that I don't 'spin' anything!
Whether or not there is currently a need for cadet programs in Australia doesn't stop a lot of people from having a chip on their shoulder about cadets in general.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: australia
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I,ll state the same thing again Keg
Australia has a sufficient number of highly qualified pilots, there is no need for a cadet scheme at this time.
And by the way, I don't hate cadets.
If you have any inside information into why Qantas employs cadets then please enlighten me.
Australia has a sufficient number of highly qualified pilots, there is no need for a cadet scheme at this time.
And by the way, I don't hate cadets.
If you have any inside information into why Qantas employs cadets then please enlighten me.
Nunc est bibendum
I'm not arguing that point about whether Australia should run cadetships at all NT, I'm discussing the use of your example of the Gulf Air A320 to generally denegrate cadet pilots.
You use this as an example of how poor cadets are. You imply that cadets can't handle it when the going gets tough. As a former cadet from the early '90s (when QF claimed that they weren't happy with the numbers and quality of those out of GA in the pilot shortage leading up to 1989 and the domestic pilots dispute) I take offence at the implied generalisation that former cadets are not up to speed. As I mentioned in my earlier posts, non assertive crew are NOT restricted to just cadets.
You'll note that I haven't commented otherwise on the relative merits of cadet ships in the current environment. I have no opinion on the matter. I won't let people make crass generalisations about those who graduate those programs- whether the program was needed or not.
Please read, current flight safety mag.
Any monkey can learn to manipulate the controls.
How about life experience and how this translates into positive command decisions when the s*** hits the fan.
You cannot learn that much in one or two years.
Hired as a cadet July 4, 1999
A320 F/O April 20, 2000
Total time 608 hrs
Any monkey can learn to manipulate the controls.
How about life experience and how this translates into positive command decisions when the s*** hits the fan.
You cannot learn that much in one or two years.
Hired as a cadet July 4, 1999
A320 F/O April 20, 2000
Total time 608 hrs
You'll note that I haven't commented otherwise on the relative merits of cadet ships in the current environment. I have no opinion on the matter. I won't let people make crass generalisations about those who graduate those programs- whether the program was needed or not.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Too far away from the cockpit...
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Being relatively new to the aviation business I don't have a lot of authority on this subject, but:
It has always been my understanding that Qantas views cadets as INVESTMENTS.
And to date those investments have been very worth while. (Current QF Chief Pilot, for example???)
So for notrouble and others who state that there is no need for a cadet scheme, it would seem that the powers at be believe otherwise. And they know. I don't believe anyone here is stupid enough to not understand why the cadet scheme exists- they're just too biast by their own sentiments.
I'm glad to see Keg and a few others presenting a balanced, logical argument rather than listing their gripes.
Also, it would see that 'multi- disciplinary / experienced' crews are an invaluable part of the airline and safety culture.
It has always been my understanding that Qantas views cadets as INVESTMENTS.
And to date those investments have been very worth while. (Current QF Chief Pilot, for example???)
So for notrouble and others who state that there is no need for a cadet scheme, it would seem that the powers at be believe otherwise. And they know. I don't believe anyone here is stupid enough to not understand why the cadet scheme exists- they're just too biast by their own sentiments.
I'm glad to see Keg and a few others presenting a balanced, logical argument rather than listing their gripes.
Also, it would see that 'multi- disciplinary / experienced' crews are an invaluable part of the airline and safety culture.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Notrouble - sorry, but I have to enter the discussion again - I would turn your quote around and say - "If in the cockpit you have a qualified pilot (CPL + I/R + Type Rated who has completed Line Training and the "Check to Line") then you have in the cockpit a valuable crew member/resource. It is about proficiencies, not years or hours. The current the CASA "2 class" system of ratings for Capt and F/O's doesn't help promote acceptance of this view.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: australia
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey Nzer
The F/O may be proficient, this doesn't mean he or she is experienced though.
As an example, you have two proficient well trained pilots, ones been flying for one year, the other ten years. Who do you trust the most.
The one with more experience would be my guess.
How about you NZER, are you a better pilot now than when you started?
I'll reiterate what I said at the start, there are an adequate number of highly trained and experienced pilots in AUSTRALIA.
We do not need cadets.
The F/O may be proficient, this doesn't mean he or she is experienced though.
As an example, you have two proficient well trained pilots, ones been flying for one year, the other ten years. Who do you trust the most.
The one with more experience would be my guess.
How about you NZER, are you a better pilot now than when you started?
I'll reiterate what I said at the start, there are an adequate number of highly trained and experienced pilots in AUSTRALIA.
We do not need cadets.
Guest
Posts: n/a
No trouble, you said "Ifyou have a F/O up front with less than a year in aviation you have a single pilot operation." Now you are admitting that that pilot may well be "proficient", but lacking in "experience".
That is without dispute. So as I understand it you accept that a well trained CM possessing requisite proficiency, is a benefit on any Flight Deck.
The issue of experience is another one entirely - as is whether or not Australia (or NZ) needs cadet pilots - and not relevant in the position I have taken on this topic.
Am I a "better" pilot now than when I began as a CPL (yes, the good old "hard" way) in 1975? - yes, I am more practised at my particular type of flying, and my experience in my particular operating environment facilitates my performance. However if I were to change types of flying/environments, that experience would not be a lot of good to me - (if, eg, I went Ag flying). So "experie3nce" per se isn't a lot of help i don't think - I have already made the point that 200hrs SPIFR in a BE58 is not a lot of help transitioning to a multi-crew T/prop, and so on.
However it looks as though this is a courteous "agree to disagree" topic.
That is without dispute. So as I understand it you accept that a well trained CM possessing requisite proficiency, is a benefit on any Flight Deck.
The issue of experience is another one entirely - as is whether or not Australia (or NZ) needs cadet pilots - and not relevant in the position I have taken on this topic.
Am I a "better" pilot now than when I began as a CPL (yes, the good old "hard" way) in 1975? - yes, I am more practised at my particular type of flying, and my experience in my particular operating environment facilitates my performance. However if I were to change types of flying/environments, that experience would not be a lot of good to me - (if, eg, I went Ag flying). So "experie3nce" per se isn't a lot of help i don't think - I have already made the point that 200hrs SPIFR in a BE58 is not a lot of help transitioning to a multi-crew T/prop, and so on.
However it looks as though this is a courteous "agree to disagree" topic.
