Do type-rates new hires get priority (or obligated) into their old types

[-]

Tony_Three_Pies@reddit

Generally speaking, when you’re new at an airline you go through their full training course regardless of previous experience so a new hire with a type costs the same as one without. The only difference is a little bit of paperwork at the end of the checkride.

[-]

Apprehensive_Cost937@reddit

Very strange to send type rated people through the full type rating training.

Here in Europe, you just do a quick operator's conversion course, which focuses on airline's specific procedures, but obviously there's no need to learn how the airplane works, how to load the FMS, etc. if you have a few hundred or even thousands of hours of experience on type.

[-]

doom_pizza@reddit

Procedures differ from airline to airline. Learning an airplane is only part of new hire training, the rest is company procedures and what not.

[-]

Apprehensive_Cost937@reddit

Of course, but if the training course is detailed enough that someone new on type and to the airline can pass it, surely it can be made more efficient by shortening it a bit for someone very experienced on type?

[-]

Tony_Three_Pies@reddit

Maybe your type rating courses are just different?

I'm thinking back to my most recent full course at my company trying to identify what could be ditched for an already typed pilot. I really don't think there are that many sessions that would be worth avoiding and certainly not enough to be worth building an entirely new training program around.

There's a systems ground school coupled with systems focused sessions. A type rated pilot would find this redundant, but it does offer some opportunity to practice new procedures (especially normal and non-normal checklist usage). I suppose if you were really trying to cut costs this could be dropped for a typed pilot.

Next was a couple of sessions in a fixed training device that focused on flows and box manipulation. An already typed pilot would find this fairly easy, but I don't think they would want to skip it because not every airline uses the same flows or even FMS technology (route uplinking, performance procedures, etc).

Then we moved into the full motion sims. We do 10 total. 2 of the 10 were differences training for an uncommon sub-variant that it's unlikely even a type rated pilot would have experience with. Another 2 were checkrides. That leaves sims that we could cut. I don't remember the exact curriculum but 1 or 2 of those sims covered regulatory compliance stuff that isn't really specific to the airplane but is something every pilot has to do (for example, UPRT). Some maybe you could ditch a couple of sims that are primarily focused on airplane specific stuff but even then you're getting practice with all of the airline specific things.

You guys obviously make it work but I just don't see much of an advantage in cutting a couple of sim sessions. I suppose the corporate bean counters would like it but there is also a cost associated with developing and maintaining this alternate pipeline.

Honestly the biggest advantage in my opinion is just getting to know the new airline, and its culture. I don't mind spending a little extra time getting a feel for how the airline operates, what its instructors and check pilots are like etc

[-]

prex10@reddit

On top of what you said. There are always the senior guys who have been goin through the motions for a decade or more depending on the company and just phone in it when flying the line.

Some of those guys really need it whether they want it or not. Besides trust me, they *do*.

[-]

pipesIAH@reddit

As an instructor at a major, thanks for typing this all out so I didn't have to.

I'll also add that throughout the course, we emphasize how we want the aircraft flown AND train folks on how CRM/TEM will contribute to a safe outcome.

Everyone we hire knows how to fly an airplane. But some people struggle because they can't learn where they fit in the team. Learning how you fit in to the big picture is what takes a person from just flying an airplane to an experienced pilot.

I'I'm genuinely surprised this even up for debate.

[-]

RobThree03@reddit

Wouldn’t it be even more efficient to not train people at all? You’d save so much money and time if you just grabbed a random passenger who paid to be on the flight and told them they got an upgrade to the Captain’s seat and told them to fly the trip. /s

You’re trading safety for that efficiency. And while a type rated pilot is pretty safe in a familiar cockpit at an unfamiliar airline the marginal costs vs the marginal gains are a bad trade.

[-]

Apprehensive_Cost937@reddit

That's why a conversion course is specifically focused on getting familiar with airline's specific procedures, rather than redoing the full type rating.

Focus is on the important stuff, instead of everyone getting bored learning how to insert a hold in the FMS with 10,000 hours on type.

[-]