Back to Squawk list
  • 10

Delta To Boost Loss-Of-Control Prevention With New Instructor Training

Soumis
 
Delta Air Lines is sending its senior instructors to a one-week upset prevention and recovery training (UPRT) program that includes ground, in-aircraft and full-motion simulator instruction aimed at helping the airline better train its line pilots to avoid or recover from loss-of-control (LOC) incidents. (aviationweek.com) Plus d'info...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


preacher1
preacher1 1
FLY THE PLANE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Murphy doesn't give you any warning when he walks in and makes himself at home in your cockpit
LoralThomas
Loral Thomas 3
Agree wholeheartedly, preacher. Seems like "stick and rudder" is finally returning to the flight deck. All the new-age whistles and bells still can't replace good piloting skills. Applaud Delta for taking the plunge early.
preacher1
preacher1 2
I have always said that automation is wonderful if you let it ASSIST you as a tool rather than rely on it. I can speak from experience on it's evolution. I went from a 707 full of steam gauges to a 757 with a glass panel. Transition was close to a month and that was about 86. There has been so much more. from 86 until 2009 when I retired, we had 3 major avionics upgrades and during one of them there was a major upgrade on the engines from RR, and I'm not talking Dcheck.
Highflyer1950
Highflyer1950 1
It's interesting that we have TCAS that will tell you which way to turn and whether to climb or descend and even tell you when you are clear of danger, and Then there is GPWS. Which requires immediate pilot input to rectify, so why can't we have a Big Bright Read Out that says" STALL - lower the nose/ increase power and then advise the pilots when the stall has been recovered and further Big Read Outs that dictate actions to maintain that flight profile until out of danger? I agree Preacher, my DC-8-63/L1011 were both steam and I didn't glass until the 90's. I also believe that teaching something is also the best way to know systems and watching others as an old school instructor was invaluable info. I like the 1500 hour rule but even that may not be enough! To me, the proof is Air Canada 767 glides into Gimli- no fatalities, Air TransAt A330 glides into the Azores - no fatalities. Asiana Airlines takes a perfectly good 777 in great weather and flies it into the ground in SFO - 2 fatalities. Great pilots have great airmanship, and great airmanship comes from experience comes from hours in the logbook. Fast track a kid to the right seat of an airliner, well, read the papers!
preacher1
preacher1 1
Well, you are definitely right about experience. Add to that Sully's deal. He had a bunch of sailplane time. See my post up top and you can find my opinion on the 1500hr rule.
BTW, I think it was 3 on Asiana.
ADXbear
ADXbear 1
We need quality flight time and training in those 1500 hours for the ATP. not quantity.. a lot of partial panel flying, a lot of aerobatics.. fly the plane by instinct,, not by a book..
preacher1
preacher1 1
What gets me about the whole 1500 hour rule is that both of the Colgan pilots were well above that. In my opinion, you are correct on quality. I always thought it was better to hire a guy with say 800 hrs and let him gain turbine and quality experience for the next 700. You are correct in that 1500 with an ATP in the cockpit, you don't really know what you have. A lot of that does come out in the wash though when they get hired and they get a crusty old stick and rudder check airman in the SIM beside them.
LoralThomas
Loral Thomas 1
What do you think needs to change? I fully agree that having an ATP doesn't make you super pilot. I also feel the FAA goofed in raising the right seat qualifications to ATP. Far better to take that lower time pilot, pair him with a "very seasoned" captain and let him/her learn the real world. And if I'm not mistaken, the Captain is still PIC ready to add input when necessary.
preacher1
preacher1 1
You and I are on same wave length and as far as what needs to change, your comment says it all. Like I said above, some of those 1500 hr wonders meet the real world head on when they sit down beside a crusty old stick & rudder guy that's their check airman. It is one thing to be able to know which button to push or lever to pull, but it is another thing to have a good idea what it'll make the plane do when you do it.
LoralThomas
Loral Thomas 1
Not knocking the CFI (I was one) but most of those hours between Commercial and ATP are spent sitting in the right seat showing somebody how to fly a single engine airplane. I quit flying a long time ago and just recently got interested again from a ground perspective only. What I have seen (and read) makes me cringe. Just follow all the light twin crashes lately. It's become a bad rash and can't help thinking poor piloting skills has a major impact (mechanical catastrophes not included). CFIs who are just bidding their time to build time for that airline career are not invested in training as much as a "professional" CFI. And you don't want to get me started on today's technology in the cockpit. That's where the problem lies. Applaud the new UPRT program -- now maybe basic flying skills will again be emphasized on training.

Se connecter

Vous n'avez pas de compte? Inscrivez-vous maintenant (gratuitement) pour des fonctionnalités personnalisées, des alertes de vols, et plus encore!
Saviez-vous que le suivi des vols FlightAware est soutenu par la publicité ?
Vous pouvez nous aider à garder FlightAware gratuit en autorisant les annonces de FlightAware.com. Nous travaillons dur pour que notre publicité reste pertinente et discrète afin de créer une expérience formidable. Il est facile et rapide de mettre les annonces en liste blanche sur FlightAware ou d’examiner nos comptes premium.
Abandonner