Search

Notices

CFI to UAL CPP

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 02-11-2018, 07:10 AM
  #111  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Airhoss's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Sleeping in the black swan’s nest.
Posts: 5,726
Default

Originally Posted by HuggyU2
I don't believe this is true. There are PLENTY of high-time, quality, experienced pilots that want to fly for UAL.

The problem is that UAL manages to not hire many of them.
If you actually look at the experience of the vast majority of new hires you’d soon see what a completely ridiculous statement this is.
Airhoss is offline  
Old 02-11-2018, 08:43 AM
  #112  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Mar 2017
Posts: 28
Default

Originally Posted by AboveMins
Have fun baby sitting your puppy mill FO. Experience is priceless in this line of work. United disagrees, which is why my family will never set foot on one of your aircraft. Just because someone passes a silly test, figures out how to beat HR at their own games, or makes it through a check ride, doesn't make them a competent pilot. Thousands of hours operating safely in challenging conditions does.

BTW, of course they're inferior. When the fecal matter hits the axial impeller, would you want someone in your right seat that has turbine command experience in all types of conditions, or some goober who was buzzing around the pattern at a CAVU airport in AZ? Better yet, send me your answer after your fire bell goes off at V1 with a special departure in ice, when your CFI becomes as useless as a 3rd nipple.
By that logic they shouldn’t hire any military fighter pilots either. One could argue that their prior experience is not relevant in airline operations. Just food for thought before you call people from other backgrounds incompetent.
Snyper00 is offline  
Old 02-11-2018, 09:37 AM
  #113  
Gets Weekends Off
 
oldmako's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2009
Position: The GF of FUPM
Posts: 3,073
Default

Originally Posted by John Carr

.... L-UAL .......shut the engines off on a 76 coming out of Hawaii
[/QUOTE]

If you're referring to the episode that I think you are, there was a LOT more to it than that. Not trying to pick the fly feces from the pepper just to add some clarification. At the time, Boeing said that the engines would suction feed up to max altitude. Which apparently they WILL, but only if you climb to that altitude with the pumps off. But, switch the pumps off at ALT, and the flame goes away.

I think you and I are in agreement here. If experienced guys manage to dork things up on occasion, adding more less experienced guys to the mix might not be the best course of action.

- ACA parked a perfectly operating plane in a guys yard going into CHM.

- Avair (American Eagle) did the same thing going into Dulles.

- Two test pilots (right!) flamed out a CRJ doing high alt testing one day on a ferry flight. They then mishandled the in-flight relight which resulted in a lawn dart.

- Buffalo. He couldn't recognize an imminent stall which he had created, and had no idea what to do with the thrust levers even though his speed was ebbing and the stall warning was going off. Meanwhile, his FO had never been in actual icing conditions and thought that retracting the flaps was in order.

As a unionized and highly trained labor force, we ought to be at the forefront of demanding highly qualified and highly experienced labor to join our ranks. Not relatively low time piston engine CFI's who might have an in that the 8000-hour Turbojet RJ Captain (or high time MIL candidate) doesn't.
oldmako is offline  
Old 02-11-2018, 11:07 AM
  #114  
Gets Weekends Off
 
MasterOfPuppets's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2012
Position: 787
Posts: 3,202
Default

So we have beat it to death. I think we all agree there are better qualified pilots out there. I think we all agree that now is not the time to be bringing CFIs onboard.

So how do we fix this?
MasterOfPuppets is offline  
Old 02-11-2018, 11:16 AM
  #115  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Mar 2017
Posts: 705
Default

Originally Posted by MasterOfPuppets
So we have beat it to death. I think we all agree there are better qualified pilots out there. I think we all agree that now is not the time to be bringing CFIs onboard.

So how do we fix this?
We don't. Last time I heard Darla, we don't have the keys to the pick em' up truck.

We just manage the situation.
Floyd is offline  
Old 02-11-2018, 11:17 AM
  #116  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Oct 2015
Posts: 772
Default

Originally Posted by MasterOfPuppets
So we have beat it to death. I think we all agree there are better qualified pilots out there. I think we all agree that now is not the time to be bringing CFIs onboard.

So how do we fix this?
Everyone on these boards always complains about how United isnt forward thinking, but when they actually do something that is, we all complain about that too. I see absolutely no problem with it, however our training program needs have an overhaul to accommodate this. My previous regionals were set up to train low time pilots, however when I came to United it was kinda a party the first 2 weeks and a little more serious during sim training. The CFI hires in my opinion should have to have an in classroom setting for systems, more in depth oral about 121 ops, and many more observation rides.
Broncofan is offline  
Old 02-11-2018, 11:28 AM
  #117  
Gets Weekends Off
 
MasterOfPuppets's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2012
Position: 787
Posts: 3,202
Default

Originally Posted by Broncofan
Everyone on these boards always complains about how United isnt forward thinking, but when they actually do something that is, we all complain about that too. I see absolutely no problem with it, however our training program needs have an overhaul to accommodate this. My previous regionals were set up to train low time pilots, however when I came to United it was kinda a party the first 2 weeks and a little more serious during sim training. The CFI hires in my opinion should have to have an in classroom setting for systems, more in depth oral about 121 ops, and many more observation rides.
These CFIs are going to have a very hard time. Our training program is not built for them. So yes we need a flying 101, 121 intro class. atleast another 2 weeks. But it has to be separate, we can’t send our “normal” new hires through that class. They will need more sims for sure and a lot more IOE.

United may have jumped the gun here and thrown these pilots straight into the inferno. Is it impossible? No but it is not going to be easy nor will it be fun. These pilots got the job but do they have the ability?
MasterOfPuppets is offline  
Old 02-11-2018, 12:28 PM
  #118  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Oct 2017
Posts: 848
Default

Just to add my unsolicited theory to this conversation.......maybe UAL knows that the experience pool is going to dry up in the future and they’re trying to space it out a little? Otherwise they’re going to have a span of time where ALL their new-hires are “unworthy” of the standards WE all think they should have. I freely admit, I’m jealous as hell. I’ve been slugging it out at a wounded regional for well over a decade, and I have a CHANCE at a CHANCE to go to UAL....maybe. But it’s their game and their rules. When I think too much about it, it doesn’t help my state of mind much, but when I’m as objective as I can be, that’s the theory I come up with. I think they’re trying to drag out the experienced applicants so they still have some, while also making sure they have experienced guys and gals operating their feed. Sucks for those of us who think we have “paid our dues”, but it’s not my company and I don’t make the hiring decisions.
PhantomHawk is offline  
Old 02-11-2018, 04:08 PM
  #119  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Sep 2014
Position: Airbus 320 Captain
Posts: 481
Default

Originally Posted by Snyper00
By that logic they shouldn’t hire any military fighter pilots either. One could argue that their prior experience is not relevant in airline operations. Just food for thought before you call people from other backgrounds incompetent.
Military flight training eliminates quite a few of the 100 knot brains from the program. You get a couple looks at a maneuver and then are expected to be proficient at it, and on and on. Add to that the level of training received, formation, aerobatic, extensive OCF/spin training, low level flying, gun pattern, bomb pattern, Air Combat Maneuvering, and, for the Navy, carrier landing; the military training syllabus is arguably far more demanding than most anything in the civilian world.
rp2pilot is offline  
Old 02-11-2018, 04:23 PM
  #120  
Get me outta here...
 
HuggyU2's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2008
Position: Boeing right seat
Posts: 1,541
Default

Airhoss,
Would you clarify? I'm reading what you posted in two possible ways.
HuggyU2 is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
ReserveDog
United
46
05-23-2014 08:23 AM
Airhoss
United
210
09-04-2012 07:48 AM
TruthHurts
United
48
04-04-2012 10:07 AM
cons
Flight Schools and Training
8
03-27-2007 08:09 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices