Originally Posted by Deathray

I don’t agree. I came off the Airbus and found the 756 training to be just fine. Although there are a few differences, the guts are the same. My biggest beef was the age and reliability of the sims, especially the 76 sim appropriately nicknamed “Christine.” Other than that, without any Boeing experience whatsoever, I felt well prepared going into IOE.

Originally Posted by rightside02

I have had 3 guys all DEN lifetime TK guys . Matter of fact none of my PI’s were even IAH guys . (Obvi cause it’s Airbus) either way I think most of the IAH guys have gone to the line as their positive space gig is done .

Originally Posted by Deathray

I don’t agree. I came off the Airbus and found the 756 training to be just fine. Although there are a few differences, the guts are the same. My biggest beef was the age and reliability of the sims, especially the 76 sim appropriately nicknamed “Christine.” Other than that, without any Boeing experience whatsoever, I felt well prepared going into IOE.

Originally Posted by JimLaheyTPS

Good old Christine has botched many commutes home due to her being herself and breaking down every 30 minutes per session.

Originally Posted by FlewNavy

Was the spike before/after implementation of the IFT syllabus?

Originally Posted by Zoomie

"Training bubble guys"... please elaborate as I've never heard this term before...

I know you've never been a TK instructor because it seems you don't really understand how things work there.

Your average TK instructor has pretty much zero control over policy and FM changes, just like your average LCA or line CA. Do you think that management brings in instructors and evaluators to have exhaustive discussion on what they are changing?

Nope.

These fleet decisions are made by 1-2 people in a fleet of 5000 737 pilots. There is no discussion, no debate, etc. When the line pilots see the change, that's when the instructor/evaluators see the change as well.

Do you honestly think TK instructors want all of these "harmonization" changes? That means they have to teach all of these changes during CQ to some guys who have been on the aircraft for 10-30 years and listen to everyone ***** about it.

Please get some perspective. The instructors/sim check airmen/ LCAs are your fellow brothers and sisters just trying to keep their heads above water will all these ridiculous changes as well. Basically, your on your soapbox preaching to the choir here.

Originally Posted by rightside02

All comes down to one thing ... MONEY

Originally Posted by sleeves

Yep! The industry has pressured Boeing into designing aircraft that are less efficient, design Frankensteins all in the name of not having to send us to a sim period! Insanity!!

Originally Posted by Dave Fitzgerald

You think the 757 syllabus is too short and not built for new hires?

Wait a couple of months when the last bid starts training new hires in the 787 and 777 fleets. Both those programs presume some prior Boeing and FMC familiarity--as well as knowing UAL. It's going to be a cluster. Not because of the new hires, UAL is just not prepared for new hires in those fleets.

Originally Posted by Itsajob

Complete all CBT’s before going to Denver. There are 3 or 4 days in the footprint to get that done and you can do them at the hotel in Denver, or at home. Most do it at home. When class starts you get a 3-4 hour systems review with an instructor followed by a FTD session. That last 4 days then the SV. It’s basically a self taught program on your iPad and the class portion just clears up any questions. That is followed by more FTD’s and then sim. The sim portion is the normal stuff followed by several international loft sessions. The flying part is done well, the systems part needs more time due to all of the differences in the fleet.