More Good Press
06-20-2011, 02:10 PM
#1
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,253
More Good Press
United Continental Pilots Split on Training Simulators - WSJ.com
Gotta tip my hat to the fine leaders in Willis Tower for making the new combined airline look stellar over the last few days. FYI United guys a few years ago I heard Fred Abbott exalt with satisfaction the following: "We've already cut the training dept as much as we can." Obviously TK is just a new block of wood for him to whack.
Gotta tip my hat to the fine leaders in Willis Tower for making the new combined airline look stellar over the last few days. FYI United guys a few years ago I heard Fred Abbott exalt with satisfaction the following: "We've already cut the training dept as much as we can." Obviously TK is just a new block of wood for him to whack.
06-20-2011, 04:09 PM
#2
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: B737 CAPT IAH
Posts: 1,130
All focus on SOC
United Continental Pilots Split on Training Simulators - WSJ.com
Gotta tip my hat to the fine leaders in Willis Tower for making the new combined airline look stellar over the last few days. FYI United guys a few years ago I heard Fred Abbott exalt with satisfaction the following: "We've already cut the training dept as much as we can." Obviously TK is just a new block of wood for him to whack.
Gotta tip my hat to the fine leaders in Willis Tower for making the new combined airline look stellar over the last few days. FYI United guys a few years ago I heard Fred Abbott exalt with satisfaction the following: "We've already cut the training dept as much as we can." Obviously TK is just a new block of wood for him to whack.
Obviously, the mgmt of UCH wants to have one standard of training. A "standard" that I believe is substandard. That is my opinion as a former UAL pilot.
Nonetheless, they want a cheaper answer that satisfies the FAA and, as well, handles the lowest common denominator.....CALs training facility. That is not to say that CAL training isn't good. I'll let a CAL pilot comment.
I'm just saying that the lowest level of training is the target for the "standard" to achieve the many requirements of the company goal of SOC.
For all out there. Those "synergies" that pilot's thought were their leverage can be achieved on many different levels. The company is still pushing to get them. Training to one standard, with standardized FMs, FOMs, etc., as well as standardized training saves the company millions while you train via CBT.
The concept of a "split" pilot group is NO different than the old companies dealing with pilots that are only qual'd on aircraft x or y.
They'll leave you split because it is their desire. They do have a plan and it doesn't include your best interests......especially if you're a UAL legacy.
My 2 cents.
06-21-2011, 05:34 AM
#3
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: 737 CAPT
Posts: 1,898
OK, last night I was able to read the whole article when I first saw it on Yahoo! Finance. Now all I see is a couple of paragraphs and no access to the entire article any longer.
Now, as a CAL pilot, I will comment. The article mostly deals with the 777. However, as indicated above, the company would like to expand some of the annual recurrent training to the use of FTDs for other aircraft. Last year the FAA approved CAL to do a test group of 737 pilots in the new -800 FTD with visuals for the LOE (LOFT) portion of the annual training.
I happened to be one of the pilots who had this on my schedule. Think these were randomly assigned based up on availability of slots. The first day was the standard full motion simulator with evaluation of critical maneuvers (RNAV RNP, CATIII, autoland, reduced visibility takeoffs, V1 cuts, SE approaches, etc.).
The second day we used the -800 visual FTD for the LOE. I will say that, yes, it was different to get in there. However, for the scenario given this past year, I found the FTD to be sufficient in what needed to be accomplished and evaluated. Was it strange not having the motion? Initially, sure. However, there was nothing during this particular scenario I feel would have been enhanced by having motion available. That is my opinion, of course.
I do think there is either a misconception or misrepresentation or whatever you want to call it when reading the article. It is made to sound as though all sorts of critical maneuvers are being conducted in the FTD.
Now, under a different yearly LOE scenario, would a full-motion simulator make more sense? Absolutely. Would it be great if every session was conducted in a full-motion simulator? Of course it would! I'm just a 737 pilot who has only done one of these. A 777 guy could probably give more insight since they do this regularly.
I do understand the UAL side's concern and even can agree with most of what their position is. However, I am curious if any of the UAL union representatives have gone to the CAL training center to see these sessions "in action" so-to-speak to get a thorough understanding of the process.
I don't believe that pilots doing an LOE in an FTD makes them less qualified to fly the line. I do agree that the company does view training as a cost that they want to bring down, but I don't see every solution or idea as necessarily anti-safety. I'm in the middle on this. I'm probably split 55%-45% in favor of always using a full-motion simulator for these training events, but as I said above that really is based on only one experience under one scenario. Given another scenario I might say 100% definite that we should be using only full-motion simulators.
Now, as a CAL pilot, I will comment. The article mostly deals with the 777. However, as indicated above, the company would like to expand some of the annual recurrent training to the use of FTDs for other aircraft. Last year the FAA approved CAL to do a test group of 737 pilots in the new -800 FTD with visuals for the LOE (LOFT) portion of the annual training.
I happened to be one of the pilots who had this on my schedule. Think these were randomly assigned based up on availability of slots. The first day was the standard full motion simulator with evaluation of critical maneuvers (RNAV RNP, CATIII, autoland, reduced visibility takeoffs, V1 cuts, SE approaches, etc.).
The second day we used the -800 visual FTD for the LOE. I will say that, yes, it was different to get in there. However, for the scenario given this past year, I found the FTD to be sufficient in what needed to be accomplished and evaluated. Was it strange not having the motion? Initially, sure. However, there was nothing during this particular scenario I feel would have been enhanced by having motion available. That is my opinion, of course.
I do think there is either a misconception or misrepresentation or whatever you want to call it when reading the article. It is made to sound as though all sorts of critical maneuvers are being conducted in the FTD.
Now, under a different yearly LOE scenario, would a full-motion simulator make more sense? Absolutely. Would it be great if every session was conducted in a full-motion simulator? Of course it would! I'm just a 737 pilot who has only done one of these. A 777 guy could probably give more insight since they do this regularly.
I do understand the UAL side's concern and even can agree with most of what their position is. However, I am curious if any of the UAL union representatives have gone to the CAL training center to see these sessions "in action" so-to-speak to get a thorough understanding of the process.
I don't believe that pilots doing an LOE in an FTD makes them less qualified to fly the line. I do agree that the company does view training as a cost that they want to bring down, but I don't see every solution or idea as necessarily anti-safety. I'm in the middle on this. I'm probably split 55%-45% in favor of always using a full-motion simulator for these training events, but as I said above that really is based on only one experience under one scenario. Given another scenario I might say 100% definite that we should be using only full-motion simulators.
06-21-2011, 06:09 AM
#4
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,253
As I recall last year's LOE ended with a Flap 15 landing to 29 in EWR w/gusty winds. Not necessarily difficult, but certainly unusual and requiring some airmenship down low. Losing the motion for something like that hurts the effect so why bother with winds/flap setting difference. Basically it's just one more step towards button pushing monkeys.
In the end, I will put money that Fred gets what he wants. Call it journalistic sensationalism, but I'm a little embarrassed when safety experts at Paris Air Show question our bean counting en lite of AF accident showing just what full motion should train. Then again I'm a little embarrassed at a lot of things that Jeffery's minions have done lately. There is a wonderful thread on flyertalk where our passengers are expressing there under educated dismay at this article. Just salt in the wounds after skynet fiasco this weekend.
WSJ: UACO wants to downgrade the Simulators Used for Pilot Training - FlyerTalk Forums
In the end, I will put money that Fred gets what he wants. Call it journalistic sensationalism, but I'm a little embarrassed when safety experts at Paris Air Show question our bean counting en lite of AF accident showing just what full motion should train. Then again I'm a little embarrassed at a lot of things that Jeffery's minions have done lately. There is a wonderful thread on flyertalk where our passengers are expressing there under educated dismay at this article. Just salt in the wounds after skynet fiasco this weekend.
WSJ: UACO wants to downgrade the Simulators Used for Pilot Training - FlyerTalk Forums
06-21-2011, 06:42 AM
#5
(retired)
Joined APC: Apr 2011
Position: Old, retired, healthy, debt-free, liquid
Posts: 422
...I happened to be one of the pilots who had this on my schedule. Think these were randomly assigned based up on availability of slots. The first day was the standard full motion simulator with evaluation of critical maneuvers (RNAV RNP, CATIII, autoland, reduced visibility takeoffs, V1 cuts, SE approaches, etc.).
The second day we used the -800 visual FTD for the LOE. I will say that, yes, it was different to get in there. However, for the scenario given this past year, I found the FTD to be sufficient in what needed to be accomplished and evaluated...
...I do think there is either a misconception or misrepresentation or whatever you want to call it when reading the article. It is made to sound as though all sorts of critical maneuvers are being conducted in the FTD...
...Would it be great if every session was conducted in a full-motion simulator? Of course it would!...
...I don't believe that pilots doing an LOE in an FTD makes them less qualified to fly the line...
...Given another scenario I might say 100% definite that we should be using only full-motion simulators.
The second day we used the -800 visual FTD for the LOE. I will say that, yes, it was different to get in there. However, for the scenario given this past year, I found the FTD to be sufficient in what needed to be accomplished and evaluated...
...I do think there is either a misconception or misrepresentation or whatever you want to call it when reading the article. It is made to sound as though all sorts of critical maneuvers are being conducted in the FTD...
...Would it be great if every session was conducted in a full-motion simulator? Of course it would!...
...I don't believe that pilots doing an LOE in an FTD makes them less qualified to fly the line...
...Given another scenario I might say 100% definite that we should be using only full-motion simulators.
06-21-2011, 01:41 PM
#6
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: B737 CAPT IAH
Posts: 1,130
OK, last night I was able to read the whole article when I first saw it on Yahoo! Finance. Now all I see is a couple of paragraphs and no access to the entire article any longer.
Now, as a CAL pilot, I will comment. The article mostly deals with the 777. However, as indicated above, the company would like to expand some of the annual recurrent training to the use of FTDs for other aircraft. Last year the FAA approved CAL to do a test group of 737 pilots in the new -800 FTD with visuals for the LOE (LOFT) portion of the annual training.
I happened to be one of the pilots who had this on my schedule. Think these were randomly assigned based up on availability of slots. The first day was the standard full motion simulator with evaluation of critical maneuvers (RNAV RNP, CATIII, autoland, reduced visibility takeoffs, V1 cuts, SE approaches, etc.).
The second day we used the -800 visual FTD for the LOE. I will say that, yes, it was different to get in there. However, for the scenario given this past year, I found the FTD to be sufficient in what needed to be accomplished and evaluated. Was it strange not having the motion? Initially, sure. However, there was nothing during this particular scenario I feel would have been enhanced by having motion available. That is my opinion, of course.
I do think there is either a misconception or misrepresentation or whatever you want to call it when reading the article. It is made to sound as though all sorts of critical maneuvers are being conducted in the FTD.
Now, under a different yearly LOE scenario, would a full-motion simulator make more sense? Absolutely. Would it be great if every session was conducted in a full-motion simulator? Of course it would! I'm just a 737 pilot who has only done one of these. A 777 guy could probably give more insight since they do this regularly.
I do understand the UAL side's concern and even can agree with most of what their position is. However, I am curious if any of the UAL union representatives have gone to the CAL training center to see these sessions "in action" so-to-speak to get a thorough understanding of the process.
I don't believe that pilots doing an LOE in an FTD makes them less qualified to fly the line. I do agree that the company does view training as a cost that they want to bring down, but I don't see every solution or idea as necessarily anti-safety. I'm in the middle on this. I'm probably split 55%-45% in favor of always using a full-motion simulator for these training events, but as I said above that really is based on only one experience under one scenario. Given another scenario I might say 100% definite that we should be using only full-motion simulators.
Now, as a CAL pilot, I will comment. The article mostly deals with the 777. However, as indicated above, the company would like to expand some of the annual recurrent training to the use of FTDs for other aircraft. Last year the FAA approved CAL to do a test group of 737 pilots in the new -800 FTD with visuals for the LOE (LOFT) portion of the annual training.
I happened to be one of the pilots who had this on my schedule. Think these were randomly assigned based up on availability of slots. The first day was the standard full motion simulator with evaluation of critical maneuvers (RNAV RNP, CATIII, autoland, reduced visibility takeoffs, V1 cuts, SE approaches, etc.).
The second day we used the -800 visual FTD for the LOE. I will say that, yes, it was different to get in there. However, for the scenario given this past year, I found the FTD to be sufficient in what needed to be accomplished and evaluated. Was it strange not having the motion? Initially, sure. However, there was nothing during this particular scenario I feel would have been enhanced by having motion available. That is my opinion, of course.
I do think there is either a misconception or misrepresentation or whatever you want to call it when reading the article. It is made to sound as though all sorts of critical maneuvers are being conducted in the FTD.
Now, under a different yearly LOE scenario, would a full-motion simulator make more sense? Absolutely. Would it be great if every session was conducted in a full-motion simulator? Of course it would! I'm just a 737 pilot who has only done one of these. A 777 guy could probably give more insight since they do this regularly.
I do understand the UAL side's concern and even can agree with most of what their position is. However, I am curious if any of the UAL union representatives have gone to the CAL training center to see these sessions "in action" so-to-speak to get a thorough understanding of the process.
I don't believe that pilots doing an LOE in an FTD makes them less qualified to fly the line. I do agree that the company does view training as a cost that they want to bring down, but I don't see every solution or idea as necessarily anti-safety. I'm in the middle on this. I'm probably split 55%-45% in favor of always using a full-motion simulator for these training events, but as I said above that really is based on only one experience under one scenario. Given another scenario I might say 100% definite that we should be using only full-motion simulators.
Thanks for the good info. The question really does boil down to is the FTD adequate for the training and level of safety desired? As you stated, perhaps not in all scenarios.
I have no doubt that the mighty $ is at the root of this. Is CAL training center equipped to up their recurrent training requirements to all full up sims on I believe you said the 777 and some 737 training? If not, I think you have your answer there.
Not in the game right now but really think the motive is one of SOC and not refining training to save cost and achieve the same results. Again, as you stated, I can think of a number of scenarios where a FBT wouldn't provide that training.
Frats,
Lee
06-21-2011, 03:53 PM
#7
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,083
Lee I doubt it's a volume issue as CAL has been doing this on the 777 for years. I did one cycle myself and found it unrealistic, but didn't see a big problem since we did the MV in a FFS the previous day. Definitely less than optimal, but I think they simply figured it costs less (maintenance, electricity, etc.) to do it in a FBT than FFS. One thing that might be driving this is I've heard we're going to the legacy UAL training module where you come in for two or three sims depending on the airplane and where you are in the cycle, instead of the one or two as is done at legacy CAL. Doing the LOE in a FBT might be the compromise in cost vs. training between the two programs.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
