If the goal of the student is to get into an airliner, why have him/her waste time grinding circuits all-day in a clapped-out C172? The sims are getting so good and relatively cheap, so I just wonder.
Is it the ‘seat of the pants’ flying skills you get from SEP? But are these really important? One could even argue that it is ‘negative training’, because a 737 feels completely different. And the trend of airliner flying is more towards management rather than hand flying anyway.
‘Fly what you have been trained in’ makes sense.
An hour in a sim where you can really train emergencies almost all of the time which you cannot do in a SEP/MEP is worth so much more. Besides, you can concentrate on relevant emergencies, which may be quite different in a SEP compared to a 737.
And FO’s will always have the benefit of sitting next to an experienced Captain for quite some time, to complement their synthetic training.
I’m probably missing things, so shoot please.
aart wrote:
One could even argue that it is ‘negative training’, because a 737 feels completely different.
Basic automatisms like to pull when you see too much green and to push if it’s too blue are the same across all airplanes. And gaining a feeling for actual flying can be better developed in small aircraft – plus an hour of C-172 is easily cheaper than an hour in a 737 full flightsim.
But the concept you describe actually exists: It’s called MPL and the license only qualifies you to fly heavy metal.
Malibuflyer wrote:
But the concept you describe actually exists: It’s called MPL and the license only qualifies you to fly heavy metal.
Indeed. Some have thought it quite odd that the holder is a qualified pilot, but is not qualified to fly in command (and therefore solo) in anything at all – not even a C152.
I tend to think the move towards systems management at the expense of basic flying skills has already gone too far. AF447 is a classic example.
Actually one of the progress tests on the MPL plus the solo cross country qualifier grants them an SEP PPL, just an application is required.
One MPL program is carried out in a Citation 501. Arguably being straight wing still some element of negative transfer type training:)
AF447 is often referred to when it comes to the subjects of, training, accidents and basic flying
But I would urge the reading of the full report and you will recognise more of the Swiss Cheese/ human factors contribution to this disaster than just seen in the headline quotes.
Graham wrote:
AF447 is a classic example.
But that one did cause a change of mind in the industry, didn’t it? E.g. the Advanced Upset Prevention and Recovery Training.
gallois wrote:
AF447 is often referred to when it comes to the subjects of, training, accidents and basic flying
But I would urge the reading of the full report and you will recognise more of the Swiss Cheese/ human factors contribution to this disaster than just seen in the headline quotes.
Of course you can write pages on the mix of automation, crew coordination and instrument errors and how all that combined contributed to the sad accident, a simple look at ground speed on 1M$ GPS or 100$ handheld GPS would have saved the day on recognising stalls from overspeeds without even going into complex IAS/GS conversions, most people flying airliners will tend to laugh at the above statement, maybe they can’t hand fly unusual attitudes without everything working? or they are completly disconnect from simple physics & reality? things like ground speed & track, power & attitude went away long time ago?
RobertL18C wrote:
Actually one of the progress tests on the MPL plus the solo cross country qualifier grants them an SEP PPL, just an application is required.
I don’t think this is generally true. There are some MPL programs that are designed in a way that they include a PPL/SEP but in general it takes additional training to get a PPL with an MPL – it’s not just an application.
@Malibuflyer each MPL is managed by an airline, on the four MPL programs I am aware of all cadets can get a SEP PPL after PT2 and the qualifier cross country.
