Real world training schools

[CAPFlyer]

Also look into Cathay Pacific, a friend of mine from Montreal took that route. Even if you have hours, they start you right back from the beginning, send you to Australia, you redo all of your training from start to finish. Then you start as a cruise relief Captain on a 744 or 777. Thats how it worked for him anyways and he only had 800 hours.

DO NOT go this route. Sorry, but that training is what was directly at fault for the AF447 accident. You will come out an unsafe pilot, sorry. If the ICAO doesn't outlaw these pilot ratings as a result of the crash, the reorganization will make it a no win situation for almost any pilot.

Also, may I suggest we stop talking about Canadian training since he's in the US and has indicated he is looking at the US for training. Not only that, but as a foreign student, if he went to Canada he would spend more than getting the training here and end up with less as there is a lot of extra training he won't get credit for (like night and VFR OTT) since the regs are differentand would require duplication of training down the road.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2

[bigjuicyspider]

---

[flyboy4612]

Well, thanks to everyone for putting in their two cents anyway. Right now it looks like my top choice may be Spartan College of Aeronautics. The gent there talked me out of the 5 month PanAm program stating that though they can get you done in 5 months, you lack a great deal of experience and if the people they work with aren't hiring at the time, you're pretty much up the creek. Spartan offers lifetime job placement assistance which I thought was pretty cool. If I go this route it sounds like I'd work for Spartan for a while as an instructor. I never used to like the idea of instructing much but the more I think about it, the more I'm seeing what an opportunity it is to really get a solid knowledge base in aviation. Who knows, maybe I'll find a lot of personal satisfaction in teaching. I know the pay isn't going to be great for quite a while but at least I'd be around aircraft and flying. So, we'll see how it goes!

[CAPFlyer]

Spartan is a very well respected school. Having already gotten your degree, it's probably the better way to go since they offer the post-graduate type training in addition to their link-up with OSU and a couple other 4-year colleges for training.

Getting there fast isn't the always the best way to get there. The more experience you can get and still survive the better. Most of what you learn in aviation is from experience, not from a classroom. The more you're out there "in the stuff", the better you learn how to do the basics of flying the airplane.

[Rocket_Bird]

DO NOT go this route. Sorry, but that training is what was directly at fault for the AF447 accident. You will come out an unsafe pilot, sorry. If the ICAO doesn't outlaw these pilot ratings as a result of the crash, the reorganization will make it a no win situation for almost any pilot.2

For enlightenment purposes, can you please clarify this? What specifically is the flaw with their training program? Were the AF447 pilots graduates of the Cathay program? I understand the AF447 pilots used improper judgment under the circumstances, but as I understand it, the airline programs build you from the ground up.

[Rocket_Bird]

Since when do you need a VFR OTT for a Commercial license in Canada?

Never said it was. Just said it was one of the first steps towards one. Since you can use the 10 IFR hours towards the CPL IFR requirement. So many people get their PPL, then Night, and lastly VFR OTT, and all those hours will count towards the CPL hour requirements.

Just for sake of clarity, the privileges of a Commercial License is Canada includes VFR OTT, and that doesn't require a separate rating or any separate training for. People can get their PPL, then Night, then straight to commercial, and they can exercise VFR OTT. But as most people say, if you are going to dance around up in the clouds, it is better off just getting an instrument rating and forget about it.

The VFR OTT rating is mostly just for private pilots who have no intention of going further. But again, it's better to just get an instrument rating.

[seaniam81]

Sorry Rocket Bird your missing the point, of using training for a rating towards the hourly requirement for getting a CPL. A holder of a PPL who gets a night and a VFR OTT can use those 10+ hours of IFR training towards a CPL. Also a holder of a PPL can use much of their "solo" hours going towards the CPL. Example, if a holder of a PPL goes on a 300NM cross country, and stops at 3 other airports on the trip, then his CPL cross country is done.

[CAPFlyer]

Duplicate.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2

[CAPFlyer]

For enlightenment purposes, can you please clarify this? What specifically is the flaw with their training program? Were the AF447 pilots graduates of the Cathay program? I understand the AF447 pilots used improper judgment under the circumstances, but as I understand it, the airline programs build you from the ground up.

Both the Air France and Cathay programs train to the same standards as the Relief Crew rating is ICAO only and is not recognized by the FAA or UK CAA. The program has serious deficiencies in requirements for emergency procedures and basic handling of the aircraft. This lack of training is what led to the problem as the pilots had only been trained how to handle unreliable IAS during the approach and takeoff phases, not in cruise. As a pilot reverts to training during emergencies, the inevitable happened and they stalled the plane. The final report was just recently released and points out this deficiency among other serious training deficiencies brought on by the Relief only crew ratings.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2

[Rocket_Bird]

Sorry Rocket Bird your missing the point, of using training for a rating towards the hourly requirement for getting a CPL. A holder of a PPL who gets a night and a VFR OTT can use those 10+ hours of IFR training towards a CPL. Also a holder of a PPL can use much of their "solo" hours going towards the CPL. Example, if a holder of a PPL goes on a 300NM cross country, and stops at 3 other airports on the trip, then his CPL cross country is done.

Yes I understand that, I have a CPL myself. I'm just saying that the VFR OTT stuff is optional, and is not even worth getting for those who shoot for a commercial and instrument rating. Especially since the CPL grants the same privileges anyway. Instrument hour requirements on the license is better served by actual IFR/instrument rating training (which also grants OTT) if one dares to fly in IMC. They all count of course, but an OTT rating, for the most part, is just duplicate training and probably confuses the heck out of our American friends .

Sorry for hijacking the thread.

[CAPFlyer]

BTW, for those whom haven't seen it, here's the BEA's final report on Air France 447 -

http://www.bea.aero/docspa/2009/f-cp090 ... 601.en.pdf

Page 206 contains where the BEA is most critical of the "Relief Crew" concept in my opinion, although other parts of the reccomendations and findings also point directly to this sub-standard form of training and dangerous operating policy.

4.2.1 Recommendations on Operations
Training for Manual Aircraft Handling
Examination of their last training records and check rides
made it clear that the copilots had not been trained for manual aeroplane handling
of approach to stall and stall recovery at high altitude.

Look also starting at Page 24 of the training of these crewmembers. All the "type ratings" for the Co-Pilots were valid only for Air France (thus why it says "Within Air France" to the side of their type ratings). This is part of the problem. Air France was able to develop and approve its own program, which included the "Cruise Only" rating that allowed them to bypass certain parts of the training that would otherwise be required. While these guys had a lot of time, they never did the training on high altitude upsets, something that is required for a full type rating. This is where the problem starts. When you're not fully qualified to fly an aircraft, you're not fully qualified to handle an emergency, and thus, you're a liability and a danger, not an asset. This is what's kept the FAA in particular from approving these "relief crew only" endorsements.