Skip to main content

Fasten Seatbelts

As a pilot, I'm pretty alarmed by the news that the minimum number of flying hours for trainee commercial pilots is to be halved under new rules that are being rushed through despite protests that the changes will be unsafe.

The Times reports that newly qualified pilots are to be allowed to take control of airliners after only 70 hours’ flying experience. Under the present rules, pilots must accumulate at least 145 flying hours before being entrusted with carrying passengers.

The new training scheme, due to be introduced by the end of the year, places far more emphasis on flying in simulators. The time that trainees spend in simulators will almost double, from 90 to 170 hours

But the British Air Line Pilots’ Association argues that a simulator is no substitute for real flying experience and I'm inclined to agree. Seventy hours flying experience from the lad or lady at the "sharp" end of the aircraft would not give me great confidence. I used to joke that after one hundred hours one stops being a danger to oneself and starts being a danger to others and I'm far from convinced by this new proposal. Fortunately most pilots won't even be looked at by an airline if they ask for an interview with less than 250 hours in command, so I guess this applies to direct entry trainees.

What do you think?

Comments

steve fossett said…
well 70 hours seems a doddle to me....

anyway, I thought you'd realise that learning by making mistakes is a much better learning experience than doing thing right first time

so more hours in a simulator where the pilots can learn what happens during diffuclt situations and crashes must be better than doing it for real...

Popular posts from this blog

Civilisational Data Mining

It’s a new expression I haven’t heard before. ‘Civilisational data mining.’

Let me start by putting it in some context. Every character, you or I have typed into the Google search engine or Facebook over the last decade, means something, to someone or perhaps ‘something,’ if it’s an algorithm.


In May 2014, journalists revealed that the United States National Security Agency, the NSA, was recording and archiving every single cell-phone conversation that took place in the Bahamas. In the process they managed to transform a significant proportion of a society’s day to day interactions into unstructured data; valuable information which can of course be analysed, correlated and transformed for whatever purpose the intelligence agency deems fit.

And today, I read that a GOP-hired data company in the United States has ‘leaked’ personal information, preferences and voting intentions on… wait for it… 198 million US citizens.

Within another decade or so, the cost of sequencing the human genome …

The Nature of Nurture?

Recently, I found myself in a fascinating four-way Twitter exchange, with Professor Adam Rutherford and two other science-minded friends The subject, frequently regarded as a delicate one, genetics and whether there could exist an unknown but contributory genetic factor(s) or influences in determining what we broadly understand or misunderstand as human intelligence.

I won’t discuss this subject in any great detail here, being completely unqualified to do so, but I’ll point you at the document we were discussing, and Rutherford’s excellent new book, ‘A Brief History of Everyone.”

What had sparked my own interest was the story of my own grandfather, Edmond Greville; unless you are an expert on the history of French cinema, you are unlikely to have ever hear of him but he still enjoys an almost cult-like following for his work, half a century after his death.

I've been enjoying the series "Genius" on National Geographic about the life of Albert Einstein. The four of us ha…
The Mandate of Heaven

eGov Monitor Version

“Parliament”, said my distinguished friend “has always leaked like a sieve”.

I’m researching the thorny issue of ‘Confidence in Public Sector Computing’ and we were discussing the dangers presented by the Internet. In his opinion, information security is an oxymoron, which has no place being discussed in a Parliament built upon the uninterrupted flow of information of every kind, from the politically sensitive to the most salacious and mundane.

With the threat of war hanging over us, I asked if MPs should be more aware of the risks that surround this new communications medium? More importantly, shouldn’t the same policies and precautions that any business might use to protect itself and its staff, be available to MPs?

What concerns me is that my well-respected friend mostly considers security in terms of guns, gates and guards. He now uses the Internet almost as much as he uses the telephone and the Fax machine and yet the growing collective t…