Narrative:

I have just completed the company's B777 transition course. In all my 30 aviation yrs; I have never attended a course as bad as this. This course does not adequately prepare each student to operate the B777 according to company procedures nor train adequate system knowledge. It is so inadequate; I feel it has gone well beyond simple cost cutting and has progressed to a safety problem of monumental proportions. I believe this is only the tip of the iceberg. Cost cutting has grown to be the dominant factor in the transition course instead of what the objective should be; teaching the B777 aircraft to pilots. I believe this starts at the top with the training manager. His bonus should not be tied to budgetary cost reductions or operations. This leads us exactly to the unsafe situation we have today. I will be outlining the specific deficiencies in the B777 course; even though I believe this gutting approach to be pandemic to all courses at this company. Some of these deficiencies are small and easily corrected; some are a basic problematic approach to course structure: 1) clearance delivery discs shipped with course training materials have multiple install failures and do not seem to be compatible with windows vista fonts files. 2) clearance delivery based computer based training programs are incomplete and do not contain several required learning center computer based training courses; and are not available in the study rooms at the hotel training rooms. 3) many computer based training courseware programs are out-of-date with current company procedures and seem to reference boeing procedure and not our company's procedure. There are also references in the international and WX sections to WX products which have not been available for over 1 yr now. 4) day #1 of the transition course has more hours of study with the required computer based training courses than are available in the contractually mandated duty day for training. Thus making day #1; the only day for system study; impossible. My day started at XA00 for an XB00 flight to ZZZ. The duty day for an XA00 show time is 13 hours. I gave up on the day #1 computer based training courses at XQ00 that night and had only half the required computer based training courses completed. This is the central basis for the inadequacy of training. I cannot say this strongly enough. Aircraft system are not adequately taught. I have finished this course and still do not feel qualified to operate this plane because of my lack of system knowledge. Our last day of training before our final loft check; we found ourselves expressing the concern that we didn't have enough system knowledge or depth to solve many problems. Please do not misconstrue this as a critique of the instructor core. The instructors; for the most part; did an outstanding job within the time constraints of the training day. In fact; most of our instructors expressed the same dismay and concern about management's seemingly careless attitude toward safety and a quality training product. Most instructors felt that they have tried to express their feelings on the course shortcomings; with no result and are now resigned to an inferior and unsafe product. 5) because the system training are inadequate; the computer based test; on training day #6; is a travesty. It is widely accepted that we are not prepared for the test and many aids in passing the test are employed; with instructor knowledge 6) the new instructor scheduling program in the scheduling office makes instructor continuity difficult. At one point we had a new instructor every day during the second week. Each instructor did not know what was covered previously and many areas were left out completely. One instructor acknowledged the training time problem; and proceeded to read a powerpoint program as fast as he could read. Many times clicking so fast through the presentation; we could not see what was presented. I asked him to stop and slow down. He said he was sorry; but could not cover all the areas needed that day unless he proceeded in this manner. Some of the information on the slides was out-of-date or wrong. Thisis not an effective method of instruction and I highly recommend not allowing its use. This was a wasted day of training. I could have stayed at the hotel and gone through a powerpoint presentation on my own. Reading from a powerpoint script is not instructing. 7) the training report times each day were widely varied. This is in itself not a problem. However; the cafeteria is not adequately staffed for meals at the unusual time of our training periods. Again; time is the problem. When we did have time; meals were not available. This leads to inefficient training periods and we couldn't focus on the materials. Tired and hungry. 8) there are several study choke points. I believe on training day #8; we had 11 hours off to study cold WX operations; international flight plans; performance; CDU SOP's; rvsm; class ii navigation; ETOPS; atlantic track procedures; oceanic procedures. This was wasted training time. If we do not have adequate time to prepare for the day's lessons; this adds to the feeling of frustration. I am not speaking of the normal feeling of I'm behind; this is truly a feeling of I give up; I can't do it. I have always prided myself on always being prepared for training; and continue to try to do so. But this is over the top. 9) every day in the fixed base simulator we lost 20-30 mins of training time because the trainer froze and locked up requiring a complete re-boot of the system. The B777 simulator also locked up requiring re-boot and resulted in loss of training time. None of the simulators will handle satcom calls. Simulators are not capable of realistic cpdlc messages for international training. 10) flight plan training materials in many instances were not realistic and do not reflect the current product on the line resulting in negative training. 11) the computer based training also has incorrect information on visa requirements for ZZZ1 B777 pilots. It needs to be updated. 12) my recommendations to fix the course are as follows: 1) add at least 2 more days dedicated to system knowledge. A minimum of at least 1 day dedicated with an instructor. This will pay dividends in later classes in improved system knowledge and enable better utilization during the simulator and fixed base simulator sessions. 2) purchase another fixed base simulator. Restructure the fixed base simulator to teach only flows; and company procedure. Specifically the differences in ACARS from the other fleets; electronic checklists; satcom; and the cabin interphone. This sounds dumb; but I still don't know how to use the interphone. 2 or 3 days should be adequate for this; building on the better system knowledge. Keep international; oceanic; ETOPS; and re-dispatch procedures out of the fixed base simulator. 3) return international operations; oceanic; ETOPS; and re-dispatch procedures to a dedicated session near the end of training. Teaching it in the fixed base simulator is a waste of training time. In other words; return to the dedicated international training to the end of the course. 4) try to schedule high workload days with adequate time off between finish and report to prepare. Specifically training days #8; #14; and #16. Over the last few yrs; we have had a rash of incidents in the B777 fleet; we are very lucky we have not had a hull loss. A galley fire; diverts to minimal support airports on ETOPS rtes; and ground collisions that were our fault. I suggest that these incidents could have been handled much better or completely avoided if the training had been better. None of these incidents were briefed in the class. The training itself seems to be stonewalling the current state of safety in the system; not dealing with timely incidents and developing procedures to avoid these in the future; possibly related to the cost cutting and not allowing new class modules based on line experience. These are a direct result of the minimalistic training and cost cutting approach in these last several yrs. If this trend of cutting costs at the expense of safety continues; we will have larger problems. I do not feel adequately prepared to operate the B777. A 20 day course of training is not enough. In general; the simulators are adequate; but have some small shortcomings. The fixed base simulator is not adequate as currently structured; but could be if utilized as designed to teach normal procedures and flows; not international operations. The system portion of the ground school is totally inadequate. The instructors are generally competent; with a couple of notable standouts. As the B777 fleet expands further into the pacific; furloughs recalled and new hires entering with the resultant fleet/seat movements; crew experience is going down. This training course is already inadequate; and the situation will get worse. So; it comes down to money. This course is structured to pass a student; not to teach the B777. It will ultimately come down to this simple question: is the cost savings worth a potential catastrophic hull loss?

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: NEWLY RELEASED B777-200 CAPTAIN DECLARES TRAINING PROVIDED BY THE ACR IS INADEQUATE; PRIORITIZED TO REDUCE COSTS AT THE EXPENSE OF OPERATIONAL SAFETY.

Narrative: I HAVE JUST COMPLETED THE COMPANY'S B777 TRANSITION COURSE. IN ALL MY 30 AVIATION YRS; I HAVE NEVER ATTENDED A COURSE AS BAD AS THIS. THIS COURSE DOES NOT ADEQUATELY PREPARE EACH STUDENT TO OPERATE THE B777 ACCORDING TO COMPANY PROCS NOR TRAIN ADEQUATE SYS KNOWLEDGE. IT IS SO INADEQUATE; I FEEL IT HAS GONE WELL BEYOND SIMPLE COST CUTTING AND HAS PROGRESSED TO A SAFETY PROB OF MONUMENTAL PROPORTIONS. I BELIEVE THIS IS ONLY THE TIP OF THE ICEBERG. COST CUTTING HAS GROWN TO BE THE DOMINANT FACTOR IN THE TRANSITION COURSE INSTEAD OF WHAT THE OBJECTIVE SHOULD BE; TEACHING THE B777 ACFT TO PLTS. I BELIEVE THIS STARTS AT THE TOP WITH THE TRAINING MGR. HIS BONUS SHOULD NOT BE TIED TO BUDGETARY COST REDUCTIONS OR OPS. THIS LEADS US EXACTLY TO THE UNSAFE SITUATION WE HAVE TODAY. I WILL BE OUTLINING THE SPECIFIC DEFICIENCIES IN THE B777 COURSE; EVEN THOUGH I BELIEVE THIS GUTTING APCH TO BE PANDEMIC TO ALL COURSES AT THIS COMPANY. SOME OF THESE DEFICIENCIES ARE SMALL AND EASILY CORRECTED; SOME ARE A BASIC PROBLEMATIC APPROACH TO COURSE STRUCTURE: 1) CD DISCS SHIPPED WITH COURSE TRAINING MATERIALS HAVE MULTIPLE INSTALL FAILURES AND DO NOT SEEM TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH WINDOWS VISTA FONTS FILES. 2) CD BASED COMPUTER BASED TRAINING PROGRAMS ARE INCOMPLETE AND DO NOT CONTAIN SEVERAL REQUIRED LEARNING CENTER COMPUTER BASED TRAINING COURSES; AND ARE NOT AVAILABLE IN THE STUDY ROOMS AT THE HOTEL TRAINING ROOMS. 3) MANY COMPUTER BASED TRAINING COURSEWARE PROGRAMS ARE OUT-OF-DATE WITH CURRENT COMPANY PROCS AND SEEM TO REF BOEING PROC AND NOT OUR COMPANY'S PROC. THERE ARE ALSO REFS IN THE INTL AND WX SECTIONS TO WX PRODUCTS WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN AVAILABLE FOR OVER 1 YR NOW. 4) DAY #1 OF THE TRANSITION COURSE HAS MORE HRS OF STUDY WITH THE REQUIRED COMPUTER BASED TRAINING COURSES THAN ARE AVAILABLE IN THE CONTRACTUALLY MANDATED DUTY DAY FOR TRAINING. THUS MAKING DAY #1; THE ONLY DAY FOR SYS STUDY; IMPOSSIBLE. MY DAY STARTED AT XA00 FOR AN XB00 FLT TO ZZZ. THE DUTY DAY FOR AN XA00 SHOW TIME IS 13 HRS. I GAVE UP ON THE DAY #1 COMPUTER BASED TRAINING COURSES AT XQ00 THAT NIGHT AND HAD ONLY HALF THE REQUIRED COMPUTER BASED TRAINING COURSES COMPLETED. THIS IS THE CENTRAL BASIS FOR THE INADEQUACY OF TRAINING. I CANNOT SAY THIS STRONGLY ENOUGH. ACFT SYS ARE NOT ADEQUATELY TAUGHT. I HAVE FINISHED THIS COURSE AND STILL DO NOT FEEL QUALIFIED TO OPERATE THIS PLANE BECAUSE OF MY LACK OF SYS KNOWLEDGE. OUR LAST DAY OF TRAINING BEFORE OUR FINAL LOFT CHK; WE FOUND OURSELVES EXPRESSING THE CONCERN THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH SYS KNOWLEDGE OR DEPTH TO SOLVE MANY PROBS. PLEASE DO NOT MISCONSTRUE THIS AS A CRITIQUE OF THE INSTRUCTOR CORE. THE INSTRUCTORS; FOR THE MOST PART; DID AN OUTSTANDING JOB WITHIN THE TIME CONSTRAINTS OF THE TRAINING DAY. IN FACT; MOST OF OUR INSTRUCTORS EXPRESSED THE SAME DISMAY AND CONCERN ABOUT MGMNT'S SEEMINGLY CARELESS ATTITUDE TOWARD SAFETY AND A QUALITY TRAINING PRODUCT. MOST INSTRUCTORS FELT THAT THEY HAVE TRIED TO EXPRESS THEIR FEELINGS ON THE COURSE SHORTCOMINGS; WITH NO RESULT AND ARE NOW RESIGNED TO AN INFERIOR AND UNSAFE PRODUCT. 5) BECAUSE THE SYS TRAINING ARE INADEQUATE; THE COMPUTER BASED TEST; ON TRAINING DAY #6; IS A TRAVESTY. IT IS WIDELY ACCEPTED THAT WE ARE NOT PREPARED FOR THE TEST AND MANY AIDS IN PASSING THE TEST ARE EMPLOYED; WITH INSTRUCTOR KNOWLEDGE 6) THE NEW INSTRUCTOR SCHEDULING PROGRAM IN THE SCHEDULING OFFICE MAKES INSTRUCTOR CONTINUITY DIFFICULT. AT ONE POINT WE HAD A NEW INSTRUCTOR EVERY DAY DURING THE SECOND WK. EACH INSTRUCTOR DID NOT KNOW WHAT WAS COVERED PREVIOUSLY AND MANY AREAS WERE LEFT OUT COMPLETELY. ONE INSTRUCTOR ACKNOWLEDGED THE TRAINING TIME PROB; AND PROCEEDED TO READ A POWERPOINT PROGRAM AS FAST AS HE COULD READ. MANY TIMES CLICKING SO FAST THROUGH THE PRESENTATION; WE COULD NOT SEE WHAT WAS PRESENTED. I ASKED HIM TO STOP AND SLOW DOWN. HE SAID HE WAS SORRY; BUT COULD NOT COVER ALL THE AREAS NEEDED THAT DAY UNLESS HE PROCEEDED IN THIS MANNER. SOME OF THE INFO ON THE SLIDES WAS OUT-OF-DATE OR WRONG. THISIS NOT AN EFFECTIVE METHOD OF INSTRUCTION AND I HIGHLY RECOMMEND NOT ALLOWING ITS USE. THIS WAS A WASTED DAY OF TRAINING. I COULD HAVE STAYED AT THE HOTEL AND GONE THROUGH A POWERPOINT PRESENTATION ON MY OWN. READING FROM A POWERPOINT SCRIPT IS NOT INSTRUCTING. 7) THE TRAINING REPORT TIMES EACH DAY WERE WIDELY VARIED. THIS IS IN ITSELF NOT A PROB. HOWEVER; THE CAFETERIA IS NOT ADEQUATELY STAFFED FOR MEALS AT THE UNUSUAL TIME OF OUR TRAINING PERIODS. AGAIN; TIME IS THE PROB. WHEN WE DID HAVE TIME; MEALS WERE NOT AVAILABLE. THIS LEADS TO INEFFICIENT TRAINING PERIODS AND WE COULDN'T FOCUS ON THE MATERIALS. TIRED AND HUNGRY. 8) THERE ARE SEVERAL STUDY CHOKE POINTS. I BELIEVE ON TRAINING DAY #8; WE HAD 11 HRS OFF TO STUDY COLD WX OPS; INTL FLT PLANS; PERFORMANCE; CDU SOP'S; RVSM; CLASS II NAV; ETOPS; ATLANTIC TRACK PROCS; OCEANIC PROCS. THIS WAS WASTED TRAINING TIME. IF WE DO NOT HAVE ADEQUATE TIME TO PREPARE FOR THE DAY'S LESSONS; THIS ADDS TO THE FEELING OF FRUSTRATION. I AM NOT SPEAKING OF THE NORMAL FEELING OF I'M BEHIND; THIS IS TRULY A FEELING OF I GIVE UP; I CAN'T DO IT. I HAVE ALWAYS PRIDED MYSELF ON ALWAYS BEING PREPARED FOR TRAINING; AND CONTINUE TO TRY TO DO SO. BUT THIS IS OVER THE TOP. 9) EVERY DAY IN THE FIXED BASE SIMULATOR WE LOST 20-30 MINS OF TRAINING TIME BECAUSE THE TRAINER FROZE AND LOCKED UP REQUIRING A COMPLETE RE-BOOT OF THE SYS. THE B777 SIMULATOR ALSO LOCKED UP REQUIRING RE-BOOT AND RESULTED IN LOSS OF TRAINING TIME. NONE OF THE SIMULATORS WILL HANDLE SATCOM CALLS. SIMULATORS ARE NOT CAPABLE OF REALISTIC CPDLC MESSAGES FOR INTL TRAINING. 10) FLT PLAN TRAINING MATERIALS IN MANY INSTANCES WERE NOT REALISTIC AND DO NOT REFLECT THE CURRENT PRODUCT ON THE LINE RESULTING IN NEGATIVE TRAINING. 11) THE COMPUTER BASED TRAINING ALSO HAS INCORRECT INFO ON VISA REQUIREMENTS FOR ZZZ1 B777 PLTS. IT NEEDS TO BE UPDATED. 12) MY RECOMMENDATIONS TO FIX THE COURSE ARE AS FOLLOWS: 1) ADD AT LEAST 2 MORE DAYS DEDICATED TO SYS KNOWLEDGE. A MINIMUM OF AT LEAST 1 DAY DEDICATED WITH AN INSTRUCTOR. THIS WILL PAY DIVIDENDS IN LATER CLASSES IN IMPROVED SYS KNOWLEDGE AND ENABLE BETTER UTILIZATION DURING THE SIMULATOR AND FIXED BASE SIMULATOR SESSIONS. 2) PURCHASE ANOTHER FIXED BASE SIMULATOR. RESTRUCTURE THE FIXED BASE SIMULATOR TO TEACH ONLY FLOWS; AND COMPANY PROC. SPECIFICALLY THE DIFFERENCES IN ACARS FROM THE OTHER FLEETS; ELECTRONIC CHKLISTS; SATCOM; AND THE CABIN INTERPHONE. THIS SOUNDS DUMB; BUT I STILL DON'T KNOW HOW TO USE THE INTERPHONE. 2 OR 3 DAYS SHOULD BE ADEQUATE FOR THIS; BUILDING ON THE BETTER SYS KNOWLEDGE. KEEP INTL; OCEANIC; ETOPS; AND RE-DISPATCH PROCS OUT OF THE FIXED BASE SIMULATOR. 3) RETURN INTL OPS; OCEANIC; ETOPS; AND RE-DISPATCH PROCS TO A DEDICATED SESSION NEAR THE END OF TRAINING. TEACHING IT IN THE FIXED BASE SIMULATOR IS A WASTE OF TRAINING TIME. IN OTHER WORDS; RETURN TO THE DEDICATED INTL TRAINING TO THE END OF THE COURSE. 4) TRY TO SCHEDULE HIGH WORKLOAD DAYS WITH ADEQUATE TIME OFF BTWN FINISH AND RPT TO PREPARE. SPECIFICALLY TRAINING DAYS #8; #14; AND #16. OVER THE LAST FEW YRS; WE HAVE HAD A RASH OF INCIDENTS IN THE B777 FLEET; WE ARE VERY LUCKY WE HAVE NOT HAD A HULL LOSS. A GALLEY FIRE; DIVERTS TO MINIMAL SUPPORT ARPTS ON ETOPS RTES; AND GND COLLISIONS THAT WERE OUR FAULT. I SUGGEST THAT THESE INCIDENTS COULD HAVE BEEN HANDLED MUCH BETTER OR COMPLETELY AVOIDED IF THE TRAINING HAD BEEN BETTER. NONE OF THESE INCIDENTS WERE BRIEFED IN THE CLASS. THE TRAINING ITSELF SEEMS TO BE STONEWALLING THE CURRENT STATE OF SAFETY IN THE SYS; NOT DEALING WITH TIMELY INCIDENTS AND DEVELOPING PROCS TO AVOID THESE IN THE FUTURE; POSSIBLY RELATED TO THE COST CUTTING AND NOT ALLOWING NEW CLASS MODULES BASED ON LINE EXPERIENCE. THESE ARE A DIRECT RESULT OF THE MINIMALISTIC TRAINING AND COST CUTTING APPROACH IN THESE LAST SEVERAL YRS. IF THIS TREND OF CUTTING COSTS AT THE EXPENSE OF SAFETY CONTINUES; WE WILL HAVE LARGER PROBS. I DO NOT FEEL ADEQUATELY PREPARED TO OPERATE THE B777. A 20 DAY COURSE OF TRAINING IS NOT ENOUGH. IN GENERAL; THE SIMULATORS ARE ADEQUATE; BUT HAVE SOME SMALL SHORTCOMINGS. THE FIXED BASE SIMULATOR IS NOT ADEQUATE AS CURRENTLY STRUCTURED; BUT COULD BE IF UTILIZED AS DESIGNED TO TEACH NORMAL PROCS AND FLOWS; NOT INTL OPS. THE SYS PORTION OF THE GND SCHOOL IS TOTALLY INADEQUATE. THE INSTRUCTORS ARE GENERALLY COMPETENT; WITH A COUPLE OF NOTABLE STANDOUTS. AS THE B777 FLEET EXPANDS FURTHER INTO THE PACIFIC; FURLOUGHS RECALLED AND NEW HIRES ENTERING WITH THE RESULTANT FLEET/SEAT MOVEMENTS; CREW EXPERIENCE IS GOING DOWN. THIS TRAINING COURSE IS ALREADY INADEQUATE; AND THE SITUATION WILL GET WORSE. SO; IT COMES DOWN TO MONEY. THIS COURSE IS STRUCTURED TO PASS A STUDENT; NOT TO TEACH THE B777. IT WILL ULTIMATELY COME DOWN TO THIS SIMPLE QUESTION: IS THE COST SAVINGS WORTH A POTENTIAL CATASTROPHIC HULL LOSS?

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.