![Transcription Center logo](/themes/custom/tc_theme/assets/image/logo.png)
This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.
- 39 - Preparation of the Flight Plan 1. Discussion of flight with dispatcher 2. Discussion of flight with meteorologist 3. Discussion of flight with co-pilot 4. Selection of cruising altitude 5. Choice of alternates 6. Fuel requirements Individual airline companies show great variation as concerns the items which are to be rated on these forms and the type of scale on which ratings are made. Almost all of the airlines have a check-flight form which is used either for practice hooded flights or for the six-months instrument flight. This type of check-flight breaks down the components of the job into very small units, such as: Instrument takeoff 1. Proper application of power 2. Direction held during takeoff 3. Timing proper takeoff -- fast -- slow -- proper 4. Initial climb out -- direction -- angle -- establishment of proper air speed Ratings are usually made on a two-, three-, or four-point scale on each item. Only one of the airlines had in the pilots' records a flight check which could be called objective. Almost all of the ratings received by the pilots, consequently, depend to a great extent upon the judgement of the check-pilot. Seldom were there records of the actual performance of a pilot such as how many degrees he varied in heading or how many feet he varied in altitude -- instead, there were only ratings of his performance, such as "Average," "Standard," etc. Another observation was made in regard to the ratings given on these checks. Even when captains use a check form which breaks down components of the job into specific units, it is seldom that there will be different ratings given on each unit -- that is, all the units of a particular component invariably have the same score, indicating the "halo effect" is operating strongly on such forms. It was also observed that there was a great amount of variation between airline companies as to the adequacy of the personnel records themselves. Some of the companies had records of many flight-checks, captains' reports and other evaluations. Others had records of only a few such evaluations. Some of the files for a single pilot had no record of any flight checks. 2. Attitudes Towards Present Methods of Evaluation. Information pertaining to methods of evaluation was obtained from a content analysis of the attitudes of pilots, Civil Aeronautics Administration Examiners and Company Check-pilots towards presently employed methods. Table 21 presents a classification of all their suggestions for improving the present instrument check.
Transcription Notes:
REOPENED~ - no indents needed.