FAA looks at revising tougher pilot training
#111
Bracing for Fallacies
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: In favor of good things, not in favor of bad things
Posts: 3,543
This is exactly what I was thinking. No way those places would be cut off from the student loan funding stream.
#112
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2009
Position: Left seat of a Jet
Posts: 514
Many great posts. Unless congress/politicians are willing to bridge the terrible salaries and the cost of doing business with their own money, the airlines will continue to shrink unprofitable routes/ operations in which they have to invest their own money to make a profit.
#113
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Posts: 618
The real problem with staffing is wages. You can work just about any job in America and make more the a regional pilot. Kids coming out of school are not going to be jumping at a 20k job when they can make 35-50 with corp america. Compound that with the cost for training and you got a shortage of pilots.
#114
Line Holder
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Mar 2012
Posts: 34
No new facts here, but a new opinion piece from the Buffalo News.
Stand firm on air safety Foolhardy FAA again seems willing to weaken vital pilot training rules - Opinion - The Buffalo News
And, again, the Federal Aviation Administration looks to be trying to weaken the new flight safety rules enacted by Congress in the aftermath of the deadly 2009 crash in Clarence Center. It’s becoming routine, and the FAA is beginning to show what appear to be its true colors – more concerned with satisfying the airline industry than it is in ensuring air safety.
Let’s be clear: Fifty people died here because of poor pilot training. Flight Capt. Marvin D. Renslow took the exact opposite action the situation required when Continental Connection Flight 3407 stalled due to dangerously slow air speed. That’s why the Families of Flight 3407 campaigned and, with the muscular help of Sen. Charles E. Schumer, D-N.Y., fought for legislation increasing training requirements for new pilots.
The law was passed and virtually since that day, the airlines, the FAA and even some in Congress have sought to subvert it. Schumer has helped to fight back against those efforts and we presume he will monitor this latest maneuver to ensure that the law is fully implemented.
Industry leaders are shedding crocodile tears about a lack of pilots because of the new training requirements. Basically, they want to continue, as much as possible, operating in the same way: underpaying and overworking pilots whose training doesn’t cost too much. It’s a cynical game whose consequence played out in Clarence Center five years ago.
This issue cries out not just for our congressional delegation and the Families of Flight 3407 to stand firm on this issue, but for Congress to evaluate the function and performance of the FAA. If it has been so badly infiltrated by the airline industry that it cannot reliably implement safety laws passed by Congress and supported by Americans, then perhaps its mission and organizational structure – including its lines of accountability – need to be re-evaluated.
The crash of Flight 3407 was a watershed moment. Too many Americans are being flown on regional carriers, profiting the large airlines at the expense of passengers whose safety has been placed in the hands of inadequately trained, poorly compensated cockpit crews.
That changed with the ensuing legislation. It needs to stay changed.
Stand firm on air safety Foolhardy FAA again seems willing to weaken vital pilot training rules - Opinion - The Buffalo News
And, again, the Federal Aviation Administration looks to be trying to weaken the new flight safety rules enacted by Congress in the aftermath of the deadly 2009 crash in Clarence Center. It’s becoming routine, and the FAA is beginning to show what appear to be its true colors – more concerned with satisfying the airline industry than it is in ensuring air safety.
Let’s be clear: Fifty people died here because of poor pilot training. Flight Capt. Marvin D. Renslow took the exact opposite action the situation required when Continental Connection Flight 3407 stalled due to dangerously slow air speed. That’s why the Families of Flight 3407 campaigned and, with the muscular help of Sen. Charles E. Schumer, D-N.Y., fought for legislation increasing training requirements for new pilots.
The law was passed and virtually since that day, the airlines, the FAA and even some in Congress have sought to subvert it. Schumer has helped to fight back against those efforts and we presume he will monitor this latest maneuver to ensure that the law is fully implemented.
Industry leaders are shedding crocodile tears about a lack of pilots because of the new training requirements. Basically, they want to continue, as much as possible, operating in the same way: underpaying and overworking pilots whose training doesn’t cost too much. It’s a cynical game whose consequence played out in Clarence Center five years ago.
This issue cries out not just for our congressional delegation and the Families of Flight 3407 to stand firm on this issue, but for Congress to evaluate the function and performance of the FAA. If it has been so badly infiltrated by the airline industry that it cannot reliably implement safety laws passed by Congress and supported by Americans, then perhaps its mission and organizational structure – including its lines of accountability – need to be re-evaluated.
The crash of Flight 3407 was a watershed moment. Too many Americans are being flown on regional carriers, profiting the large airlines at the expense of passengers whose safety has been placed in the hands of inadequately trained, poorly compensated cockpit crews.
That changed with the ensuing legislation. It needs to stay changed.
#116
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2009
Position: Square root of the variance and average of the variation
Posts: 1,602
I was a stupid 20 something in college that over-borrowed and used the money for things other than school (I'm sure I'm wasn't the only one).
However, mine totaled 26K for a four year degree at Western Michigan University and flight training outside of the aviation dept. I got a degree in psychology and did all my training at a mom and pop part 61 school (Private to ATP). Didn't hurt me a bit that I didn't have the aviation dept pedigree. The cost these days is absurd through the university. I could go to Law school at the University of Michigan for the same price.
As to the art degree it's not just that - I see a lot of people getting sociology degrees with 60K in loans that have career prospects in the 35K range. My B.S. in psychology would be basically minimum wage worthless outside of aviation had I not leveraged it into human factors work and entered graduate school.
Last edited by Std Deviation; 07-28-2014 at 10:40 AM.
#117
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2009
Position: Square root of the variance and average of the variation
Posts: 1,602
#118
I was in shock when I saw it! Riddle is 43k a year just for a BS degree. Plus another 60K for flight training. Then you add on room and board and all the other ridiculous fees and charges. Your looking at close to 250K!!
I went to UND in the 90"s and I think it ran about 65k. For same degree and training that you get at Riddle it's about 150k... UND is a bargain if you can get reciprocity,it might knock another 20k off. If you put these figures in front of a 17-18 year old kid they might think twice about it. I know I'm not paying for my son to do this, and i'm definitely not co- signing a loan...
It should be illegal for someone to spend 250k to make 22k first year and at some regionals not more than 35k as an FO. That was eye opening.
#119
The current MISSION STATEMENT does not mention such opposed ideas:
Mission
The only 'promote and regulate' I see any more is to:
"Regulating civil aviation to promote safety"
What we do
They (the gov't) at least recognizes this when it comes specifically to Commercial Space Travel as disclosed in this GAO report:
GAO report number GAO-12-836T
entitled 'Commercial Space Transportation: Industry Trends, Government Challenges, and International Competitiveness Issues' which was released on June 20, 2012.
...suggesting that FAA and Congress must remain vigilant so that potential conflicts in FAA’s safety oversight and industry promotion roles do not occur.
Congress required the 2008 DOT-commissioned report
to discuss whether the federal government should separate the
promotion of commercial human spaceflight from the regulation of such activity.
to discuss whether the federal government should separate the
promotion of commercial human spaceflight from the regulation of such activity.
#120
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2013
Posts: 2,936
Yes true! Their charter is (was?) flawed. It's funny, way back when there was the CAA which was disbanded and a new FAA was created for many of the same problems with today's FAA.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post