Originally Posted by
IQuitEagle
Not sure why I chose to read this thread today, but I am surprised this mentality still exists. Back in early 2000/2001, many people were hired with less time. Overall, they turned out just fine, with the same exceptions as those with higher total hours coming in.
As a former low-timer myself (400 hrs), back in early 2001, I can say that I had no more problems than my more "experienced" classmates. Having flown as a captain myself on the Saab 340 with low time pilots (250+ hrs), I can say that those with low time didn't do any worse overall, than those with more time. And as for low-timers flying jets, I for one think that flying jets is easier than flying turboprops.
As it's always been, it's less about the total hours, than it is about the aptitude of the individual, and quality of hours flown.
Although i partially agree with you, the aptitude may be there but the skill set in "most cases" is not. Sure you were there to babysit your 250 hour F/O on the SAAB...and day in day out, yes anyone can perform up to standard when things are going peachy. Stick that 250 hour wonder in a non-normal situation and you are going to have your hands full. I am not going off of what i might think, but i have flown with some of these 250-500 hours pilots and from what i have seen, they need more experience before carrying my family around. Not saying they have to be Chuck Yeager, just have more experience.