Originally Posted by
CaptainNameless
The MPL programs in other countries use very little actual flight time, and significant hours in simulators. And what they produce are hardly real, thinking pilots. They are trainees with passengers on board, which is what the 1500/1000 hour rule was created to eliminate.
A real-pilot training track could be developed as an in-house or airline controlled program to get pilots trained with far less than 1000 or 1500 hours. Every pilot I ever flew with as a new hire from ATP flight school was excellent and most had about 600-700 hours when they got into their first RJ job.
The armed forces create combat-ready pilots in 300-500 hours. So the same could happen to create airline-ready crews. It just depends on the quality of the training and the monitoring, and motivation of the trainees. Motivation may be a problem if they are working such an intense training program to get a $22,500 job, so they better figure out that problem too.
If the airlines propose to create their own pilots, they law would be written to allow it. They still want to minimize the costs, so that is what is likely being discussed now. How cheap can they make it and still get the government to sign off on it. My guess is simulators would not be allowed to exceed 50% of program hours. Much less simulator time as compared to the MPL model, where they use 75-80% simulator time. You need to fly actual airplanes to create actual pilots.
Those 600-700 hrs at ATP involve airline type flying not just sim training or SE instruction so the transition is easier.
However, airline training w/o the ability to go out and make mistakes and screw-ups in a forgiving aircraft and environment is wrong-headed and dangerous. The Air France crash over the So. Atlantic and Asiana crash prove this. The dirty secret is that Airbus and now Boeing are promoting airplanes that fly for the pilot, so a 300 hr wunderkind can handle it. The fact is the demand for air travel is outstripping the supply of QUALIFIED pilots. Asia is producing automaton "operators" not pilots. But the type of flying they do is a lot more regimented. ILS only approaches--in all weather. Autopilot on immediately after t/o and off right before landing.
This is the airline mgmt. wet dream. Low skill operators that rely on automation. Airbus execs have been quoted as saying their aircraft are designed so that a goat herder could easily learn to fly them. The AF and Asiana crashes have proven them wrong. This is where ALPA could get out in front and show the difference between a well trained, experienced pilot and an operator. Exposing this to the public would helpt the public understand why they should want a well trained pilot and that all airlines are not the same. But ALPA is a too political organization and doesn't want to step on toes.