It's interesting read what you all think makes a pilot experienced enought to be a PIC versus what Army Aviation thinks makes a pilot experienced enough. I come from a culture where 1 year experience as a PI and roughly 500 hours FWME time is the target on the the wall to be nominated for PIC. The trick is, all the PICs in the orginazation that we've flow with have to nominate us and the commander has to approve even before we can take the checkride.

It was not uncommon in my last organization to have flight crews with less than 1000 hours FWME flying together, with passengers on board, on international legs, over water, into large airports (Frankfurt, Brussels, Lisbon, Venice etc). (Granted most of the pilot had 1000+ RW hours but not all the 1LT's and CPTs did).

Even now, on my second overseas tour with a grand total of three years and 1250 hours Army C-12 (BE200) time under my belt I am in the top 25% experience bracket (for airplanes). Once I get 150 hours in my current version I would expect to be up for PIC again.

If the FAA has thrown a mark on the wall and said "This is what you need to be an ATP and you have to be and ATP to be a CA on an airliner" and you pass your companies CA upgrade program than that should be enough. Just because your airline takes 3-10 years to upgrade from FO to CA doesn't mean that you're not experienced enough to be a CA with less than 3000-10000 hours. It just means the seniority has you by the tail and you have to wait your turn.

Lowering minimums isn't a problem, lowering standards and failing to mitigate risk is.