Hornet - obviously flying is better than not flying. 100 hrs is a common number that comes up.

There's always outliers. Guys should be shooting for the std deviation cricle and not the outliers. I just spoke with a guy that had barely 100 hrs in the last year. Multiple jet quals, squadron CC, Stan/Eval, IP, etc, etc. You meet the guy and you're impressed. His resume was loaded so having just 100 hrs recent experience wasn't a factor.

A low time guy with only 100 hrs in the last year? IMO that would = ouch. The standard review, that everyone does, even if they're not in HR/recruiting, is 'how does that stack up against his peers and competition'? A 10,000 hr guy, with 4 type ratings, is impressive at age 30 but isn't impressive at age 60.

Good luck.