Originally Posted by
TallFlyer
But one of the problems that we're facing is there are fewer of those experience building jobs to go around, which has implications both to what kind of experience people have when they strap into a 121 aircraft, AND how many people can be in the pipeline at any given time to fill those positions. There are only so many aerial survey, night freight, jet charter, etc, etc, jobs to go around, while the need at the 121 carriers will continue to grow unabated.
I'm all for having very high barriers to entry in this profession for both safety and economic reasons, and for that reason I hope the ATP rule doesn't change for a long time. But I'm pretty sure that it's going to change at some point.
What does it change to? Well that's the million dollar question.
there is a nprm circulating to address this issue. It's called the PDP or pilot development program and it allows operators to assign an SIC to certain twin engine aircraft; and even though he is not required by the type or the operation conducted, he can legally log the time.
Therefore when it passes, all the cargo operators will be able to take green 250hr wonders and put them in the right seat of a beech 99, navajo, metro etc and they can legally log to gain those vital IFR hours and move towards 500, then 1200 and then 1500.
I was a wet commercial pilot in late 2014 and remember just how frustrated I was trying to find work and simultaneously being straddled with debt, and insufficient funds for the CFI. Once I broke in (due to forging non-flying relationships with a certain 135 carrier for 9 months), I started gaining 60-80 hours a month and now am close to ATP mins and have an offer at SKW. In 2014 I wanted so badly for congress to repeal the law FOQ, but now I realize the value, not just to gaining experience, but to protecting the profession.