Originally Posted by
⌐ AV8OR WANNABE
Sultan - so what's your solution for countries such as China, India, etc. where there're very few civilian trained pilots and the military simply doesn't have enough aviators who can transition to the civilian passenger/cargo airlines?
Just like we want people to 'buy American,' purchase products 'Made in USA' etc., they want to have their own pilots so they don't have to rely on foreigners for their own transportation needs...
...Because very often they too go from zero experience to flying very heavy iron in a relatively short time frame; I realize military training is very well designed and that people use sophisticated equipment form the very beginning however, in a way it’s a little like an ab-initio training program where pilots solo in Bonanzas and quickly transition to Airbus/Boeing simulators…
Again, the multi-crew license is not as bad as people think. Those guys/gals will have years and years of 'observing' experience AFTER their training has been completed before they can transition to the co-pilot seat; all this while they keep doing their recurrent and simulator training sessions.
Just my take on it...
I don't know enough about the cultures, economies, and problems of any other country to make an informed and fair suggestion of solutions. All I can say is that I can appreciate the fact that a good deal of lucrative jobs available to current American pilots are for overseas carriers; I'm not in a big hurry to fix that. We have enough trouble back home.
Is it fair to say that those issues will resolve themselves as other countries further develop? Back in the day, most American airline pilots were former military. I understand, as you have rightfully indicated, that many foreign militaries don't have the exiting manpower to answer the demand. And that's where outsourcing of skill comes in. I understand the desire to have home-grown airmen, as opposed to corn-fed Americans...but I think that desire is derived from preference rather than necessity.
Originally Posted by
Silver2Gold
...Soloing in a Bonanza (or similar aircraft) is done as a pre-requisite before even being allowed to start USAF pilot training. Becoming a fully IFR qualified pilot with over 300 jet hours, 200 sim hours, fully aerobatic, fingertip formation, low-level, cross-country IFR navigation,............ and this is just the first year. Nevermind that in order to leave the military, another 8+ year commitment must be served which will include further, much more advanced training, and thousands of hours in command of a jet...
I also think it's a bit of a stretch to compare ab-initio directly to service training...200 hours of piston time with a CFI
versus 600 hours high performance turbine+
hundreds of additional hours of mandatory simulator and classroom study.
I'll never try and BS you into thinking that I have answers to anything, but I'll call foul when I think the chosen solutions go to far. The military has proven that solid pilots can be made in 600 hours of experience...BUT, that's a sub-million dollar training program with many hours of additional training and all the applicants were screened with success in mind.
As for the MPL, how does anyone afford to sit in an airline cockpit and observe the cockpit duties for years? Furthermore, do you think merely observing line oriented cockpit duties
without hands-on experience is going to make a safer pilot out of a sub-300 hour MPL grad? No sarcasm here, but I just don't see how the entire concept makes any sense...unless you can find some means for getting the grad more stick time in situations where their own decision making and awareness counts, you're still left with very raw and unproven products that lack the qualifications to even fly in the NAS on their own.
I think the entire industry needs overhauled...
Since the regionals act as "Farm teams" for the majors, it would be nice if there was something that could act like a farm team for the regionals. Wait...I've got it! Other jobs! (I kid)...
I guess time will tell how the international community receives and operates with the MPL...I'll certainly be watching.
What no one seems to want to say is this:
The easier, more seamless, faster, and less challenging it becomes to be a pilot with a scheduled air carrier, the less cream will rise to the top. With the increase in bodies eligible to fill the seats, incentives to work the job will be depleted; management will do what they believe makes business sense, and slash incentives. Because the incentives will no longer appeal to the elite, the elite won't fly 121 anymore. This means the high strung, perfectionist attitudes common to the elitist, traditional pilot will be in jeopardy. The less an airman believes he or she has to maximize his or her potential, the less likely they are to do so. The industry will revert to doing what is easiest and cheapest...meeting the bare minimums...PTS. The transition from aviation being a
seemingly elite, white collar profession to a blue collar vocation will be complete.
Is it fair to block people from reaching their dreams by placing obstacles in their way? Maybe not. But does the continual slide in standards and required experience add to safety/ability or take away? Is the technology good or reliable enough to allow the game to become "high rise bus driving"
without resistance? As I see it, that's the trend.
Am I alone in thinking that the concerns modern day pilots have with ab initio and MPL concepts are that 1) the job will no longer merit any prestige and 2) will be less safe?
Isn't that what no one wants to say? That it's all just a profession tending toward its lowest common denominator?
Where's the balance?