I guess what I'm missing in all of this is where is the supporting data for the rule change? It seems like the rule change was predicated on assumptions regarding low-time pilots.
Now I agree that low-time pilots can be a lot of work. But that's not the goal of the legislation. The goal of the legislation is to enhance safety. But I have not seen any study saying that a sub-1500 hour pilot without an ATP is more dangerous than a pilot with more than 1500 hours and an ATP.
What are the statistics? Where is the data? Does anyone have anything released from insurance companies that can target or pin-point who the high-risk pilots really are?