Originally Posted by
afterburn81
When I first started flying, my instructors would say they were getting burned out after giving about 2000hrs of instruction (2200tt). Now you hear instructors saying they are already burned out after 500hrs of instruction given (700tt). ..... Lets face it. If you are burned out after 1000tt, well you shouldn't do the 121 thing. It's just not for you.
Bingo!
Originally Posted by
lifter123
I have way under the 1500 hours needed and am still for this requirement due to the long term results. However, the problem I see is how are we, and future pilots, going to get these 1500 hours. I've had my CFI(I)/MEI for about 8 months and still don't have a job.
Where have you looked? What are you willing to move or pump gas and wash planes between flights? Have you tried to find other work?
In short, How Bad Do You Want It? If it is too hard now, imagine how hard it will be when you have a family and get furloughed. Consider the previous post.
Originally Posted by
dh05z28
One more thing that needs to change is the Commercial curriculum!??? Chandelles. Lazy 8's???? really? I understand that it helps you "master" control of the aircraft ....
When I was instructing I would try to keep my commercial students in the clouds and on approaches whenever I could. I dont know how many people I had to RE-teach holds too or answer questions like "Do I go missed AT the MDA or the MAP????" .
Chandelles and 8s teach basic airmanship: they need to stay. I would add spin training which, by the way, was once required for a PRIVATE.
Good for you for keeping your students sharp. However, if the student is asking too many of those questions, it tells me he never really LEARNED how to fly IFR.
Originally Posted by
schone
...thunderstorms, radar usage, icing hazards etc need to be taught and ingrained with real world experience.
.... it would be nice if they cross trained just a tad but enough to give you the other side view of what controllers are trying to do,
I agree. However, if a new hire were paired with an old salt who knew how to mentor, that knowledge would naturally be handed down.
Originally Posted by
Whistlin' Dan
The problem is, it won't. It won't do much for pay and benefits, either.
Requiring an applicant for an ATP to be a graduate of an approved, college-level training program would be a start. You wanna fly 50-500 people in turbine-powered aircraft for money, you have to go to school. REAL school, not "Bubba's Academy of Airline Flying and Taxidermy" school.
The other problem is documenting the required flight experience. Periodic reviews of rental receipts, fuel and/or maintenance bills for aircraft flown, etc. might be another way to ensure that guys aren't padding their logbooks.
The bill has nothing to do with pay and benefits. It is about improving safety.
I attended one of those fancy 141 schools and instructed CFIs at another. The students get their tickets through CFI/CFII/MEI, then THEY start teaching students. Then those students end up teaching the next class of students. After a few of these generations, the schools become "inbred". Everybody teaches exactly the same things in exactly the same ways. So rather than different people bringing new experience and knowledge to enrich the curriculum, they end up dreaming up ridicules, obscure questions like "what is the volume of fluid in the nose gear actuator?" I can't measure it, so don't know and don't care.
Originally Posted by
Contrail06
If I had to pick between two 1500 hr FO's....
a) 250 to get their ratings, 250 dual given, 1000 part 135 (assuming he/she started doing vfr until the 1200 hr mark)
or
b) worthless aviation 4 yr degree, 250 to get their ratings, 250 dual given, 1000 part 121 in the jet that we are currently sitting in.
I pick option B
There is a problem with your comparison.
Sure, he has 1000 in type NOW, but "B" was hired with only 250 hours of "signing for the aircraft" experience. Also, that time was probably earned at a school that prevented flight on a 200 and 1/2 day. Depending on how fast he got his tickets and how busy the school is, he may not have even flown during all four seasons.
"A's" CFI time was the same as "B". And his time from 500-1200 was VFR as well, but those 700 hours were spent "flying a line": HE supervised the loading, insured the paper work was correct, checked the wx, and made the go/no go decisions. After that, he spent another 300 hours doing the same stuff under IFR. And all that time in 135, he was flying an underpowered, marginally equipped plane that was far less capable of penetrating wx than your jet.
So as a
new hire, I'll take "A".
Originally Posted by
sweptwing
My two cents worth, Just because you have a commercial certificate and some multi engine time does not make you a professional pilot. Experience does count and is a necessary part of becoming a pro pilot. IMO you must go out get that experience on your own and learn what your own limitations are and how to make sound decisions.
Absolutely!
Originally Posted by
B757CA
What's the difference between a 121 type ride and a 121 F/O ride? Precious little...........The difference between someone having 500 hours and 100 multi-engine and someone having 1500 and 100 is also very little.
I agree the checkrides are the same. But 121 checkrides primarily measure a candidate's ability to manipulate a particular aircraft. They DO NOT (and cannot) accurately measure a candidate's judgment or his "horse sense." Only by experience can one learn where to penetrate a 1000 mile line of CBs, how to mentally picture where wake turbulence will drift, or when to demand extra fuel even if it means bumping revenue.
Originally Posted by
Hot Rod Wannabe
The Flt3407 was doomed when it took off. What was the forecast, why was it even allowed to take off? Why did the Captain take it?
The PIC needs real authority to tell management to reschedule the flight. PIC's need a minimum amount of education over and beyound the current 121 requirements.
They took off because they were legal. The wx was typical for that time of year. Why did the CA take it? Because on paper it was safe. And if any one of a dozen tiny things had been different, it would have been safe.
The real question is do you or I have the fortitude to say, "This flight, while legal, is not safe or prudent. Unless xyz changes, I cannot accept the flight." And then are you or I willing to accept the poop-storm? I work hard to move the goods, but a long time ago I decided NO job is worth me exceeding MY limits.
Originally Posted by
Superpilot92
bottom line is having a little more time wont hurt and can only help.