Originally Posted by
wags3539
Noted...like I said, I'm not necessarily saying that raising minimums to 1500 hours is a bad thing, I'm just saying I can see it from the view of a student pilot as well. Just having 1500 hours does not guarantee that you will be exposed to the examples you have posted above. If I were to have 1500 hours tooling around in a Cessna 150 as a flight instructor, I wouldn't necessarily be exposed to 16 hour days, reduced rest, dealing with MX control/dispatch, etc. I'm not saying that flight instructing is not valuable, I agree that a 1500 hour pilot will most likely have better decision making abilities since they are exposed to more. I say most likely because you can fly for 1500 hours and not run into a single problem, while at the same time somebody else could fly for 100 hours and have an engine failure/fire right after takeoff. It's all relative, which is why I think quality of flight time and experience should still be taken into consideration.
Quality of flight time and experience has always been considered. It's been a basis of hiring for years. If I'm instructing a PP applicant, and I feel he is ready for his Part 61 checkride before he meets the min applications times, it doesn't matter. He still has to meet the mins before he can take the checkride.
Just because a guy can read a gouge, chair fly, and pass an interview doesn't mean he can do the job. And just because I've flown 1500 hours as a Flight Instructor without ever experiencing an engine failure doesn't mean I'm not as good as a guy who has flown 100 hours and has experienced an engine failure. That's not quality, that's odds. But having 1500 hours does make me a more experienced pilot then the 100 hour guy.
And experience is flat out easier to determine then quality of flight time. JMO
