Low-timers are not the real problem, as posted many times before, world-class airlines such as BA and LH (among others) hire pilots with 0-40 hrs TT and mold them to be a capable F/O at >300 hrs TT. It starts by hiring the right candidates and training them thoroughly. Experience does help anyone, in any profession, from Janitor to Heart Surgeon, to make better decisions. However, the thought that someone MUST have some as-yet-to-be conclusively determined minimum experience is ridiculous. How much total time does one need to fly an F-15 in our Air Force? I think the difference is the selection process and the training that the military does; the same goes for BA, LH, etc.

A huge part of our problem is that just about anyone who can walk upright most of the time will be awarded a 1st class medical and can pass the commercial check-ride. The FAA has the dual (sometimes conflicting) role of promotion and regulation of our industry. I think most of us would agree that if the standards were adjusted upwards such that the bottom 15-20% of current applicants would not pass would be a benefit to us all.

Please stop blaming regional guys for ruining the industry. It surely cannot be the fault of the 22 yr. old CFII who takes the $19/hr regional jet job because it is an improvement over his/her current instructing gig. The older and more senior guys were the ones who voted to allow 1st year salary for new-hires to be sacrificed in an effort to protect their own jobs and payscales. I am reasonably certain that even they did not expect the industry to deteriorate to this level, but it is a direct effect of those decisions and I realize that it was a tough decision presented to them by management (who IMO, are the real scoundrels).