Airline Pilot Forums

Airline Pilot Forums was designed to be a community where working airline pilots can share ideas and information about the aviation field. In the forum you will find information about major and regional airline carriers, career training, interview and job seeker help, finance, and living the airline pilot lifestyle.




View Full Version : FAA bill and single pilot ops


jdt30
06-01-2018, 05:30 AM
This is an ALPA email to your US Reps and Senators asking them to vote no against the new FAA reauthorization bill. The bill has a section that pushes for single pilot operations. If you want an airline career please fill it out. It takes seconds.

Action Needed?Tell Congress: "No Single-Pilot Aircraft" (http://www.alpa.org/advocacy/cta/faa-744)


Han Solo
06-01-2018, 05:39 AM
This is an ALPA email to your US Reps and Senators asking them to vote no against the new FAA reauthorization bill. The bill has a section that pushes for single pilot operations. If you want an airline career please fill it out. It takes seconds.

Action Needed?Tell Congress: "No Single-Pilot Aircraft" (http://www.alpa.org/advocacy/cta/faa-744)

done, took 10 seconds tops.

colonials13
06-01-2018, 06:42 AM
This is an ALPA email to your US Reps and Senators asking them to vote no against the new FAA reauthorization bill. The bill has a section that pushes for single pilot operations. If you want an airline career please fill it out. It takes seconds.

Action Needed?Tell Congress: "No Single-Pilot Aircraft" (http://www.alpa.org/advocacy/cta/faa-744)

Complete and verified. Easy peasy.


OKLATEX
06-01-2018, 06:56 AM
Got the email last night and wrote my reps.

Glad to see it posted, thanks!

Qotsaautopilot
06-01-2018, 07:22 AM
Sent. Had all my voting relatives do it as well

rightside02
06-01-2018, 07:22 AM
Done , all the names on this site that donít sign this should be kicked off ASAP ... give the mods something to do .

Aero1900
06-01-2018, 07:43 AM
done. Everyone needs to do this.

HuggyU2
06-01-2018, 08:14 AM
Done , all the names on this site that don’t sign this should be kicked off ASAP ... give the mods something to do .
Yes, let's not allow people to have a differing opinion. Did you read the 27 page section-by-section summary off of rules.house.gov? There are some really good things in there that I'd like to see get passed.

Here's the offending paragraph:

Section 744. Single-Piloted Commercial Cargo Aircraft. Establishes a research and development program in support of single-piloted cargo aircraft assisted with remote piloting and computer piloting. A report is due six months after enactment on the program and the results of a review of the program conducted by the FAA in consultation with NASA.

The ALPA call-to-action certainly makes it sound like the sky is falling.

Is anyone honestly concerned that the technology is there and the US Gov't will have 747's flying with one pilot by 2020? 2030?

One only needs to look at the gnashing of teeth over 3rd class medical reform, and the proposal to ride-share with airplanes to see that the FAA will not let this happen any time soon.

Let the gov't do all of the research they want: it will help to expose what the limitations are and why we aren't there in terms of safety and reliability.

Qotsaautopilot
06-01-2018, 09:04 AM
Yes, let's not allow people to have a differing opinion. Did you read the 27 page section-by-section summary off of rules.house.gov? There are some really good things in there that I'd like to see get passed.

Here's the offending paragraph:

Section 744. Single-Piloted Commercial Cargo Aircraft. Establishes a research and development program in support of single-piloted cargo aircraft assisted with remote piloting and computer piloting. A report is due six months after enactment on the program and the results of a review of the program conducted by the FAA in consultation with NASA.

The ALPA call-to-action certainly makes it sound like the sky is falling.

Is anyone honestly concerned that the technology is there and the US Gov't will have 747's flying with one pilot by 2020? 2030?

One only needs to look at the gnashing of teeth over 3rd class medical reform, and the proposal to ride-share with airplanes to see that the FAA will not let this happen any time soon.

Let the gov't do all of the research they want: it will help to expose what the limitations are and why we aren't there in terms of safety and reliability.

Some of us will be here well beyond 2030 so yeah it matters. If it ever gains any traction half of us will be reduced to “remote pilot” probably making a third of the money a first officer makes. Some of us also have kids in Flight school and would like to see them have a full career in the cockpit and not get the axe in their mid 40s with a family to support. I don’t want my tax dollars funding any furtherance of pilotless technology. The airlines and manufactures already work hard enough to eliminate us. We don’t need to fund things that help their cause. And yes right now it will prove it cannot be done right now but the program is indefinite as in forever.

Sure the bill has so good items but none in my mind more important than this. Strike the paragraph and pass the bill. Done.

OKLATEX
06-01-2018, 09:22 AM
Some of us will be here well beyond 2030 so yeah it matters. If it ever gains any traction half of us will be reduced to ďremote pilotĒ probably making a third of the money a first officer makes. Some of us also have kids in Flight school and would like to see them have a full career in the cockpit and not get the axe in their mid 40s with a family to support. I donít want my tax dollars funding any furtherance of pilotless technology. The airlines and manufactures already work hard enough to eliminate us. We donít need to fund things that help their cause. And yes right now it will prove it cannot be done right now but the program is indefinite as in forever.

Sure the bill has so good items but none in my mind more important than this. Strike the paragraph and pass the bill. Done.

Exactly. I think one of the ALPA emails talked about the Bill overall being good, except for this paragraph that was added in a backdoor, last minute, no debate way.

Chuck D
06-01-2018, 09:35 AM
EVERY SINGLE PILOT NEEDS TO DO THIS!!

I'm sure there are a few "I stayed at a Holiday Inn" casual non-pilot outside observers who probably think this is no big deal, and there are certainly AI, aerospace and tech industry VC's looking to capitalize off of leading some new ill-advised aviation revolution. Their interest isn't safety - it's $$$.

We need to make it crystal clear in very easy to digest soundbites that two sets of expert eyes on scene in the flight deck, with their ability to rapidly recognize, react and adapt to near and far threats, whether cargo or passenger ops, is ESSENTIAL to the safety of the skies over everyone's heads.

Air travel is safe - extremely safe actually - here. In the U.S. In our system and in the others that follow our lead . But that fact is sort of astounding considering how complex it all is. That's because we pilots, as an "on-site" team constantly scan for and fix the myriad issues that come up in and around the aircraft. These 10-250million dollar near-mach machines break and malfunction in minor (and sometimes major) ways ALL OF THE TIME!

In a future scenario with one single person up there - who's perhaps firing on only 7 of 8 cylinders on a given day, who's not quite "fatigued", but slept in a noisy or poorly cooled hotel room, who perhaps argued with their spouse earlier that day or had a bad meal, something subtle that's missed over the course of a 2 or 8 hour flight is not going to be remotely caught and is not "remotely" sufficient to ensure safe flight. When there are two well trained experts, even if one is not at 100% that day, that combined safety net catches and addresses issues and keeps the flight safe - safe to the tune of zero fatalities over entire years. That's my idea of safety!

This part 121 safety exists because of CRM, rigorous training, and the 2 pilot crew.

There is 0 substitute for 2 pros on the flight deck!

labbats
06-01-2018, 01:33 PM
done, took 10 seconds tops.

Agreed. Input a form and hit enter. Even I can do that!

drivinghome
06-01-2018, 01:41 PM
Done. Shared on all social media accounts too. The general public needs to know.

SonicFlyer
06-01-2018, 04:11 PM
This is an ALPA email to your US Reps and Senators asking them to vote no against the new FAA reauthorization bill. The bill has a section that pushes for single pilot operations. If you want an airline career please fill it out. It takes seconds.

Action Needed?Tell Congress: "No Single-Pilot Aircraft" (http://www.alpa.org/advocacy/cta/faa-744)

LOL, once again, the union propaganda caught in a lie.


This provision in the bill doesn't grant single pilot ops, it merely researches it. Not even close to being able to grant single pilot ops.



That being said, this is part of why the 1500 hour rule is bad, because it makes entry level pilots more expensive to the companies. When that happens they will seek ways to get rid of single pilot ops.

SonicFlyer
06-01-2018, 04:21 PM
The ALPA call-to-action certainly makes it sound like the sky is falling.
Yep, exactly. This is why the unions have no credibility, stunts like this.

Some of us will be here well beyond 2030 so yeah it matters. If it ever gains any traction half of us will be reduced to ďremote pilotĒ probably making a third of the money a first officer makes. 1- probably not. 2- the 1500 hour rule is accelerating automation because it makes entry-level pilots more expensive.

Qotsaautopilot
06-01-2018, 07:29 PM
LOL, once again, the union propaganda caught in a lie.


This provision in the bill doesn't grant single pilot ops, it merely researches it. Not even close to being able to grant single pilot ops.



That being said, this is part of why the 1500 hour rule is bad, because it makes entry level pilots more expensive to the companies. When that happens they will seek ways to get rid of single pilot ops.

I think we understand itís research. I just donít want my tax dollars used for anything single pilot related, even research.

And I hardly think a few first year 1500hr regional FOs making $50k as opposed to 250hrs and $20k is tipping the scales. What I can say is itís certainly improved safety and as a nice byproduct, driven up wages a little for guys that deserve it.

Beech Dude
06-01-2018, 07:39 PM
Done. Yes, this is dangerous language and just like ATC privatization, is something that will not go away. It will be a continuous fight for the rest of our careers.

CBreezy
06-01-2018, 08:22 PM
Yep, exactly. This is why the unions have no credibility, stunts like this.

1- probably not. 2- the 1500 hour rule is accelerating automation because it makes entry-level pilots more expensive.

Automation isn't being developed because of the 1500 hour rule. It is being developed because it is cheap to do it.

But you wouldn't understand that because you have a permanent beef with what you perceive as unions keeping you out of the airlines. That's called being ignorant.

chrisreedrules
06-03-2018, 04:33 AM
The technology is much further along than we have been led to beleive. Email your MEC chairmen about their closed door meeting with various government agencies recently. This is real and it is coming quicker than many have anticipated. We need to draw a very definitive line in the sand.

aiir
06-03-2018, 04:44 AM
https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN1FS0SV

Aero1900
06-03-2018, 08:27 AM
Yep, exactly. This is why the unions have no credibility, stunts like this.


B.S. this is exactly what I want and expect our union to do. This is trying to defend our careers. I would be very upset if ALPA wasn't trying to get this provision removed from the bill.

Gundriver64
06-03-2018, 08:42 AM
Done, took 7 seconds.

WhiskeyDelta
06-03-2018, 09:15 AM
The technology is much further along than we have been led to beleive. Email your MEC chairmen about their closed door meeting with various government agencies recently. This is real and it is coming quicker than many have anticipated. We need to draw a very definitive line in the sand.


How about you post first what yours has said. Most of us would need more proof of what youíre talking about before we randomly confront our MECs with, frankly, wild conspiracy-theory-type accusations.

Bottom line is it will take decades to convince the flying public this is needed and safe. We may have the tech now but that doesnít mean people would fly with it up front right away.

SonicFlyer
06-03-2018, 01:29 PM
B.S. this is exactly what I want and expect our union to do. This is trying to defend our careers. I would be very upset if ALPA wasn't trying to get this provision removed from the bill.If they were actually trying to implement it, then I could understand the resistance. But to study it really isn't a big deal. They look petty when they cry wolf over something so silly.

Aero1900
06-03-2018, 04:14 PM
If they were actually trying to implement it, then I could understand the resistance. But to study it really isn't a big deal. They look petty when they cry wolf over something so silly.

I understand what you are saying, but I see this as a first step in the path to single pilot airliners. Everyone who is trying to get something done in Washington cries wolf. I get the looking petty argument, and I don't disagree with you, but I still want ALPA to fight this.

Wang Wei
06-03-2018, 05:09 PM
What about the possibility of new automation and technology brought about by the development of "single pilot airliners" making flying safer and more economical for the flying public? It might actually be a good thing (except for the aviator, I suppose).

Qotsaautopilot
06-03-2018, 05:41 PM
What about the possibility of new automation and technology brought about by the development of "single pilot airliners" making flying safer and more economical for the flying public? It might actually be a good thing (except for the aviator, I suppose).

I guess taking 50,000 of the middle class’s best earners out of the economy means nothing. How many of us will be retrained for some job of the future that replaces our current income. Not many. Americans love things cheap even to their own detriment. Walmartization of America. So wonderful.

Wang Wei
06-03-2018, 06:29 PM
I guess taking 50,000 of the middle classís best earners out of the economy means nothing. How many of us will be retrained for some job of the future that replaces our current income. Not many. Americans love things cheap even to their own detriment. Walmartization of America. So wonderful.

The brutal fact is that taking 50,000 middle class earners out of the economy means absolutely nothing in the context of an economy with 125,000,000 workers.

It might not happen in 10, 20, or even 50 years, but it will happen. Is society obligated to stop progress because it makes the jobs of 0.01% of the population obsolete?

If this thing represented a fundamental threat to safety, I'd sign a petition without hesitation. If it represented a fundamental threat to my job, I'd sign a petition for selfish reasons. It does neither, so I'm not signing.

Qotsaautopilot
06-03-2018, 07:17 PM
I get the relative size that airline pilots make up in the national economy. I was more making a broader point of the middle class disappearing as good paying honest jobs get eliminated. Not many of my neighbors can support their families on one income. I’d guess few have much saved for retirement. The income gap keeps widening and those in the middle suddenly find themselves as those just getting by.

I see single pilot or no pilot study as a threat to our jobs yes. Immediate, no. But we need to stretch this thing out as long as we can. It’ll never die but whatever we can do to slow the process down is good for us. We already know that with current equipment, moving to single pilot would be a threat to safety. I don’t need my tax money spent telling us what we already know

Aero1900
06-03-2018, 08:00 PM
If this thing represented a fundamental threat to safety, I'd sign a petition without hesitation. If it represented a fundamental threat to my job, I'd sign a petition for selfish reasons. It does neither, so I'm not signing.

Wow. Can't believe I just read that on this forum.

Take a look at single pilot vs crew cockpit safety statistics . It's a night and day difference. Two pilots are substantially safer than one, no question.

Secondly, you seriously don't think this is a threat to our jobs? The McDonald by my house has touch screens to order from. No cashier at McDonald's anymore. Last time I checked, airliners used to have 3 guys up front. You don't think it's possible to go to one? It is. It will happen. It will be less safe, but it will be cheaper for the airlines. I expect OUR union to fight this. I expect OUR union to slow the 'progress' of destroying our careers.

SonicFlyer
06-03-2018, 09:15 PM
I guess taking 50,000 of the middle classís best earners out of the economy means nothing. Um actually no, not the case. Single pilot ops with pax in part 121 ops is decades away. In cargo, maybe less, but they all fly older planes, so then again, maybe not.

It will happen with newer generation planes eventually, but retrofitting current aircraft to be single pilot will likely be cost prohibitive. And since it takes decades for these things to depreciate to the point it becomes worth it, pretty much everyone employed at the moment will be ok.

SonicFlyer
06-03-2018, 09:16 PM
I understand what you are saying, but I see this as a first step in the path to single pilot airliners. Everyone who is trying to get something done in Washington cries wolf. I get the looking petty argument, and I don't disagree with you, but I still want ALPA to fight this.It will be a multi-decade gradual transition. And it will indeed benefit because it increased efficiency and safety. But see my previous comment above.

SonicFlyer
06-03-2018, 09:18 PM
The McDonald by my house has touch screens to order from. No cashier at McDonald's anymore. This is patently untrue.

McDonalds that have touch screen ordering still have cash registers and cashiers at the front desk too.

Bigapplepilot
06-04-2018, 09:33 AM
Wow. Can't believe I just read that on this forum.

Take a look at single pilot vs crew cockpit safety statistics . It's a night and day difference. Two pilots are substantially safer than one, no question.

Secondly, you seriously don't think this is a threat to our jobs? The McDonald by my house has touch screens to order from. No cashier at McDonald's anymore. Last time I checked, airliners used to have 3 guys up front. You don't think it's possible to go to one? It is. It will happen. It will be less safe, but it will be cheaper for the airlines. I expect OUR union to fight this. I expect OUR union to slow the 'progress' of destroying our careers.

Airplanes crossing the pond used to have 4 engines. Then 3. Now two. That doesn’t mean taking one more away is going to be easy or logical. 3-1 is not the same as 2-1..

But in reference to the comments above about ‘50,000 people being taken out of the economy.’ Well, automation affects every human on the planet, including doctors and financial analysts. There is a hedge fund working on an algorithm to automate management. So in a weird way it’s not a worry because by the time this happens, there will be much larger issues to deal with. Remember, accelerating progress...

tomgoodman
06-04-2018, 11:52 AM
The technology is much further along than we have been led to beleive. Email your MEC chairmen about their closed door meeting with various government agencies recently. This is real and it is coming quicker than many have anticipated. We need to draw a very definitive line in the sand.

A mole in the closed door meeting has revealed their nefarious plan: single pilots, monitored by F/As with cattle prods. :eek:

badflaps
06-04-2018, 11:54 AM
A mole in the closed door meeting has revealed their nefarious plan: single pilots, monitored by F/As with cattle prods. :eek:
And whips, don't forget whips........

TransWorld
06-04-2018, 01:18 PM
A mole in the closed door meeting has revealed their nefarious plan: single pilots, monitored by F/As with cattle prods. :eek:

And a bag full of cats, ready to open onto the flight deck?!

Elevation
06-04-2018, 01:31 PM
I share everyoneís thoughts about how this automation will affect the future of aviation. However, is this something we can stop? While we can prevent funding for reasearch this time, eventually automation will affect us more than it already has.

Even arguments about safety only hold up in the short term. There used to be navigators, radio operators, engineers and pilots on the flight deck in years gone by. Similar arguments about safety were made as technology sequentially rendered those stations obsolete, yet, overall airline safety improved.

So perhaps we ought to change our paradigm? What if we add RPA operators to the rolls of ALPA and Teamsters? If we have contract language to add those guys to our seniority lists we ay do more to protect our futures than fighting to stem the tide of development.

C37AFE
06-04-2018, 01:58 PM
Copilots going the way of the Nav and FE. Maybe I should get those A&P tools back out the shed!

Ronaldo
06-04-2018, 06:39 PM
Whiskey, Sonic et al,

I completely disagree that studying this isnít a threat. One study, one rule making NPRM period of 6 months and 18-24 months later all FOs at cargo operators are replaced.

This is coming from from the same group that refused TCAS on cargo planes, avoided 117 rest rules, etc. If you think gutting half the UPS, FedEx, Atlas, ATI pilot list isnít a significant financial motivator, you are grossly underestimating the potential savings for cargo airlines.

This is absolutely a 3-5 year threat for cargo pilots and probably a 10 year threat for pax carriers. If Iím wrong, then we all wasted 5 minutes trying to avoid it. Youíll waste 10 times that in 2 trips to PHL waiting in a jetway driver.

1500 has less to do with this than the general rise in legacy/cargo compensation. Pilot supply to cargo operators (top tier) is not at risk. Maybe Atlas has difficulty but FedEx and UPS, like United, have no supply or shortage problems.

WhiskeyDelta
06-04-2018, 08:41 PM
Donít get me wrong, Iím all for pushing back against this amendment or whatever it is. Iíve done my part. That said, I was asking for more info about the doomsday post I originally quoted a few days ago. While I can easily see the threat on the horizon, I also believe due to typical government bureaucracy and public resistance, itís much farther away than we realize at the moment.



Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1