CRJJ

They do actually, now they've changed things a little bit but 10 years ago when I got my ATPL (Spain), you had people going from flight school (180h), to a 737 right seat at Ryanair. Difference is, that type rating is tailored for that level of experience, they added the typical Jet transition course, etc.....but at the end of the day, you had FOs with 200h. MPL licences changed things and now training is more oriented to what the airlines need/want

Elevation

From an airmanship perspective I agree. The 1500 hour rule isn't about airmanship, though. It's about decision-making. At 1500 hours, whether instructing, flying charter or towing banners, a pilot will have faced some catch-22 that required some hard decisions. The 1500 hour person we hire can ride seniority to whatever seat they want on the winds of the economy. They can sit reserve and drill just hard enough to pass training. So the basic safety nets around decision making to get the ATP are very iimportant. In many cases there is no subsequent filter or check until some event in an airplane.

Reducing requirements below 1500 hours in the US is a recipe for trouble. This is because civil training in the US is structured differently than Europe and the military. The military puts pilots through OCS and subsequent training with significant wash rates. Europe puts low time pilots into seats, but their training emphasizes theory and tech study more than the US. (This includes large and well known schools like ERAU.). Simply put the risks Europe mitigates through study or the Navy mitigates through filtration the FAA mitigates through experience.

When we change our FAA, industry or company standards, we make a substandard product. The FAA will never be able to filter like the military or teach like the UK CAA or Canadians. We're not built, staffed or cultured for it.

I hear people complaing about 1500hr pilots. If they make today's standards and pass training, they're welcome to fly with me. I look forward to meeting them, in fact.

If we reduce what it means to hold an ATP, etc. then things are different.

Rover isn't suggesting lowering standards, but there is some industry noise to this effect.

JohnnyBekkestad

Yeah, i don't think people in America understand what a PITA the EASA ATPLs are. I have both FAA and EASA license and i took a 2 year University program to get my EASA endorsement for the 14 written exams.

Natca

With the right sign off it only took two weeks of study and a gun to your head to pass all the easa exams never the less.

Ludicrous Speed

Non sequitur. I am tired of people bringing this up out of context. They hired them as Flight Engineers where they had time to slowly experience operations. After rigorous steps to qualify for FO, then they upgraded….and so on…. We don’t have classics anymore.

bscott58d

I left the airlines in 2019 due to a divorce and now that life is back to normal (getting divorced during covid was not fun) and I am finishing my degree, I am looking for any insight from those like myself who have an R-ATP but a decent gap in flying.
The current plan is to start currency at the end of next month as my term passes mid-point and am hoping to be reasonably attractive to Atlas by the time I graduate in Oct. My Degree is in project management and legal topic related so I don't expect that to be a huge help. Is getting my CFI going to make any real difference? Currently at 1300 hours and have some 121 time, but it is not anything worth bragging about. Thanks for any insight in advance.

Ludicrous Speed

Do you mean will getting your CFI make a real difference to getting selected for an interview/hired or being a better and more well-rounded pilot? Either way, yes. It’s fine to be a CFI to build time, but the time will be worthless unless you instruct with some passion. If you’re just doing it to build time, then you are doing yourself and your students a disservice.

bscott58d

I mention it as it is listed as a requirement. If I get I would use it to teach on some level as I enjoy training others and have a decent amount of experience on the UAS side with DOD and in non-aviation-related environments. I should have been clear and you make a very valid point

Elevation

Don't sell your degree short. It is a good thing, and it shows you're more than a one-trick pony.

TropoRex

If I were to join the pathway program and be in the seat of the 737 for the minimum 2 years, would I have built enough 121/turbine hours to qualify for wide body FO? Atlas requires 500 hours turbine and 500 hours 121. I read from a post in 2019 737 flight hours are 200-300 a year.