Death2Daleks

[QUOTE=USMCFLYR;1229916]It is true; you have a higher chance of having an accident in your first 100 hours of flight time than at any other point in your career. However, if you add up all the accidents that have happened in general aviation, the majority of them happened with mid to high time pilots at the yoke. Their rate may be slightly lower, but their numbers are vastly greater when examining the whole spectrum.

Look at the Airbus incident, a 5000hr+ pilot drove the thing into the ocean because he failed to recognize the stall indications. There's not a single CFI I know who wouldn't have picked up on that right away. Why? Because they're living with stalls and spins every day. They have currency on how to handle that situation.

Further reading: http://www.faa.gov/library/reports/m...ia/age60_3.pdf

HercDriver130

Now hold on... you are comparing apples and oranges... Commercial airline pilots are not in my mind nor in the mind of most...General Aviation .....MOST general aviation accidents are very low time....OR ... VFR rated pilot continued flight into marginal or known IFR conditions....result = loss of control of the aircraft. Commercial Airline accidents is a totally different animal. So lets NOT call the Air France or any other airline accident General Aviation.

Oh... and for the poster above who lumped military trained pilots with those from a "structured school"... try again pal...not even in the same league. And before the flamers jump on me.... I am in no way saying that military pilots are better than GA trained pilots. What I will say is they are held to different standards and even then you have guys who make it through who probably shouldn't.

FWIW... I support the 1500 rule... with or without exemptions for type of training involved.

skylover

Both the military and aeronautical colleges are structured approaches to flight training/education.

However, I'm guessing it's mostly av. college pilots applying to ASA in that chart, not military pilots.

HercDriver130

structured...perhaps...comparable...NO.

Stitches

1,500hrs is high, and it should be. You mentioned earlier that you have yet to begin training. So from your perspective as someone with zero experience, do you really think you are qualified to judge whether 1,500hrs are sufficient mins?

I can see how you might think going from 250hrs to 1,500hrs is a huge jump. If you look back to the 80's and 90's before the explosion of regional jet operators you might be surprised to learn that it wasn't uncommon for a pilot to have several thousand hours before being hired at any airline (regional or major) flying pax. Back then pay was higher and when you take inflation into account the difference is staggering. Nowadays the airspace is more congested, automation is more complicated, and pilots work longer and harder than ever before.

Prior to the massive outsourcing of the last decade and the Colgan accident, a 250hr pilot with a wet commercial flying pax was almost unheard of. The public tolerated this because outsourcing allowed cheaper fares and as long as the flight showed up on time and the landing was smooth no one knew the difference.

I do agree with your premise that a structured program is better but I challenge you to find anyone who went into this profession who wanted a 20-30yr "career" with a regional carrier. Unfortunately that is the reality for many pilots today. I fear it will continue so as long as those who are motivated by a quick professional gain to lower the standard.

I hope you won't take this as a personal attack as I wish that anyone who enters this profession has it better than those who came before you.

skylover

First of all, let's be clear, I do not want a regional airline career, and I do believe that the industry is improving in that regard. Also, I fully support the new ATP regulations in general - standards need to be raised. The past 10 years have been horrendous for any pilot, and I really do think that a "perfect storm" is about to happen because of major changes within this industry.

I do, and always will, see regional airlines as a stepping stone; simply another layer of flight training to become a major airline pilot. The past 10 years, it hasn't been the case. I believe that will change though.

JamesNoBrakes

How is that going to change? Regional airline managers love it when pilots think this. It means cheap labor, which in turn means they can continue to undercut major airlines/routes, which in turn keeps it a "career" due to the passenger volume on regionals.

skylover

I think major airlines are beginning to reel in scope again, just like the Delta contract is doing (at least it's a good start...)
Also, increased hiring at majors means more attrition at regionals, making it a "stepping stone" once again for folks just joining the industry.
That's just my opinion; I know others think differently.

Also, there are other ways to make it to a major quicker if one is proactive. Internships, for example. Some even offer a guaranteed interview once one meets the min. requirements.

robthree

1500 hours is a huge number. When you're looking up at it. When you're looking back at it, it is a much smaller obstacle.

One learns when one reaches his limits of experience. Once you get to an airline, you tend to not push those limits(and your passengers thank you for that) and so learning slows. Thus, you get more out of 1000 hours as a CFI than you will in 1000 hours of RJ flying.

Stitches

Spot on.

I was in an FBO not too long ago when an older gentlemen asked the All ATP CFI who just landed about his career plans.

The CFI replied that he was building hours (at a rate of 8 per day plus ground instruction) to move on to a regional and when asked about regional pay he acknowledged it was extremely low but that it would be worth it because whoever hired him would be "investing" in him through all the training he would get.

I don't think it ever occured to him that "investing" could easily be replaced with "exploiting".

Just depends on your point of view.