"When 1.95% of your gross salary isn't enough" . . . :rolleyes:


Seriously. You'd probably get more bang for your buck by hand writing letters to your elected leaders on issues you care about. None of that mass e-mail, form letter stuff. Better yet, do that, and get 10 of your friends and family to do the same.

Nothing gets the attention of a politician faster than a constituent who demonstrates that he's actually paying attention to what he's doing in Washington.

I write mine at least once every other month on issues and pending legislation that I care about. But then, I'm crazy!

DO YOU ALL NOT SEE A PROBLEM WITH THIS STATEMENT! The regionals SHOULD NOT be a place to gain your initial operating experience in the aviation industry! It is completely irresponsible to allow a pilot with merely 3.5 years of experience (or lack of) in aviation, to be operating as the Captain of an airliner.

Rhino,

How many years until you were flying your fighter jet there? There is no question the Military has the best training in the world, but those guys are also going zero to (true) hero.

Pansk

I hate to tell you this but Part 61 students are required to meet the same standards as Part 141 students. They are called the FAA Practical Test Standards and all applicants for an FAA license or rating are required to be tested to those same standards. These standards must be demonstrated to an FAA designated examiner during a check ride regardless if the student came for a 61 or 141 type of environment.

There are many, many great pilots who came up through the part 61 ranks. (for a variety of reasons - cost, availability of 141 schools, etc.) And, gasp, many of these pilots are now flying for major airlines. The horror! These pilots need to be identified immediately, their certificates pulled and banned from commercial aviation for life! Or at least until the can be retrained through a part 141 school.

By the way, there is one exception to the check ride requirements I mentioned above - ATP's and type ratings issued through airline AQP programs. Pilots under an AQP program are required to demonstrate the same standards as listed the ATP PTS. The big difference being that its done in a series of "validations." And if a demonstrated manuever does not meet standards, it can be retrained on the the spot. Under a part 61 check ride, if any part of the ride does not meet the standards then that check ride is a bust. The examiner will issue an FAA pink slip and cannot provide retraining.

I think you would have to equate being a section lead, maybe even a division lead to being the Captain in the airlines. That's when you're truly responsible for the flight and mission.

For me personally, I was 3 years in flight school (T-34, T-2, A-4) before going to the F-14 FRS. So after roughly 3.5 years of training, I was the aircraft commander of an F-14. At the 4 year point in my career, I was a Nugget flying in a fleet squadron. At the about the 6 year point, I was a section lead and about year 7 a division lead. This was a pretty standard progression at the time.

The transport bubbas (Navy) are probably around year 6 before they become a TAC. After initial and advanced training, they go to the FRS then on to their fleet tours. They start out in the fleet as a 3P, 2P, and finally become a TAC (aircraft commander).

That's the quick and dirty. Some go faster, some slower. Much of this is dictated on timing, current events, and obviously money.

...and they're generally not risking the lives of 50-70 paying passengers on each flight.

FWIW, I don't think it's that the military has such superior training, it's that their selection and weeding out process is so much more rigorous. At the regionals you just need a pulse and $50-200k of debt (or mommy & daddy's money).

Unfortunately, this is exactly what will happen if we raise more barriers to entry for professional pilots. More expensive training leads to fewer pilots in the pipeline (remember, these guys are having to pay for this training themselves), which leads to less competition for jobs, which leads to people with less experience getting those jobs.

Just look at many of the foreign carriers. GA is so limited that there is very little civilian base for the airlines to hire from (and not enough military pilots to fill the need). Therefore, these airlines are forced to hire off the street people who are not even pilots yet.

Thread Creep..........................

Not trying to be a buzz kill guys, but the only reason that scope is an issue is because the DELTA pilots gave it away.

Yes Delta has military and civilian pilots, go start another thread if you really want to compare the 2.

Maybe we should stop voting for things that allow more RJ's? Maybe let our reps know that we want the outsourcing of our jobs to stop right now.

Just a thought

agreed 100%

Now there is a good idea...