Airline Pilot Central Forums

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)
-   Flight Schools and Training (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/flight-schools-training/)
-   -   61 (Mom & Pop) vs 141 (Pilot Mills) in 2019 (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/flight-schools-training/124076-61-mom-pop-vs-141-pilot-mills-2019-a.html)

fenix1 09-13-2019 03:17 PM

61 (Mom & Pop) vs 141 (Pilot Mills) in 2019
 
Traditionally, Part 121 carriers (regional airlines) favor Part 141 training due to its regimented nature, many evals (stage checks), etc. But 141 schools - especially with 2019’s rapid movement & opportunities across the industry - have a lot of relatively inexperienced instructors teaching, as flight schools tend to hire their own students once they earn their instructor certificate/ratings. Given this, it seems there would be significant value in training at Part 61 school with an experienced (possibly career) instructor, rather than a time-building instructor at a 141 school. Yet most regional airlines still prefer 141 training over 61; regionals just want everyone to reach hiring/ATP mins ASAP above all else, but most regionals will indicate a preference for 141 training if asked. Can you please help me understand why this is still the case?

I don’t mean for this to become a degree-granting flight training (college/university programs) vs stand-alone flight training debate, but instead I’d like to get thoughts from experienced pilots, especially those flying 121, on Part 141 (degree-granting or stand-alone training) vs Part 61 (stand-alone training) and why the regionals continue to prefer 141 training (even when it’s ‘babies-teaching-babies’) instead of Part 61 where there’s more experienced instructors available potentially.

usmc-sgt 09-13-2019 03:48 PM

1: regionals prefer that you have clean records (training/legal)
2: regionals require you meet their minimums.
3: the end.

List of regionals which prefer 141 vs 61 and vice versa:
1:
2:
3:

captive apple 09-13-2019 03:57 PM


Originally Posted by usmc-sgt (Post 2886930)
1: regionals prefer that you have clean records (training/legal)
2: regionals require you meet their minimums.
3: the end.

List of regionals which prefer 141 vs 61 and vice versa:
1:
2:
3:

Thank you.

viper548 09-13-2019 04:28 PM

I've interviewed at:
1. SkyWest (hired)
2. Northwest (hired but didn't make it into a class before merger with DL)
3. NetJets (didn't get hired)
4. US Airways (hired)

Airlines that asked if I was part 61 or 141:

1.
2.
3.
4.

No ones cares.

rickair7777 09-13-2019 04:42 PM


Originally Posted by fenix1 (Post 2886917)
Traditionally, Part 121 carriers (regional airlines) favor Part 141 training due to its regimented nature, many evals (stage checks), etc.

No. That's a myth perpetuated by 141 schools and some of their clueless alumni. Airlines vastly prefer graduates of title 10 flight schools.

One known exception: DAL likes aviation universities. If you can't do a title 10 school, and have money to burn, that would be the next best choice for DAL. But a name-brand university, not a puppy-mill.


Originally Posted by fenix1 (Post 2886917)
But 141 schools - especially with 2019’s rapid movement & opportunities across the industry - have a lot of relatively inexperienced instructors teaching, as flight schools tend to hire their own students once they earn their instructor certificate/ratings. Given this, it seems there would be significant value in training at Part 61 school with an experienced (possibly career) instructor, rather than a time-building instructor at a 141 school. Yet most regional airlines still prefer 141 training over 61; regionals just want everyone to reach hiring/ATP mins ASAP above all else, but most regionals will indicate a preference for 141 training if asked. Can you please help me understand why this is still the case?

Never ever heard of any regional actually having a preference.

141 and 61 instructors have always been pretty much the same young, low-time, time-builders. Occasionaly (in either system) you'll find a more experienced CFI. Most of the career CFI's are free-lancers, not working for a school. Schools make money by paying low wages, which works for time-builders but not for career people.


Originally Posted by fenix1 (Post 2886917)
I don’t mean for this to become a degree-granting flight training (college/university programs) vs stand-alone flight training debate, but instead I’d like to get thoughts from experienced pilots, especially those flying 121, on Part 141 (degree-granting or stand-alone training) vs Part 61 (stand-alone training) and why the regionals continue to prefer 141 training (even when it’s ‘babies-teaching-babies’) instead of Part 61 where there’s more experienced instructors available potentially.

Easy, they don't prefer 141.

Pilsung 09-13-2019 05:26 PM

I'm a p61 CFI. We're way cooler than p141 CFI's.
lol- kidding.
Kind of...
I had a student come to me requesting grass strip proficiency- guess what we did for a month?...
...not a possibility within the limiting rigidity of 141 ops...

aviatorhi 09-13-2019 10:09 PM

Nobody cares where you got your ratings, just that you got them.

fenix1 09-13-2019 10:19 PM

Interesting and thanks - there’s something of a disconnect between regional recruiters and your feedback, as each regional airline recruiter that I’ve personally asked that has a preference indicates 141 over 61. Some recruiters don’t indicate a preference, but each that does values 141 over 61. Given that there’s more senior instructors who actually teach in 61 than there is in 141 schools (where senior folks tend to end up in management/supervision roles), this surprises me. Why is there a perception from these airline recruiters that 141 (although not necessarily degree-granting programs) is better preparation for 121 than 61?

I’m not basing any of this on feedback from flight schools themselves - obviously, they’ll pat themselves on the back.

fenix1 09-13-2019 10:27 PM

It makes sense that career/destination airlines/companies (like NorthWest, NetJets & US Airways) would have better things to use to evaluate than 61 vs 141 by that point (overall training record at a regional, any ancillary roles at regional like LCA, etc). But, among those recruiter recruiters who have expressed a preference when asked, they’ve all said 141.


Originally Posted by viper548 (Post 2886950)
I've interviewed at:
1. SkyWest (hired)
2. Northwest (hired but didn't make it into a class before merger with DL)
3. NetJets (didn't get hired)
4. US Airways (hired)

Airlines that asked if I was part 61 or 141:

1.
2.
3.
4.

No ones cares.


fenix1 09-13-2019 10:33 PM

Title 10 flight schools are those burning JP-8 on the taxpayer’s dime, right? (ie, military flight training)

Career & independent instructors (not flight school employees) is exactly who I’d be looking to work with in going 61.


Originally Posted by rickair7777 (Post 2886956)
No. That's a myth perpetuated by 141 schools and some of their clueless alumni. Airlines vastly prefer graduates of title 10 flight schools.

One known exception: DAL likes aviation universities. If you can't do a title 10 school, and have money to burn, that would be the next best choice for DAL. But a name-brand university, not a puppy-mill.



Never ever heard of any regional actually having a preference.

141 and 61 instructors have always been pretty much the same young, low-time, time-builders. Occasionaly (in either system) you'll find a more experienced CFI. Most of the career CFI's are free-lancers, not working for a school. Schools make money by paying low wages, which works for time-builders but not for career people.



Easy, they don't prefer 141.



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:38 AM.


User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright ©2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands