Zidac

Ah, but he said 0 knots though...

It's more like he was levitating in a classroom.

...or we're only talking IAS and the vomit comet had a pitot tube blockage. Either way, it must have been pretty wild.

Twin Wasp

Top of a loop and the airspeed needle has dropped below the scale.

chrisreedrules

Exactly. It should be 1,500 no matter what your education/training background.

Vito

The genesis of this issue was the Colgan crash and the F/O's lack of cold weather flying experience as attested by the cockpit CVR and some of her actions during the accident (Lots of blame on the Captain too) I guess congress and the FAA were painted in a corner and this requirement is the result. I'd argue, as others here have said that its more important to experience real world weather extremes than any classroom academics, but thats fodder for another thread. I will say from my own personal experience flying both civilian and military, that the huge difference between the two, outside of the obvious aspects of military flying like formation, air-refueling etc is that in the military our exposure to emergency training is on a monthly basis, and multiple times per month at that, whereas in my civilian job I see EP's once a year on my checkride. That is a huge difference. I'd argue a better option than imposing an arbitrary 1500 hour rule would be mandatory, non-checkride EP training more often. An example, I fly C-17's and we do a two-day sim every quarter where we are bombarded with all kinds of EP's, including multiple system malfunctions. They will simulate a missile strike that knocks out the #4 engine, while fuel is pouring out of the #2 and #3 engines with an associated hydraulic and electrical issue to deal with on top of the smoke etc etc...way more intense and much better training than your garden variety V-1 cut at the airline...
YMMV,
Vito

chrisreedrules

I wish I had training for missile strikes on my little 172

Bellanca

Amen to this.

This has been my opinion all along. To prevent another Colgan, there needs to be more training at the airline level in type. I'm not arguing that lack of overall experience isn't an issue. Sub 500 hour pilots should have never been hired at airlines in the first place, however, having 1500 hours of flying the pattern in a cessna 152 isn't going to prevent another Colgan from happening either.

coryk

Probably a tiered level system. Add in a jet course as one if the tiers. Heard from a ALPA friend in DC.

Grumble

I was drinking at the time I was reading said book.

chrisreedrules

I believe that most already do this.

Flight2012

First – sorry for the book. And yes, I have not yet spent a day in the airlines so this is an opinion from only my military background and what I have gleaned during my quest to be an airline pilot…. I may be way off the mark.

Wholeheartedly concur with Vito on this. However, the problem is time and money...it's all about money. The military has great tax-payer paid training budgets and facilities and a squadron really only loses time (not money) if they have to take part of a day to send a pilot to the simulator (and usually that time is just factored in the time the pilot will spend away from his/her family). In contrast, if every airline pilot had to have an EP simulator quarterly, that's at least 3 days per year (plus the annual check ride) that a pilot is not in a cockpit making money for the airline. Then the airline would have to increase its simulation/training budget to accommodate thousands of additional simulator training events per year. Even though this cost would probably be much cheaper than a mishap, the airline safety records are excellent and the odds of a mishap are so small, that it’s probably financially worth the gamble, or simply not a requirement to reduce the already low mishap rate.
Two big differences I see between the military and the airlines that generate a requirement for much more simulation and training for military pilots…... 1. A military pilot is given a great deal of responsibility very early in his/her career. One might become an aircraft commander (PIC/Capt) of a multi-crew aircraft as early as 500-700 hours total time and instantly become the guy with all the “experience” flying with the new guy that might only have a few hundred hours. That rookie PIC has gained quality experience required to handle such a responsibility by the intense use of good simulators and very experienced simulator instructors. 2. The nature of military flying is generally more than a departure and approach procedure to a full stop. As Vito said, the missions military pilots prepare for can be very complex and require a significant amount of training for both normal and emergency procedures. Therefore, simulators are required for realistic training, cost-efficiency, and safety. So, it works out well to throw an EP simulator in every 90 days or less.
Though more EP simulator training for the airlines would be great, I believe the next best thing would be an effective and measurable pilot training/continuing education program. The key words are EFFECTIVE and MEASURABLE. It has to be more, for example, than the FAA multiple-choice exams where it’s possible to memorize answers in a test question bank to get a passing score and walk away with a very limited understanding of the concepts.

Hmmm… let’s say, icing for example…..