......and we have a winner!

Very, very few people with good career potential are going to try to make a living as a pilot in the year 2013.

 

Very few indeed, but considering MIT has Aeronautical type degrees, such as Engineering, I would assume that some have quite a passion for flying.

MIT Flying Club - Executive Board

You're right though, 99% are not going to be joining the ATP industry.

 

MIT has ROTC units, they do produce military aviators. I suspect most of their grads who are so inclined go that route.

 

I respectfully disagree. It can be very difficult to "find the hours", and can mean the difference between going to a regional this year vs. instructing for another year (maybe two depending on where one is instructing).

Time matters quite a bit. Too many tales of the difference 1 year makes in these forums to credibly suggest otherwise. "Seniority is everything" seems to be the #1 rule.

 

Why "airline pilot"? There are a lot of fantastic Part 135 jobs out there that also require the ATP.

Btw, the answer is: because they love to fly. Just like you.

 

I understand that. I simply fail to see how person A, with a 4 year degree, 1200 TT 100 turbine 200 ME, CFI/CFII/MEI is less qualified than a K-st. Aviation grad with 1000 TT CFI/CFII/MEI for an ATP rating (even if it is "restricted").

The FAA is claiming there is a big difference between the two, to the tune of 500 flight hours. At $100/flt hr (just to put a value on it), that's $50,000.

 

Oh, I agree whole-heartedly. I'm just saying that the FAA's decision making in this situation is well within the scope of their regulatory authority. The decision holds up well in the light of day, at least to the general public...a typical juror, judge, or average citizen will see nothing wrong with extra credit for someone who focused their education on aviation.

Of course those of us in the industry know that aviation training is inherently vocational, not educational...sort of like a BS degree in welding or truck driving.

I'd rather have a co-pilot with part 61 flight training and an engineering degree. If they grant an exception for "Aviation Studies" they should grant an exception for all engineering and science degrees. Hell, make it all four-year degrees.

I don't mind the exception for military pilots since they almost all have a degree, have proven technical piloting skills, and have demonstrated significant maturity. But the reality is that the military exception will benefit only a very tiny fraction of military pilots since the vast majority will have 1500+ hours by the time they finish their active duty commitment anyway. It only benefits a few guard babies and maybe a guy who got grounded for medical reasons.

 

The helo guard babies seem to be deployed and gone as much as the active duty guys.

 

I didn't think an ATP was required for part 135 ops. Could be wrong on that haven't checked it in a while. I thought an ATP was only required for 135 chief pilots or operations directors, or something like that.

Not to knock our profession, but I think an accomplished MIT grad could probably have a more lucrative career in something other than being an airline pilot.

 

Maybe it depends on the job then.
My P135 job (non-pax carrying) requires an ATP.