An aviation degree is only worthless if you allow it to be worthless.

While I have spent a large amount of money on my education I have not gone into debt yet. When I get out of school I will be just like everyone here was excited and "Looking through the rose colored glasses" While i may have a great outlook I also know the realities of the industry. I know that there aren't many jobs out there. I know that they are going to pump their requirements up to 1500TT. Also I know that there is legislation for holders of an aviation 4 year degree to have that TT reduced to 750. That is enough of a reason for me to completely suggest that getting an aviation degree is probably not a horrible choice. Also I feel that there would be less of an issue if there wasn't a horrible recession going on right now. Those CFI jobs where you built time like none other have been disappearing like crazy because no one is learning to fly right now. Airlines are championing callbacks of 12 pilots. There will be a pilot shortage the time line for it has not been set yet. I am skeptical about the scope clauses. because I think you are on the right track but what about the airlines like Alaska, Southwest, Jetblue and Airtran? They are Large carriers who are defined as Legacy. would they then become regional? I think that the scope clause for the Big 5 might change but I don't think the Pilot groups of the other "Legacy's" would go for it.

We still have Vietnam era pilots flying?

:D

2010-1973= 37 years ago

That can be said for any degree. I've always been amused by those who go to college with no idea what they want to do or major in, but that's me.

You can graduate College with a gpa of 3.0+ and not known a damn thing about your field. You can graduate with an aviation degree without knowing what an Ops Specs is because not one class or one professor exposed the student to what it means to the carrier and it's pilots. The only way you get that kind of education is by asking questions, exploring resources and interning or getting into the field wherever you can before you graduate.

And I think that goes for any degree vs the real field.

That's something myself and a few other alums have been fighting for with Purdue alumni - to have more real-world topics discussed in the new curriculum with students vs. 4 semesters worth of 727 systems classes that an airline would teach in 2 40-hour weeks.

I think a contributing factor to this is at many universities, faculty don't have much industry experience...especially in the last 10-15 years. One reason for this is many universities want aviation faculty to have M.S. degrees if not Ph.Ds...and there simply aren't that many folks out there that have a strong professional/operational background with those academic credentials that want to teach.

Yes, it does...

Not for long. 25 + 37 = 62

will there ever be a shortage? Simple answer - NO. There never has been and there never will be. There are thousands of guys on the street, think about it.

Everything you said is true. I have learned a ton from doing a internship. at school there is such a separation from the in depth maintenance and flying sides. We learn about op specs but they just cover them briefly during a lecture. I have learned a ton of information from Reading an airline FOM. Also I have gained a lot of knowledge on compliance, opspecs, and stc mods. School gives you the tools to understand these things better when you get formally exposed to them.

yeah but that can dry up pretty quick if the airlines even get back to where they were when 65 went into effect.

When I started flying a few years ago, the same pessimistic people were touting the doom and gloom, woe is me crap. Like you, it was my dream to become a professional pilot. I put the negativity behind me, and pursed my dream while also keeping the finances in check.

Three years ago I quit my engineering job and moved down to south FL to begin my new life as a flight instructor. It was a scary decision, but it was also one of the happiest days of my life. Now I'm flying a citation for a corporate operator, and am loving it!

I have zero regrets about getting into aviation, and feel VERY lucky to have worked in the "real world" first. You will find that a lot of pilots that have only made their living as pilots are some of the most bitter and vocal mouthpieces on these boards. While sometimes they have valid complaints, often times they are just whiny people that have no clue how good they have it. Those of us that have worked in office jobs, hating everyday at work, have a different perspective. Anyway, good luck to you... Pursue you dream, don't get into a ton of debt, and enjoy your life. Good luck!

Thats a tricky question. The optimist in me says yes, due to general lack of interest in becoming a professional pilot. Too many people are becoming wise to the game of laying out a bunch of money and spending years gaining experience only to be furloughed. A lot of FOs I've flown with over the past few months has plans to either get out or is leaving altogether for various things. They see no upgrades in the future and their overall sense of satisfaction in the job is way low. Some may have a sense of entitlement to them, but others see it as "Im young enough, let me rearrainge my ducts now so Im not stuck".

As a pessimist, I dont see a shortage. You'll always have the "I just want to fly, I dont care what I make, its my dream" types. These types are 'Riddled' throughout this industry. They MUST keep in mind they will get older and wives, kids, retirement savings and mortgages come at you real quick. Making 25K a year sounds like a lot of beer money in college but in reality it isn't even close enough to live on.

I hope you guys are paying attention to this kid. This is the voice of experience from a 20 year old. He's right, you're all wrong. Get with the program.

/sarcasm

I hope you realize kiddo, that there are experienced pilots out there like myself with 4 year aviation degrees that are jumping through our own asses to help squash this "expemtion of experience" for a formal education.

I've written no less than a dozen letter to politicians expressing my opinions on the matter, and received several letters of support from them. I've also flamed away at the ERAU alumni department for their part in trying to subvert the minimums. As was expected, they've largely ignored me, which is fine, my bank account ignores them.

I don't blame new hires for anything. Assuming one is working in the USA, they are in a free country that allows one to choose where they want to work. The person I responded to (Blackbird) was going off on a rant about selling the profession short. I just found that to be amusing, considering he had "Saab" listed in his profile. Assuming he's working at a regional airline and not a corporate operator, it's a bit like the pot calling the kettle black.

If these continued reports of how 3 out of 4 kids in the USA aren't eligible for military service due to fitness / health problems, there very well could be a shortage in the future.

But I wouldn't hold my breath for it.

I understand that there are a lot of people out there with a ton more experience than my self and I do respect their opinions. If you have read some of the other posts(i know you have since you commented on the same thread) I have said that I know I am not experienced enough at this point to make the decisions pilots like the guys with 25K TT flying transpolar in a 747 have. I am not saying that I can do your job but I believe that the 1500TT rule will be the cause of the PIlot Shortage. Everyone here has their fair share of horror stoys from flying with low time pilots. Well Personally learning is the result of expierence. I am sure you all have your fair share a storys from flying with guys with 2K hours. I agree with you I haven't even graduated yet and Purdue is asking me to donate money already. I feel my bank account will be ignoring Purdue not only becasue of that but because of the issue of not having any moeny to donate.

As long as someone worked for a certain wage then they will continue to only offer that salary.

Also I am 22 i think I now should get some real respect...Just joking

I wouldn't call it "the pot calling the kettle black" unless he is voting for poor pay or contract rules. If he went to a start up then yes, that might be appropriate but I don't know of any saab start ups. As for saying there's going to be some upcoming pilot shortage, it's kind of BS. There maybe an increase in hiring and retirements but I have yet to see any of the pilot shortages that people ranted and raved about in the past.

I wish I had listened.... my degree is in ATC so I guess I have a something to fall back on in the unlikely event of furlough/bankruptcy. Here's the thing... airlines don't give a hoot what your degree is in... you basically get to decide what you want to do in the event you cannot be a pilot....


I think 1500/500 is the min that needs to be put in place... no exceptions... none.... nada... regardless... aviation degree or not. Places like Purdue, SIU, UND, and Riddle are pushing for that legislation so that they can keep their doors open and charge the crap out of people. For us as pilots to have any hope of an increase in pay we need a shortage of pilots.

We wouldn't be in this recession if people lived within their means and didn't try to live in houses that they couldn't afford. Americans on the whole are stupid like that and big champions of instant gratification.

BINGO! You're dead on.

Colleges are places of academia and they can be rather incestuous. Auburn has or at least had the same issue, a former major pilot / major airline pilot who is a current CFI/MEI is not going to qualify for a job teaching on campus but an aviation washout that sticks around a college campus until he earns a masters or PHd will and then they get to teach the future generation.

And 4 semesters of an airplane that is hard to find anymore is pointless. I think Auburn did DC-10s for a while and when they were doing that it was a joke of an idea. Systems courses ought to teach basic systems found throughout the industry and what it means to future pilots and aviation managers, problem is, they can't find people who could correlate the information.

And I doubt any of that will change because the truck driving school (aviation management) wants to do things the right way but not necessarily academia’s way.

I think there are 2 ways for students to get the most out of college whether they are aviation management or not but planning on going into this industry and that is:
a) choose their favorite airline long-term and intern somewhere in flight ops and if you’re unable to do that then try a regional, and
b) read every single aviation magazine they can.

THERE geesh

There are certainly A LOT of guys on the street with over 1500tt, I doubt highly that it will equate into a pilot shortage!

The last few months I have been flying with guys that are/ or where getting close to retiring: none said they would do it all over again... I think that tells you something.

but hey... chase your dream but don't cry to loud when it becomes a nightmare.

In case you haven't figured it out yet, you need to at least pretend safety is the reason you want 1500/500 mins, not to create an artificial lack of pilot supply leading to a bigger paycheck...

Your newsletter - I want to subscribe to it :D

I was a self-admitted airplane nerd in college and remain one today. Don't get me wrong, aviation is FAR from being my life but as my chosen industry I think it my responsibility to keep abreast of what's going on in all segments - that's why I participate on many internet aviation forums, get AIN/ProPilot/BCA, read any Aviation Week I can get my hands on ($60/yr is too rich for me to subscribe), and am posting on this thread in the Majors forum of Airline Pilot Central when I'm a corporate pilot ;)

Aspiring professional pilots coming up in flight schools in 2010 don't have any excuses to claim they don't know about the pay and lifestyle of corporate or charter or regional or legacy airline pilots, let alone the pitfalls of scabbing, or PFT, or the whole "spikey-haired-ipod-having-backpack-wearing-RJ FO" stereotype.

Well said... I frankly worry about the caliber and judgement of a pilot entering the profession today with all that is known about this rotting profession. The mystery was intact when I came in back in '94, but fully exposed by 2000... and now 10 years later it's become the topic of media story after story. You can't say you didn't expect your career to suck this bad anymore.

In my case, I just wish I wasn't 40 so I could go back and get a degree in engineering or science and do something else with my professional life!

How long would that take? Have you seriously thought about it or just posting to post?

I've gone as far as do a lot of research on it... problems I see are:

-cost of tuition as a college grad, compounded by need to raise family, and save for college for my 10 and 7 year old.

-time it would take to get to at least a competitive MS degree is 4 yrs or more

-What's the job market like for the various career paths that are out there, and which ones are the next "Airline Pilot" in that they're flooded with applicants

-What kind of work can I enjoy? I have to see myself doing something for the next 25+ years and enjoying it..

For now, I'm living off mainly investment income and occasional contract work as a pilot, but I feel like there is a hole in my life compared to when I was fully employed with the airlines.

So what's to complain about? Looks like you have plenty of time to go to law or engineering school if you want another hobby.

no I don't.... expenses exceed income, and eating away at savings.. If I spend the next 4 years earning nothing, and take on $50-70K in college loans, it's a recipe for disaster ...

nothing is simple.

There is a multitude of reason why I think mins should be 1500/500 and safety is my number one reason... I was trying to relate my response to the thread... my apologies if you read my post and thought otherwise. Frankly, there are probably 7000+ pilots out there right now that have more than the purposed mins and for at least the first 10 years I don't think there will be a shortage per se. But I think in the long term scheme of things it will be a barrier to entry that less people are willing to make the sacrifice for. I also think the type of experience leading to 1500/500 is equally important.... simply flying around the pattern in Day VFR does not equate to experience in decision making, a sharpening of one's instrument scan, or much needed understanding of Crew Resource Management.
I am a big fan of VFR 135 outfits because it gets you into the thought process of dispatch, weather planning, issues pertaining to pax/cargo, and overall eases the transition to IFR 135/Airline training standards and operations. But all of this is just my opinion so feel free to rip into me if you see some sort of error in my thought process.:D

Not so fast ...
 

There are no jobs for us re-tread lawyers either

1500/500 minimum? I think a waiver for fighter guys would be reasonable.

Usually. No. Really Wrong. Dead Wrong.

I'd say waiver on the multi-engine time, but not total time... in the end, nobody has any business carrying commercial traffic with less than an ATP in my humble opinion... Heck, as a CFI, I had over 2000 before my break into the Brazilla.. But fighter guys (there are not many SE fighters left) can get a multi-rating at your local mom and pop flight school and as far as I am concerned demonstrate competence in a simulator on single engine approaches and V1 cuts and when you consider their usually aviators of a higher caliber to begin with, you're probably going to be fine with him as an SIC for the length of time one can expect to be SIC these days.

Don't worry your pretty head, big purple loves fighter/military guys, and always will.

Devil's advocate time here:

Why waive the multi requirement for SE fighter types but not for those who have a whole bunch of SE turboprop time, like in a TBM/Pilatus/Caravan?

If the purpose is safely delivering airline passengers and/or cargo to their destination, and regulators WANT a significant amount of multi-engine experience for safety, then experience in one SE turbine (pointy nose) should be just as good as another (prop nose).

When do the new FAA pilot requirements kick in?

Because generally speaking, and I can't say for today's politically correct military environment, the fighter pilot was the top of his (or now her) class and demonstrated significantly high levels of aviation skills... they were usually trained in multiengine jets before going to their fighter billet... long story short (and as someone who didn't flight fighters myself) .. I think it's arguable that in a military environment (as I remember it) where weeding out the weak is common and skill = position, not seniority or "who you know"... Fighter pilots have earned this waiver, where as the guy who may have busted every other 299 ride in a Caravan working for some Fedex feeder isn't measured by the same yardstick..

What would you define them as? as we are talking about a separation of scope clauses I think there is a large one between horizon and Alaska for example. If you are saying that the large airlines are going to go into the over water and wide body long haul routes only and the regional will take over everything what does that mean for the airlines that fly as majors/legacy(which this site classifies AS as a legacy btw) but only operate narrow body's? would that men AS gets rolled into QX or vice versa? or would that just not happen and there would be a third class. cause if there is a third category you might as well discard the original opinion and just sya that everyone is better off as they are now wiht the scope clauses they have now.

Also 1500/500 is fine and dandy but if people can't afford to purchase their hours to get their and the training market remains the way it is currently you are going to create an industry where only people who have a ton of money at their disposal to buy their time. I know the arguement of go fly night freight or air taxi is going to come up...I suggest you go look at whtat those operators are looking for now as their minimums. almost as high as your 1500/500 wants. They also don't hire first officers.

So...SE fighter pilots should be excluded from the proposed multi requirement simply because of the training and 'demonstrated high level of aviation skills' required for one to get into pointy nose airplanes.

Is that about right?

What would you say to a Caravan pilot who hasn't failed a single checkride in his/her career? Would such a Caravan pilot have not demonstrated the same 'high level of aviation skill' as the fighter pilot?

My point is such a waiver, applicable ONLY to military pilots, serves no purpose but to discriminate against non-military pilots who arguably would have more applicable experience for airline operations than the pointy-nose crowd. I say scrap the ME requirement altogether (after all, how many 121 incidents have been directly or indirectly caused by a pilot's lack of ME time?) or word it such that anyone with significant SE turbine time (say, 500hrs in aircraft with a MTOW greater than 6,000lb) is eligible as well.

How many fighter slots are available anyways? I know there are some in the guard but overall I don't think there are that many. I have some friends in AF Rotc and they said that there weren't many of them that got slots. Also I think if your going to give a waiver to a military pilot give it to the transport drivers...they have more experience than the Fighter Pilots do.

(military transport pilots don't have to worry about having enough multi time)