USA Today Article (on pilot training)
12-18-2010, 06:45 AM
#41
Self Employed.
Joined APC: May 2005
Position: Corporate Pilot
Posts: 7,119
I agree
Originally Posted by Cubdriver
Actually, I can envision the 1500/ATP rule having an unintended consequence. People looking at a career as an entry-level professional pilot with what amounts to massive costs of entry in terms of education may see the futility of embarking on such a career and decide not to do it. A filtering effect may occur where less than ideal candidates are left. The ATP training may help make sure they are adequate pilots, but it seems unlikely to me the best pilots will stick around for what amounts to a ton of financial punishment. Congress should have addressed the part of the Colgan crash regarding socioeconomics. They should have set up a training forgiveness program like those used by industry and government in fields where fresh people are discouraged by the educational costs and the salary structure will not support high investments. Teachers, nurses, patent examiners are a few jobs that have educational cost forgiveness programs. An educational loan is paid down as long as you do the job. The scheme helps reduce barrier-to-entry for certain professions like these, and regional airline flying may be one that also needs help. Without it you get people who are too dim to calculate how miserable they are going to be on 18,000 a year minus a few that are not in it for the money, who will leave when they get bored.
I agree. Then the airlines will cry to congress that they can not find enough people to fill their classes and will gain permission to start up cadet programs like they have overseas. Creating actual indentured servants at minimum wage.
Skyhigh
12-18-2010, 06:33 PM
#42
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2007
Position: Capt
Posts: 3,215
Hi!
Actually, I can envision the 1500/ATP rule having an unintended consequence. People looking at a career as an entry-level professional pilot with what amounts to massive costs of entry in terms of education may see the futility of embarking on such a career and decide not to do it. A filtering effect may occur where only the highly motivated and dedicated candidates are left (This is actually what they told us about the low teacher salaries in WI. Since it didn't pay much, only the really dedicated ones would take the job, and teacher quality would increase!!!???!!!).
The ATP training may help make sure they are much better trained than with only a couple of hundred hours, and it seems ikely to me the best pilots will stick around, especially with all the Terms and Conditions increasing due to the worldwide pilot shortage.
The airlines will be forced, because of the lack of pilots, to set up a training forgiveness program like those used by industry and government in fields where fresh people are discouraged by the educational costs and the salary structure will not support high investments. Teachers, nurses, patent examiners are a few jobs that have educational cost forgiveness programs (not in WI, and other places with excess numbers of teachers).
An educational loan is paid down as long as you do the job. The scheme helps reduce barrier-to-entry for certain professions like these, and regional airline flying may be one that also needs help.
As stated above, the the airlines will cry to Congress that they can not find enough people to fill their classes and will gain permission to start up cadet programs like they have overseas. This system would've been great for someone like me, who didn't have the money to get pilot training, but really wanted to do it. There are LOTS of middle-class and lower people that are smart and motivated, but won't be able to afford the cost of the flight training to reach the ATP. If the airlines raise the pay enough, they may even be able to train enough pilots to all their cockpit seats.
It may even be like the 1960s, with UAL, etc., recruiting in high schools for pilots, and hiring those with a PPL who pass the screening exams.
cliff
SCL
Actually, I can envision the 1500/ATP rule having an unintended consequence. People looking at a career as an entry-level professional pilot with what amounts to massive costs of entry in terms of education may see the futility of embarking on such a career and decide not to do it. A filtering effect may occur where only the highly motivated and dedicated candidates are left (This is actually what they told us about the low teacher salaries in WI. Since it didn't pay much, only the really dedicated ones would take the job, and teacher quality would increase!!!???!!!).
The ATP training may help make sure they are much better trained than with only a couple of hundred hours, and it seems ikely to me the best pilots will stick around, especially with all the Terms and Conditions increasing due to the worldwide pilot shortage.
The airlines will be forced, because of the lack of pilots, to set up a training forgiveness program like those used by industry and government in fields where fresh people are discouraged by the educational costs and the salary structure will not support high investments. Teachers, nurses, patent examiners are a few jobs that have educational cost forgiveness programs (not in WI, and other places with excess numbers of teachers).
An educational loan is paid down as long as you do the job. The scheme helps reduce barrier-to-entry for certain professions like these, and regional airline flying may be one that also needs help.
As stated above, the the airlines will cry to Congress that they can not find enough people to fill their classes and will gain permission to start up cadet programs like they have overseas. This system would've been great for someone like me, who didn't have the money to get pilot training, but really wanted to do it. There are LOTS of middle-class and lower people that are smart and motivated, but won't be able to afford the cost of the flight training to reach the ATP. If the airlines raise the pay enough, they may even be able to train enough pilots to all their cockpit seats.
It may even be like the 1960s, with UAL, etc., recruiting in high schools for pilots, and hiring those with a PPL who pass the screening exams.
cliff
SCL
12-22-2010, 10:18 PM
#43
Line Holder
Joined APC: Mar 2009
Posts: 86
Aeronautical skill: This is not hard, and our current 121 training "should" guarantee a minimum here as long as the colgans and mesas are not allowed to push people through who don't belong.
You should adjust your stereotypes, or maybe you have been listening a little too closely to ex- Mesa, now SkyWest pilots. Mesa was the defacto training department for SkyWest. I know first-hand of pilots who were given extra IOE, only to leave (quit or be fired) and go to SkyWest.
The only fatal hull loss Mesa had was the Air Midwest disaster that was the result of a reversed elevator trim tab and poor weight and balance procedures that were rubber stamped by the FAA (which every 1900 carrier practiced at that time, not that that makes it right). SkyWest had its fatal accident in LAX in 1991 Flt 5569.
Pinnacle, Comair and Colgan, even Eagle if you include Roselawn, all had fatal accidents due to the direct result of pilot performance, or lack of, and yes, there were contributing factors but the pilots took perfectly good aircraft and destroyed them. Roselawn is up for debate with the SCLD’s, but the point remains. No, I am not painting all Colgan, Pinnacle, Comair or Eagle pilots as complacent or incompetent. They most definitely are not. They are some of the best pilots in the biz, as are SkyWest and Mesa pilots too. I am using these accidents to illustrate the point that Mr. Rickair is way, way off base to use stereotypes the way he did. Which is surprising because usually your posts are so spot on.
Mesa may be a lot of things, and I will never defend the management, but a carrier with unqualified pilots is most definitely not one of them. How challenging is it to be successful in a well supported company? Mesa pilots put up some of the best numbers with much less support than other carriers, and that’s why Mesa pilots, the ones that made it through IOE and didn’t go on to SkyWest (aren’t stereotypes fun?), are welcomed with such open arms in so many flight decks around the world.
To include Mesa in your little list may give you a thrill and reinforce your perceived stature in the world but it also perpetuates a misplaced stereotype. You can call Mesa Cheap, that they have dirty interiors, and crappy scheduling, but to judge their pilots or training department as complacent as made by your comment is flawed and incorrect. I don’t care how many former Mesa pilots you have flown with or talked to.
-HPD
12-23-2010, 01:26 AM
#44
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Posts: 247
This is sort of besides the point but it's surprising that so much taxpayers money and congressional time is spent on this stuff when 115 people die each day on the roads and driving is more dangerous by the mile than airline flying. Is it because it's more sensational and in the forefront when airplane crashes happen? I'm all for making flying safer and it's in my interests but I'm just saying... Maybe we should start increasing the standards to operate cars?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
