Charlie

Interesting.

According to a recent report by the Bureau of Transportation Statistics, there are 11.3 pilots per aircraft among the 37 passenger airlines who reported data in 2009. That's a 10 percent decline from the previous year (12.6). In 2007, there were 12.1 pilots/aircraft (among 36 reporting airlines). The report lists just one other year, 2000, which was 13.3 pilots/aircraft (30 airlines).

What do those numbers mean to you? More aircraft? Less pilots?

JetJocF14

Try over $200,000.00 for a frigin 172. $500,000.00 for a Cessna 350. Me I'll just stick with my 1963 Comanche that I paid $36,000.00 for back in 1992.

Grumble

Forget the Commanche, how much for the toy in your avatar?

Herkdrv

[QUOTE=Grumble;832212]Forget the Commanche, how much for the toy in your avatar?[/QUOTE]

Forget about buying that one either. Much cheaper to rent.

Cubdriver

Go to USBLS for the details of their data. I will venture a guess they are looking at the number of pilots employed in two basic segments of the flying industry, airlines and commercial, and not the number of pilots per aircraft. You could have, say 49 pilots per aircraft or none at all and the data would be the same as long as they call themselves "pilots". USBLS says the airline segment is going to contract somewhat over the next ten years from 12% of what it is now, down to 8%. That's what they say, don't shoot the messenger.

In college I was forced to take a class on how to interpret data presentations. Charts, graphs... that kind of thing. The course was kind of silly, but it was required and it was 2 easy credits so I took it. The only good thing I took away from that course was the fact that by misusing statistical data, anyone can show just about anything.

An example. I am reading a slogan from a bottle in front of me- "4 out of 5 steakhouses serve A-1 steak sauce." Well... hmmm. Do those steak houses also serve the opposing brand? If so wouldn't that kind of make the idea the first 4 steak houses prefer A-1 kind of null?

Or perhaps A-1 defines a "steak house" as something they prefer, any place who happens to serve A-1. Do they simply gerrymander out the ones who do not serve A-1 and include only those who do? If so, why can't they achieve a higher score, say 5 out of 5?

Many places serve steaks but choose not to call themselves steak houses. And who is doing the determination of what is a "steakhouse" anyway, let me guess.... Heinz A-1 ad department?

Oh, and what portion of those steakhouses who serve A-1 are given free cases of A-1 steak sauce before any tally was taken at all? Again, that 4-out-of-5 claim is far more suspect when you look into the details of how it was made than before. I happen to like A-1 steak sauce on my meat, but it also burns holes in my stomach lining about 4 out of 5 times.

I hope you see how silly the statistics game can be. This does mean that statistics are not useful? No, but you need to look at an issue from several sides before making a conclusion.

Charlie

Well said, Cub.

I also like how Twain put it: "There are three kinds of lies: Lies, damned lies, and statistics."

SkyHigh

It seems to me that when a person considers flying today they move quickly from hobby to profession once they see how expensive it is. As a result the total numbers of private pilots has been dropping however the percentage of commercial pilots is rising.

Among other things the results are that in a short time there will not be enough new students to serve as time builders for CFI's. Every new student will have professional aspirations. Without the base of hobby pilots to supply the CFI market the airlines will have to start up their own cadet programs just like they have in Europe and Asia to fill its ground schools.

To save money on training the FAA will grant permission for the creation of the Multi-Crew License. The multi-crew license will permit the airlines to cut out all the unnecessary aspects of pilot training like; solo, VFR operations, piston training, single engine, and the rest of what a pilot needs to fly small planes. They will be trained from day one in a specific airframe and be certified to fly nothing else.

Skyhigh

DYNASTY HVY

Was'nt there a U.S carrier that was considering 'in house training' some time ago ?
I,m thinking it was DAL but I could be wrong on this.


Fred

skidoomike

Yes it is true, the pilot shortage is coming! We have been hearing about it since the 1980's. There is only one catch though. When it comes, there will be no one dumb enough to fill the positions. Pilots are intelligent people, and we are all taught to keep perspective of the "big picture". So who is going to make the huge sacrafices with almost no chance of any return? Many pilots have given up asking HOW to get a job, flight time, ratings, etc. and now are asking - WHY? The airline industry is a dead end treadmill to nowhere. Pursuing this career anymore is like getting a masters degree to work at Wal Mart. I believe that in the future the only people that will fill airline pilot positions will be the same type of people that you get support from on the phone when your computer breaks! Sad, for a profession that was so respected for so long.

[Mod note: Because this post is very similar in topic it was merged it into this thread. It may or may not add anything.]

SkyHigh

Nicely written !!

Skyhigh