SonicFlyer

Your point explains why the hour rule isn't needed.



Of course it does... first off whenever the government intervenes in the market it causes distortions. One example of that is CFIs are now a lot more expensive.

SonicFlyer

That's called poor training.

And yes 250 hrs is too low, but 500-750 or so is about right for most. 1500 was nothing more than an arbitrary political knee-jerk reaction gift from Obama to the unions.

It's like FDR who used to set price controls based upon superstition... he'd literally just make numbers up.

JamesNoBrakes

So is Aviation Great Again yet?

hindsight2020

So what about that FFD vs mainline whipsaw dichotomy? 16% to 45% of domestic departures in just 15 years. From a mere 5% of domestic lift in 1978 mind you. Yikes. Anyone wanna tackle that doozy? Seems like the elephant in the room, and a sticking point everybody has avoided since post No. freggin 2 brought it up. And the best the gallery has for that guy is "socialist"? LOL Look in the mirror... aaaand there's the industry's problem.

WSPLT

Perhaps you could explain to me how knocking 1200 hours off of someone's resume is going to make them a better pilot? For sure, it's the QUALITY of the experience that matters, but there's no way someone flies around for 1500 hours without learning at least a few valuable lessons.


So let me get this straight, the government forces people to work in other areas of aviation (such as flight instructing) to build time before they are eligible for the airlines, and somehow that is responsible for increasing the cost of CFIs?

I'm generally in favor of smaller government, but there are times when the free market's values are NOT aligned with the best interest of the public, and in my opinion, this qualifies. If the free market were allowed to dictate aviation safety unhindered by the FAA and the federal government, airlines would be single pilot!

Regionals are NOT here because they are safer, they are here because they are cheaper, and the 1500 hour rule threatens that! It's NOT that difficult to get 1500 hours, and it requires people to do some flying away from the comforts of the 121 world.

ShyGuy

He had about 660 hrs and she had about 1200-1300 when hired. She was a CFI who taught at the Sabena flight training facility in Arizona. They had about 3,00 hrs and 2,200 hrs at the time of crash.



Lets be honest, and the crash reports of accidents back this up. When it's a pretty bad pilot error, you usually find that the PF had a history of failures, sometimes both before the airline and then during the airline. The Colgan CA was one of the nicest guys in the world but from a pass/fail standpoint, failed numerous times in primary and advanced training, and then failed just about every checking step once at Colgan. He should never have been in the left seat that night.

The company may want to fire someone, but the union will try and protect the pilot (it's their job after all to represent). And the system works at times, but it also fails and you have people who shouldn't be flying passenger planes but they get to do so anyway. And more food for thought, at an A320 airline a 1st year pilot was fired after being on line for about 8 months and that was after numerous additional training sessions, sims, and all the help they could muster. He's at GoJets now.

WSPLT

Truth! The mainline carriers CREATED the pilot shortage by expanding the regional airline industry. The regional carriers exist to save the mainline carriers money by allowing them to pay less, and hire less experienced pilots to fly the same routes in smaller airplanes.

The 1500 hour rule simply accelerated the effects of the pilot shortage, but ultimately the labor pool has shown that there is a shortage of people willing to drop $100k+ on an education to do a job that pays very little for quite a few years. This industry shot itself in the foot IMHO by expanding the regional carriers, and I think we're seeing the beginning of the end of them.

Our Canadian counterparts don't have the 1500 hour rule, and they're just beginning to feel the impact of the pilot shortage, but make no mistake, it's there too! Their regionals are canceling flights too, and it's just a matter of time before they're in the same boat.

JTwift

I don't mind people calling me whatever they want....I was just throwing out some thoughts.

I jumpseated the other day and the captain (major carrier for over 20 years) was saying the same thing as me. The pay scale should be the same for all FOs and again the same for all CAs....in other words, why does an Airbus FO make more than a CRJ FO? After watching what they're doing, the CRJ FO works way harder. Why does a 777 FO make more than an A320 FO? We all have to deal with LGA, we're in the same airspace.

In what other business can someone work a fraction of what they did when they started and make so much more money that it's a joke of a comparison? They'd be fired/let go for being a burden on the company.

Sorry for derailing the main topic. And, no, I'm not a socialist.

Chakerik

Understand your point, however the guy flying the crj makes less than the 320 guy because he works for a different company. That's the key. You work for someone else, you know that the day you get hired.

The rule not only increases the experience required, but acts as a barrier to entry. What's happened in the last few years? You go from making $20k at a regional first year to 70k. Regionals are having trouble filling classes. Regionals are being replaced by mainline. Everything you want to have happen is happening. Which is why it blows my mind that pilots want this to go away. It's only been beneficial to the profession. People are short sighted and see that it will take an extra year to get hired at a regional, then fail to see their compensation over a longer term is greatly increased.

Correlation does not equal causation, but as of late regionals have been pretty safe too since this rule.

Most states you need to be 16 to get your driver's license. Most states make you get a permit first at either 14/15. Hone your experience before being unleashed on the public. Are there some kids out there that could start driving at 16 alone and be just fine? Absolutely. Will some not improve at all after a year of driving with their parents? Absolutely. But for most, I'd venture to say that the more they drive, the more they get experience, the safer they will be when they are out driving alone. Obviously the kid in California is going to have a different experience then the kid driving in nowhere Nebraska. Quality of experience matters like many state. But when has more time to practice a skill before being unleashed upon the public hurt anyone?

It's s pretty simple concept.

hindsight2020

All great, but we're conflating topics. You can keep the barriers to entry as they exist, it still doesn't account for the land grab FFD departures attained in the industry. The 1500 hours rule didn't create a shortage. The opportunity cost of being stuck making regional money for life in a career where 45% of domestic lift is paid under said de facto C-scale IS what did it. People are gonna look at that and run the numbers and say: "meh, too protracted of a compensation scale with too little assurance I'll make it to the A-scale for the same job performed (especially after 5 years) to make it worth my while". And then add to that no lateral income portability like what 99% of pedestrians in the work force do enjoy? And y'all are surprised? Jesus....

That's what's happening. I know it's the hobby du jour to cartoon millennials as want-it-now myopics, but this goes beyond the "pay your dues" fallacy. This is a monster of a gamble for someone who doesn't believe in principle that a poorly paid apprenticeship should last 10 years. Let's bark at the right tree here. Don't shoot the messenger either, the FFD hiring numbers speak for themselves.

I also don't agree with you that present circumstances (increase of regional pay via bonus, classes short of pilots) will create an environment where you will see a reversal of the domestic lift % flown by mainline to CY 2000 levels, let alone 1978 levels. I'd love for you to be correct on that account, I just don't see that out there. Which is to say, the optics will remain the same at the level where the "pilot shortage" canard is being exploited at its loudest.

The prior poster merely scratched at the topic and some mainline folks immediately blew their tops off. Think about that for a second. Unity is a party punchline during section 6 negotiations in the airline pilot demographic, nothing more. They know damn well what would happen if the industry returned to the days of 85%+ domestic lift being flown under mainline level contract, and they want no part of that. F to the U to the I got mine.

As a mil guy I have no dog in the fight. But when I was a civilian I did have one, and I chose to bypass the profession for exactly the points I've illustrated. I believe the calculus is similar to other bright folks with multiple career options, who could thrive as airline pilots if the incentives were there. Never mind the monster shadow inventory of ATPs who won't come out the shadows to fly FFDs at current market price. I digress. To each their own.