New FAA Admin supports 1,500 HR rule
 

https://archive.org/details/CSPAN3_2.../5160/end/5220

I think it is safe to say the rule is not going anywhere...

Good.:D......

I was against that rule to begin with.
A useless knee jerk incorrect response to a different problem.
Provided the training is up to par I see no issue with returning to the “old” system.
They do it every day in Europe, 250 hrs and FO or SO with an equivalent level of safety.

If they pick who went to school and weed them out prior to even starting then sure. In America we don’t.

Yeah, lets flood the market with 250 hour wonders. That will do a ton to help wages. :rolleyes:

Let me guess, we should pay for our type ratings too? After all, they do it Europe!

Dear God, please tell me you’re just trolling.

I think the operative phrase was "...to begin with."

I second that. Flew since 95 in Europe and most of the 200 hour guys do a very good job if they receive the right training. So I don’t see any issues why it wouldn’t work in the US as well.

None of the EU legacy carriers are p2f. Even Ryan doesn't charge the full cost anymore. (and no one in the EU requires a useless 4 year degree.)
Restricting entry to increase the wages? Not very American....( Free market and all)

The only reason we have 1500 hours is because a 5000hr pilot crashed a plane. He failed every possible check ride multiple times. Better training and checking improves safety much more than an hour requirement, but yes, if you are only interested in keeping your pay, by all means, support 1500hr.

You left out the part about working for a 3rd rate employment 'agency' as a contractor. Even the vaunted British Airways does that. Lufthansa has a regional airline flying A340's. Should we do that too?

The police in Germany love kicking in pilot's doors over their contractor status..

European pilots also don't get paid as much, have as much career stability, have as much schedule flexibility.

Flying in Europe sucks. Anyone who has done both will tell you so. The last thing on earth we want in the US is some schizophrenic euro pilot market.

No one in the United States REQUIRES a 4 year degree but certainly you need one to be competitive. That's life. US companies find value in their pilots having a college education, much to your chagrin.

And while a pilot had 5000 hours, he lacked basic airmanship skills that he would have learned if he hadn't stepped into the right seat of a passenger operation with a wet commercial. While an hour requirement is a broad net, even ignoring the wage pressure, it is a good requirement to mandate anyone stepping into the right seat of a transport category jet have a few years of experience as a commercial pilot.

You're not wrong but when you compare US aviation to the EU, the US:

• Is cheaper to learn to fly
• Has a more robust and vibrant GA community
• Overall has higher wages
• Has more job opportunities from the top to the bottom
• Has better job security overall

So we are doing something right, yes?

I've done both, have absolutely no plans to go back to Europe. I still think the 1500 hour does nothing for safety.

The only reason Europe has that '200hr straight to 737' system is they dont have any 91/91k/135 ecosystem.

LH/AF/BA/LX/KLM need a couple hundreds pilot a year each (number doesnt matter here). Sure they can find a couple guys with king air/citation experience but then what ? The class is 80% empty. They're left with the 200hr wonders.

Another big factor is that EU doesnt have thousands of pilots coming out of the military every year. Take the military guys out of the US equation and the hiring landscape would be radically different.

Both DL and FedEx require a 4 year. His training record should have prevented him from getting in the left seat of any commercial operation.

Yes, filler

And the qualification would be dropped the instant the the candidate quality began to suffer.

Still not replying to the important issue.

I've flown in the EU, my company hired a lot of 185tt hour pilots (I wasn't one). It required a while for them to develop the big picture, but none that I flew with had the issues I sometimes saw in the higher time people as far as skills/airmanship. I think it is the same reason the military can put pilots in a fast jet with a 100 hours: they only put the people there that belong there. Screening is important and the school we got them from would do that before the bank would give you money. Just passing an ATP checkride does not qualify.

1500 hours of PIC decision making before flying pax is a good idea.

Even in a 172, go, no go, weather, CRM (CFI) ADM, you name it.

The Euro wonder kids probably do fine slinging gear in brand new airplanes, in benign European weather (basically nothing) while a 20year captain tells them what to do.

Sitting in the left seat of an MD-80 navigating thunderstorms strong enough to rip the wings off like a beer can at night on min fuel isn't in their league.

Look above to my edit.
I flew as a 2000hr captain, non GPS/FMS turboprop in the north of Spain, non-radar ATC, so full procedure, and if you think there's no weather there.....

Until they crash 2 737s because they can't recognize or fix runaway trim and leave the power up at takeoff thrust while not flying the airplane. Then it's not equivalent.

No, I like the 1500 hrs requirement. I don't like inexperienced pilots crashing flyable planes.

False dichotomy.

Lowering the 1500 hour rule will not necessarily lower wages.

Correlation does not equal causation.

Put another way, quantity of hours does not equate to quality of hours.

If the guy flew a 172 in circles for 1500 hours would that have given him better skills? No, of course not.

Except the 1500 hour rule came about because an experienced pilot crashed a flyable plane. :rolleyes:

Disagree. Having a smaller supply of certified pilots increases the price of their labor.

Anyone who thinks “it works in Europe we should have it too!” is welcome to go start their own airline and training academy. It’s not coming to the US otherwise, cry all you want about it but it’s not happening here

1500hr rule is total political BS. Sure I like it because it drives pilot wages up and limits the supply of pilots. But it's not science based whatsoever.

US Regionals were hiring 250hr pilots who did just fine up until the rule came into place (because two pilots with more than 1500hrs crashed an airplane).

Yes, experience counts and is great to have, but as far as entry level airline jobs go, I'd rather have a well trained FO with a high aptitude for flying than some guy with 5000hrs, a bad training record, and low aptitude.

AF 447

We’re both pulling back on the stick, why aren’t we climbing?

If folks are trying to point a finger for the 1500 hr rule, I haven’t read anybody singling-out the dysfunctional FAA, yet.

That institution has to change, and it sounds like the process has begun with the reorganization of the FSDOs, but there’s a long way to go. A failure of FAA oversight by the Colgan CMO is a root cause of that accident. The FAA treats the airlines as the customers, not the flying public. Also, what’s the likelihood that anybody in the CMO had Q400 experience? We are seeing the same issue today with Boeing’s self-certification of the Max. The FAA does not have the expertise necessary to be able to regulate/correct that for which it is responsible. Now, on the ops side, the FAA is getting away from (or trying to) inspectors who fly. The hq wants to delegate that authority (and hopefully responsibility?) to others.

If the FAA had been doing it’s job, Chuck S. wouldn’t have gone all crazy with the window-dressing legislation. I can get into the weeds about how this has done a lot of damage to 135 ops, too, and that pipeline for airline pilots, but that’s a rant for another thread. :D

No 4 year degree I guess for you and can’t get on with a major
Got it

News flash for ya buddy, you already do.
Compare first year pay to second and third.
That’s you paying for your training right there.
Left or right pocket.
:cool:

The 1500 hour rule reminds me of the bar exam for attorneys. It’s an artificial barrier to entry that sucks to be on the outside looking in on but nice once you’re “in the club.”

Yes a 1500 TT pilot won’t make a bundle in his first few years but neither do new attorneys. Time + experience = an increase of pay. How much of an increase depends on the pilot and attorney’s choices career choices and options available.

Taking the 1,500 hour rule back down to where it was is akin to removing the bar exam in a given state. It’ll flood the market overnight with job applicants, giving employers a ton of leverage over prospective employees.

A similar thing happened here in NV years ago with dentists. The entrance exam to practice dentistry in NV was waived if you wereaready licensed to practice in another state and a ton of dentists flooded the Vegas market, hurting business for all fast. It also drove down the quality of work performed. The waiver was rescinded a few years later because of the problems it caused (source: my father-in-law who is a Vegas dentist).

Although I’m not at 1500 TT yet I hope it doesn’t drop to 250 again.

Username checks out. Sit in the bushes and take potshots at people.
I fly for a major. That does not really matter. My two decades of experience on both sides of the atlantic qualify me to have an opinion.

Yes, there are people in Europe too that should not be pilots, and the pressure to use the AP in the EU is very wrong, but that doesn’t change my opinion on the 1500hrs.

Negative.. FR requires a 5,000 Euro down payment with a 5 year pro-rate bond. Other Euro Lo-cost may provide similar. Housing an food are at the expense of the candidate.

Line Training in other lands
 

Line training is based on minimum number of sectors flown versus the traditional 25 hours in the U.S.

That said with a minimum of 80 sectors of line training can yield upwards of 200 to 250 hours of line training.

I enjoyed being a line training captain in Europe and Asia. Enthusiastic gals and guys. Steep learning curves on the majority of the new pilots. The majority of pilots from Euroland as well as other countries train in the US, Canada, NZ or Philippines due to the high cost in their home lands. The training/learning process is taken very seriously.

Most are well prepared for their assessments with their airlines’ of choice and onwards towards training. Prior to Sim training is Multi Crew Training. Sim training, conducted by a recognized ATO, is airline specific and comprehensive.

LSTs, generally, are conducted by airline specific TREs.

Then off to base training followed by numerous observation flights, prior to line training.

Thanks, captjns for the post. The training system outside the US is much different than here. Their 250-hour pilots are far better trained than a 250-hour FAA commercial pilot.

GF

I don't think civilians want to go through a military-style pilot training in order to start flying at 250 hours. You don't know what you're asking.

Sent from my moto x4 using Tapatalk

The first-year pay sucked back when people had to pay for training as well. If you haven't noticed, first-year pay has been increasing since the 1500-hour rule was implemented.

Sent from my moto x4 using Tapatalk

What you arent seeing in that military low time pilot product is the attrition process that distills the end result.