Search
Notices
Major Legacy, National, and LCC

Age 67 bill

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 01-05-2023, 09:26 AM
  #81  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,788
Default

Originally Posted by Boeingdude View Post
There's another reason to keep 2 of us up there and no one is addressing the Elephant in the room, and it's not because of age 67 etc.
That is why most believe if/when it ever goes to one pilot it will take an emergency with a release from ground control for any person in the cockpit to exercise control airborne.
nene is offline  
Old 01-05-2023, 10:27 AM
  #82  
Prime Minister/Moderator
 
rickair7777's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,430
Default

Originally Posted by nene View Post
That is why most believe if/when it ever goes to one pilot it will take an emergency with a release from ground control for any person in the cockpit to exercise control airborne.
That only works if you design the cockpit so that the lone pilot cannot simply create a convenient emergency to facilitate his own release... that's quite a rabbit hole, go down very far and it starts to look cheap and easy just to keep the FO
rickair7777 is offline  
Old 01-05-2023, 10:57 AM
  #83  
On Reserve
 
Joined APC: Mar 2022
Posts: 22
Default

Originally Posted by nene View Post
That is why most believe if/when it ever goes to one pilot it will take an emergency with a release from ground control for any person in the cockpit to exercise control airborne.
The Elephant in the room is about a possible future health issue that could occur since there wasn't any testing on pilots and the affects on flight physiology, so yes there should be 2 pilots. This thread is about age 67 and if that occurs, there should be other limitations in place for safety.
Boeingdude is offline  
Old 01-05-2023, 11:20 AM
  #84  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Sep 2019
Posts: 1,538
Default

Originally Posted by rickair7777 View Post
Sure. But our profession is more complicated than medicine, lots of unpredictability and uncertainty... if you go down the medical road, you're going to end up in a good place one way or another. But if a young person (or potential career changer) talks to career airline pilots, they'll get mixed reviews at best, largely due to past instability.

Law is more like airlines, lower barriers to entry but also hard to make it to the top tier. For every major firm partner, there are 1000 junior associates putting in 80 hour weeks, and public defenders and strip mall ambulance chasers who qualify for food stamps.

When I was mentioning ab initio as a solution, I was speaking from the POV of the people who have the problem: airlines.

I'm not advocating that pilot groups/unions should be facilitating or encouraging paid training pipelines (it's out of our hands regardless, since union jurisdiction only extends back to day one of indoc). Although at some point if growth (or negative growth) gets bad enough due to pilot shortage, we might actually have an incentive to help generate new pilots.
The free market handles these things pretty well. Pay will increase until there is enough incentive to meet the demand, or demand will fall to meet the current supply. Alot of that is dependant on the health of the economy.
Seneca Pilot is offline  
Old 01-05-2023, 12:40 PM
  #85  
Prime Minister/Moderator
 
rickair7777's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,430
Default

Originally Posted by Seneca Pilot View Post
The free market handles these things pretty well. Pay will increase until there is enough incentive to meet the demand, or demand will fall to meet the current supply. Alot of that is dependent on the health of the economy.
The problem is the lead time. If majors want civilian pilots with TPIC in FAA category large aircraft (ie RJ), then it takes seven-ish years from PPL start to major class date.

If they're good with TSIC, then it's five-ish years.


Not comparable to law, medicine, accounting, etc since the demand for those remains fairly steady-state, without severe industry swings which tend to force hiring waves and subsequent boom / bust cycles.
rickair7777 is offline  
Old 01-05-2023, 08:06 PM
  #86  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Swakid8's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2015
Posts: 2,447
Default

Originally Posted by CBreezy View Post
Then GI bill is backwards with this. You only get $15k per year in benefits for vocational flight training. It should take a veteran 6 years to use the GI Bill to complete flight training
Yet, if a Vet wanted to use his benefits to the fullest extent. You enroll into a Part 141 University where it covers 100 percent tuition and fees and get paid E5 BAH and knock flight training out in 2 to 3 years…..
Swakid8 is offline  
Old 01-05-2023, 08:57 PM
  #87  
Prime Minister/Moderator
 
rickair7777's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,430
Default

Originally Posted by Swakid8 View Post
Yet, if a Vet wanted to use his benefits to the fullest extent. You enroll into a Part 141 University where it covers 100 percent tuition and fees and get paid E5 BAH and knock flight training out in 2 to 3 years…..
As I said, .gov is spring-loaded to support higher education, not so much votech.
rickair7777 is offline  
Old 01-05-2023, 09:36 PM
  #88  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jul 2013
Posts: 10,184
Default

Originally Posted by Swakid8 View Post
Yet, if a Vet wanted to use his benefits to the fullest extent. You enroll into a Part 141 University where it covers 100 percent tuition and fees and get paid E5 BAH and knock flight training out in 2 to 3 years…..
Assuming you need a degree. And flight training only takes 6 months to a year max. Your quoted university program takes 100-200% longer
CBreezy is offline  
Old 01-06-2023, 04:10 AM
  #89  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Aug 2010
Position: N/A
Posts: 582
Default

Originally Posted by CBreezy View Post
Assuming you need a degree. And flight training only takes 6 months to a year max. Your quoted university program takes 100-200% longer
As someone who earned a degree in aeronautical science and owned a flight school for over 6 years, the two don’t compare. I learned so much more about flying over those four years than I could have ever taught my students at my flight school. For instance, we had an entire semester course on turbine engines. My other instructors and I barely mentioned turbines to our students at my school. I had a full semester on global navigation, again barely covered at my school other than some GPS basics. Two semesters of aerodynamics including frequent uses of wind tunnels, versus a chapter or two in a book at my flight school.

Basically, we covered the FAA required stuff and a little bit extra at my school, versus tons of extra stuff at the university.
Duckdude is offline  
Old 01-06-2023, 05:17 AM
  #90  
All is fine at .79
 
TiredSoul's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2016
Position: Paahlot
Posts: 4,135
Default

So let’s pretend I’m an airline CEO/CFO or even just a bean counter.
65-67 for the majority will be the most senior crew members with the highest pay and the most vacation days that cherry pick the lines with the lowest block aka the most expensive.
Why would I agree to this again?
TiredSoul is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
bla bla bla
Regional
49
09-30-2007 07:56 AM
Airsupport
Regional
105
09-27-2007 05:04 AM
fireman0174
Major
79
01-07-2007 08:46 AM
fireman0174
Major
46
11-19-2006 05:49 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices