Do you honestly believe Congress gives a Rats A** what a bunch of whiny pilots have to say about it. Two words “They Don’t”. Congress sees this as a macro issue not only for staffing/economy sakes but it also keeps big dollars pumping into the Social Security fund and keeps experience in the cockpit. I hate to deflate egos here but recently I’ve heard horror stories about 1500 hr wonder pilots being consistently behind the plane, high anxiety and procedural errors that would make your knees shake. As for the Unions standing on the soapbox preaching NO, I don’t for once think they are in total opposition to this. Where do the highest dues come from….spoiler…. It’s not the plug in the most junior base.

 

It’s over in the house, work on your senators….

 

Then send these 65+ year olds to the RJ's with those 1500 hour wonder pilots to help mentor them.

I have flown with plenty of 60+ year olds who are using procedures 10 revisions ago, are behind the plane themselves, etc.

I often show up wondering, " What procedures am I going to be using today?" because some of these people can't stand change.

 

If it’s in the sim, let them crash and burn. If it happens in the plane, dial 1-800-PRO STANDARDS.

 

Oh please. You must be new to this industry. I got into the 121 world when everyone and their mom was getting hired with wet Commercial tickets and 250 total time. No one crashed a jet.

Stop spreading fear.

 

Anecdotal but I spent almost my entire time at the regionals flying with 2500 hour wonder captains, then training and flying with 1500 hour FO’s. There are some bad ones, they’re usually caught in the sim or don’t make it off of OE. I never had one “scare” me in the airplane. I mentored many on the line, which is part of the FAA mandated duties we have as captains.

On the other hand, the only times I’ve been legitimately worried in an airplane has been flying with “experienced” pilots. Usually a WB bunkie that decided at 60+ it was their time to shine in the left seat.

“Sir you’re not allowed to put in SLOP on an domestic RNAV arrival”
“Sir Airbus doesn’t recommend decrabbing at 400’”.
”if the autopilot is going to drive us into the ground on this visual approach might I suggest hand flying?”

 

Sure.

But it goes both ways. There are horror stories from the new guys and horror stories flying with the experienced pilots.

If you're going to complain about the new guys unable to get procedures, I can throw just as many experienced guys doing the same thing.

Some can't stand it and willfully disobey and that is where pro stands come in. Others just can't get the hang of the new procedures and when I bring it up, they have a good attitude about it at the very least.

I have heard only stories about "the new guys". I have yet to fly with a captain that has actually flown with such a bad new hire. You don't know how many captains attitudes change when they learn my background and just assumed I was a newb with no experience.... As if my current gig was my first 121 job ever..... Heck had one treat me as if I was just off OE and first time operating out of ORD despite already telling him I was here for a year and approaching 550 hours in type and operated out of ORD plenty of times already. Sure a small amount still compared to their 20,000+ hours, but adjust your mentorship approach......

How much are these stories blown out of proportion and made into concern trolling about how the new guys are a safety risk? I don't doubt some are struggling, but how many are there? Are the strugglers being made into a confirmation bias about a persons already preconceived notion of the new guys and generalize the crap out of them?

 

20 plus years in thanks. Not spreading fear at all just exposing the current landscape. So you’ve flown the “Connie”. I heard she was a dream to fly. I stand by my proclamation with the inexperience and distractions of the younger folk coming straight out of a Seminole into a regional for 3 months and then onto the majors. With your 100,000 hours of experience you should know that things happen faster in todays 121 environment not to mention how crowded the skies have become since the 40’s. On the other end of the spectrum with the senior folk and procedural drift, you know what, let’s include the yolk in the middle as well the phrase “There are bold pilots and old pilots but no old bold pilots”. rings true. It comes down to scenarios, situations, past emergencies and other various stress inducing thought processes that instills the calm approach that a seasoned pilot takes to fix a problem. Younger aviators just don’t have that yet and are prone to make more mistakes. Publications change all the time and usually somebody in the schoolhouse gets an award for it only to be taken back out of publications due to negative feedback or substandard outcomes. I still trust the old fart to get me home safe because he/she has never killed anybody while he/she winds their watch.

 

I've mentioned this before... it's up in the air.

Hypothetically if an airline did not like 65+ pilots, they might technically be able to require that all pilots be able to fly to all destinations served by their fleet. And then ensure that all fleets at least fly to Vancouver or Nogales. Most major fleets probably do at least Canada and Mexico anyway. The union would have to fight that though... DFR.

But that's a pretty draconian position. Initially I think airlines would work with pilots who transition to predominantly domestic fleets, to avoid international flights. Or at least allow them to bid avoid, and then drop no-pay any trips they get stuck with.

Mid-term, ICAO would almost certainly quickly drop their age 65 limit, so it would only be a temporary hassle.

 

That might be technically correct... since jets are not turboprops.

But regional jets are the new turboprops (with better training wheels).