ATP/ age 20 /1000 hrs.... Is this true?

Reply Subscribe

Page 2 of 8

Last »

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

01-18-2008, 05:26 PM

#11

detpilot

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Oct 2005

Position: Trying not to crash

Posts: 1,260

Quote:

I agree 100%...ANY seat in 121 should require an ATP.

Actually, as a young guy, I concur as well. It'll make it a bit harder to get in, but if the job is better then it's worth the extra work.

01-18-2008, 05:48 PM

#12

btwissel

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Sep 2006

Position: Q400 survivor

Posts: 537

Quote:

Originally Posted by satchip

Yes it does require an atp and a type rating for international ops.

Do you mean the SIC type that ICAO requires for intl ops? not worth the paper it's printed on. means you survived the sim, nothing more.

01-18-2008, 05:51 PM

#13

Bri85

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Apr 2007

Posts: 606

Quote:

Originally Posted by reddog25

Is that a problem? Show me someone at age 20 who has 1000 hours and I'll show youa VERY heavy pencil..............

Ive only come across 3 people who had over a 1000 hours at 20. It is very rare. all 3 were cfis, and one of them also had a inside connection flying lears on the weekends and during our school breaks.

01-18-2008, 06:17 PM

#14

CALPilotToo

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Sep 2005

Posts: 463

Quote:

Originally Posted by satchip

Yes it does require an atp and a type rating for international ops.

No it doesn't. The type is only required for FOs who do IRO duties. Flying a B-767 2 man crew on flights domestic or international that do not require an IRO does not, by regulation, require an ATP certificate nor a type rating.

01-18-2008, 07:45 PM

#15

dojetdriver

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Feb 2006

Position: DD->DH->RU/XE soon to be EV

Posts: 3,732

Quote:

Originally Posted by satchip

If we want to raise our value in the marketplace the requirements to be in the right seat of a Part 121 RJ should be an ATP. Why should they not be qualified? If an RJ Captain is incapacitated who is going to land that jet with 50+ souls? The 150 hour dude?

But then you enter the viscous cycle. How can you require more experience and a higher rating if you are not going to pay more than 20K a year?

01-18-2008, 08:09 PM

#16

CALPilotToo

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Sep 2005

Posts: 463

Quote:

Originally Posted by satchip

Since when was the last time you flew on any commercial airplane as a passenger or as a crewmember that the FO was not trained to be able to take over for the PIC if something happened? Apparently you must not be too impressed with your own companies traning of its' FOs. Either that or when you got your ATP someone described it too you in a way that you decided it was the "sky king" rating. I bet you are a real joy to fly with.

Your generalization that RJ, young, low time FOs are not qualified to save your a$$one day is a discredit to your profession and all on this forum.

01-18-2008, 08:48 PM

#17

NightIP

Tuk er jerbs!

Joined APC: Mar 2007

Position: B747 Left

Posts: 1,342

Quote:

Originally Posted by satchip

While I have considerably more than 150 hours, I don't have an ATP, but I safely fly my 50 seat jet just fine with a commercial certificate. If my CA is incapacitated, I'll uhhh, land the plane like I do all the time.

01-18-2008, 08:55 PM

#18

de727ups

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Nov 2005

Position: UPS 757/767 Capt ONT

Posts: 4,357

"Your generalization that....low time FOs are not qualified to save you.....is a discredit to your profession and all on this forum."

Ummm. Not really. Most on this forum would agree with him. I don't know how you want to define low time, but I think the bar has gone far too low with respect to experience levels to be an airline pilot.

I think the profession would be better off with ATP mins to be in the right seat of an airline jet. Heck, they might even have to raise the pay to attract such experience levels.

01-18-2008, 09:00 PM

#19

CALPilotToo

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Sep 2005

Posts: 463

Don't worry about this guy. It was his company that allowed the proliferation of the RJ concept to become common place because Delta pilots could not and would not believe that RJs would make any real impact in numbers and felt all along that RJ pilots were not real jet pilots. Started in 1992 and spread like a virus. All RJ pilots flying for their parent companies should have been immediately placed on the mainline seniority lists and as such we would have been a much stronger profession.

01-18-2008, 09:04 PM

#20

CALPilotToo

Gets Weekends Off

Joined APC: Sep 2005

Posts: 463

Quote:

Originally Posted by de727ups

I disagree. And if you feel that way. Why is IPA willing to put your crew members on RJs every day getiing to and from many of your assignments if it is so unsafe.