JiffyLube

Then end of the news story blames Mainline Pay cuts.

http://kstp.com/article/stories/S331920.shtml?cat=1&v=1

I like the defense about the younger pilots ability to adapt to "computers" easier, because computers emlinate the need to have experience when landing in a snow storm, on a icy runway with 1800 RVR, and computers eliminate the need to know how to land a swept wing turbine aircraft in a strong x-wind.

I know we were all there at one point, but at least when I was new I had min of 15-23 YEARS of experience sitting next to me in the left seat. NOT 1500 HOURS and 23 YEARS OLD sitting in the left seat like today.

This one is good too...
http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=4232596

texaspilot76

Typical media garbage.

Experience had nothing to do with the decisions that the Pinnacle morons made that caused that crash. Even most inexperienced pilots would have more common sense than those guys did.

I read the NTSB accident reports on the other mentioned accidents, and no pilot had less than 4000 hours.

Like I said, typical media garbage. Selective reporting and twisting facts to suit their message.

JiffyLube

I think the 1st story on KSTP was pretty good. The ABC story was not as good.

Bottom line is...I am not saying regional airline pilots are bad pilots, I am saying that there is a defiant lack of experience in alot, (but not all) of the RJ cockpits today. No matter what your opinion is... EXPERENCE DOES COUNT!!!

Spartan07

Well, Inexperience in high altitude aerodynamics and how there aircraft would have handled at that high of an altitude DID play a SMALL part in that accident. I concur however, that even the newest of pilot would display a lot more common sense than those two buffoons.

Oddly enough, and not helping the low-timer's case, the Captain on that flight had been Captain for about three months, the First Officer had only been a first officer for three months, and supposedly they were both graduates of Gulfstream (Can't confirm the source on that one). On top of all that mess, a lawsuit was filed on their behalf against Bombardier and Pinnacle alleging that it was the manufacturer's fault for the core-lock (Not the 600 degrees of overtemp I guess), and Pinnacle's fault for poor training. I don't know how the lawsuit turned out but it is probably still pending.

de727ups

"and supposedly they were both graduates of Gulfstream"

The Capt was a street Capt at Gulfstream.

texaspilot76

I will not disagree with you that experience makes a difference. The point I was trying to make was that the reporter was trying to blame those accidents on inexperience, when in reality, two of those accidents involved experienced pilots. They were using those accidents as fodder for their story.

viking767

The other had been fired from another regional carrier for violating company policies.


Who was fired for what?

texaspilot76

I think you will see this change soon. Now that age 65 passed, the hiring at the majors will slow over the next 5 years. In return, the regionals will eventually recover from their staffing shortage due to reduced attrition. However, unless we can produce more pilots and instructors over the next 5 years, you will see the same situation then as you do now when all the guys hit 65 and the mass retirements start. I think age 65 came about to address what was soon to be a massive retirement and no time to replace them.

IHateMgmt

...I have heard the FO was from Gulfstream as well.

Both of these news pieces were disappointing. There is certainly a story worth covering here, but both failed to do so. What they did do was rile the public up... as if we needed more of that.

Yes, the experience level has been dropping lately, but the real story is why??

The public is indirectly (and unknowingly) demanding lower experience levels not only in their pilots but most everyone involved with the flights from the flight crew down to the rampies and baggage handlers. A couple old sayings come to mind... you get what you pay for and ignorance is bliss!