|
There are much less people considering going into flight school now than 5 or 10 years ago. I would speculate that money vs reward is an issue. Flight training cost are going up while it is a known fact that airline pilot pay and compensation is going down. I could have put a similar effort, money and personal sacrifice into medicine and had my future a lot more ensured.
This then begs the question about how airlines are going to supply there businesses with pilots. Will they except less qualified pilots? Probably. What happens if the cost of flight training becomes overwhelmingly prohibitive? I happen to think its is pretty close to that now. The answer is the MPL. I was wondering how they were going to do it. This just makes sense (not good sense, but business sense). I do not advocate it. I do not support it. But it looks like it might be coming. |
Originally Posted by TheSultanofScud
(Post 557994)
Wow. Wow.
"The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows: (1) the pilots’ unprofessional behavior, deviation from standard operating procedures, and poor airmanship, which resulted in an in-flight emergency from which they were unable to recover, in part because of the pilots’ inadequate training..." Despite how bad that entire accident report reads, I suppose it highlights the dangers of the unexpected when one takes the opportunity to fly outside of the typical profile. This is EXACTLY why I think the military training program produces better, more experienced aviators. The military ROUTINELY flies "outside of the typical profile." What is an emergency? I definitely believe it falls outside the typical profile. The day to day point A to B flying that we routinely do is very uneventful. The experience is truly required when the ******* hits the fan, so to speak. I would much rather be flying with someone who has flown an entire career on the edge, making split second decisions, in this case, than someone who went to the airlines with 200 hours doing nothing but flying point A to B. This is not MIL v CIV debate. It's an experience debate. You can make the same argument for the guy who flew the checks at night in crappy IFR, towed banners during the day, flight instructed for hundreds of hours, went on to flying multiple different aircraft in the corporate world, flew for a regional, and then came to the majors. Ab-initio/MPL programs will never produce a truly experienced pilot. |
The worst accidents were the result of complacency, not because soomeone was flying or had to fly outside the typical profile. How about crossing a runway? Ignoring a faulty glide slope when the ATIS says the glide slope is OTS? Punching in a fix on the FMS that guides you into a mountain?
These are the things produce the real tragedies. |
Originally Posted by SebastianDesoto
(Post 558555)
The worst accidents were the result of complacency, not because soomeone was flying or had to fly outside the typical profile. How about crossing a runway? Ignoring a faulty glide slope when the ATIS says the glide slope is OTS? Punching in a fix on the FMS that guides you into a mountain?
These are the things produce the real tragedies. Beyond that, I'd say the bulk of this was a series of serious lapses in judgment and active failures. If the NTSB findings were correct, complacency may have been a link in the chain, but it sure wasn't the nail in the coffin. These two guys overdrafted their accounts big time, and they did it with conscious mistakes. |
Pilot Shortage
For a long time now I have thought that the MPL would be the next likely step in the downfall of our profession.
The regionals proved over the last few years that when times get tuff in the pilot market rather than increase wages and relax working conditions in order to attract more experienced pilots the airlines will choose to lower minimums instead. In the past pilots needed to rely on skill, knowledge and experience. In the modern flightdeck automation, moving map glass instrumentation and the finest in computer navigation have made it so that experience and ability is not all that necessary. Why put someone through most of what is required to get a traditional commercial license when all they intend to do is to fly for a regional? Airlines can skip 90% of what is currently trained in primary flight training and solely focus on transport category part 121 airline operations and produce a line ready first officer in just a few hundred hours. There will never be a pilot shortage because today a new commercial pilot can start filling out applications in just a few months after their first flight lesson. The world is changing. You had better change with it or get left behind. Skyhigh |
Ab Initio programs suck because they'll let anyone with enough money go through them. The hurdle to jump in order to get your ratings is how much money do you have, and how much time do you have.
The military produces experienced pilots in a short amount of time because these individuals have been screened on multiple levels before they even get an opportunity to strap on a jet. The one's that aren't up to the high standards of military flying, get washed out. It's as simple as that. In ab initio or most other civilian flight training, those that aren't up to the standard....try and try again, throw more money at it and most will eventually get the rating. In the military, if you don't cut it, if you aren't good enough, you're done. |
The right stuff
"this pilot hopes his moment in the spotlight will remind the airlines - and those who fly - that attracting those with the right stuff may make all the difference." Sullenburger
A nice quote however to management "attracting those who can make it through IOE and will work for nothing" is what makes the difference between having a profitable airline and going out of business. If you can't stay afloat under the crush of paying real wages and benefits then all the skill in the world will mean nothing. Skyhigh |
Bottom line, someday the public is going to get what they're paying for.
|
Wash out
Originally Posted by Tdub
(Post 558592)
Ab Initio programs suck because they'll let anyone with enough money go through them. The hurdle to jump in order to get your ratings is how much money do you have, and how much time do you have.
The military produces experienced pilots in a short amount of time because these individuals have been screened on multiple levels before they even get an opportunity to strap on a jet. The one's that aren't up to the high standards of military flying, get washed out. It's as simple as that. In ab initio or most other civilian flight training, those that aren't up to the standard....try and try again, throw more money at it and most will eventually get the rating. In the military, if you don't cut it, if you aren't good enough, you're done. Aviation in general use to cut people for being too short, too fat, to female, to old, needing glasses, not from the right family, being married...ect... Today the general thinking is to let everyone in. Why even people who are handicapped have a shot at being a 121 pilot. Being stupid or inept are just other forms of disabilities to be overcome. Often it takes a large amount of cash and extra training to get through, but if they got the dough then why stop them? Cash is the great equalizer in aviation. Its all good. Skyhigh |
Paying for?
Originally Posted by TheSultanofScud
(Post 558623)
Bottom line, someday the public is going to get what they're paying for.
The public is paying for the cheapest possible ticket. Pilots are the ones who are willing to show up for the wages that are being offered. Skyhigh |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:59 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands