Mason32

They already do. It's 500 TT for part 135. The 1200 TT is for IFR part 135. Part 91K offers a whole new venue for people to buidl time as well as earn a paycheck with considerably less hours than 135 minimums. What I do not understand is how flying the mail to an offshore island in a C172 requires 500 TT to do it VFR and 1200TT to be able to do it IFR... but you can come work part 121 with an ink wet commercial ticket....

Quote:

Originally Posted by forgot to bid

I’m going to stick to my opinion, the problem is not a plethora of pilots, the problem is a plethora of jobs thanks to scope relaxation at the expense of both mainline and regional pilots.

True, but only to a certain extent. That is not the single reason. It certainly contributed, but the reason for it are numerous and collectively have ruined the profession.

Quote:

Originally Posted by forgot to bid

So now that major airlines aren’t hiring because their replacing their flying with CRJ900s and E-Jets the “pay your dues” wages of the regional industry have gone from temporary to long term. That sucks.

Now that is true, they are replacing mainline flying with larger E170-190 jets flown at regional operators. It wasn't always the case though, regionals operating smaller jets and turboprop equipment just meant the mainlines were able to accept more, or additional, feed from numerous smaller airports that would otherwise not have been served to begin with.

Then they started getting larger "small" jets like the 70+ seaters and started using them on routes that no normal, sane, person would ever call a "regional flight." The scope guidlines should have not focused so tightly on plane size only.... They should also have declared what leg length is "regional." Going from Chicago to Nassau is not a Regional flight.

The original arguement for these smaller jets was that the public prefered to fly on a jet than on a turbprop. They said they needed to have the small jets to compete with the companies that had, or were getting them... otherwise the pax would go fly the jet, instead of the prop.

So, they got jets. Then they realized they could go further leg lengths.... and they started using them on low volume runs to feed from remote airports to or from the mainline flights at larger hubs.

Then they realized they could get slightly larger jets and slip some flying away from mainline and replace it with regional.... charging the same fee's, but running the operation at regional costs instead. Then some brain surgeon at Midwest decided they could just outsource just about ALL of their flying to a regional operator using a baby 737 style E-jet.

Now, there are NO good mainline jobs to go to, the folks working at the regionals who supported all this are now stuck there forever in most cases, and things are not likely to improve much at the regionals, while things are very likely to get much worse at mainlines.

This is why you give management NOTHING.

Rebuilt

I had 6000 hours before hired by a major airline. Add 3000 hours on the panel before occupying the right seat. Another 8 years of flying before the first bid opportunity to upgrade to the left seat as the most junior captain.

Before the major airline position, my earlier years in the left seat were in aircraft that were humble and forgiving of mistakes. It was there that I learned about thunderstorms, icing, turbulence, crosswinds, and crew coordination.

Most important of all, I am still learning the skills and judgement of my profession and expect to do so until my last flight.

I am concerned about the rush today of a pilot new to the trade, yet placed in a sophisticated aircraft, with trusting passengers, in a complex environment, and in challenging weather conditions.

Yes, each day numerous flights are successfully conducted with these pilots. But will the odds one day overtake us resulting in tragedy?

loubetti

Now, and even though this was a while back, how do we describe this pilot?



Do I even need to tell you what this iconic photo is about, and the multi thousand hour ATP and chief training captain who caused it while killing 583 people?

I am not saying that the Colgan crash was not due to inexperience, but I think it was mostly caused by inattentiveness and some complacency, with perhaps some fatigue thrown into the equation. That's not always something that thousands of hours in the left seat will prevent. I know it was not due to low pay, disagree as you may.

We're still human, we're not always perfect, and aviation is usually not very forgiving of such.

These days we're not used to crashes, and that's why when they occur the reasons behind them are often somewhat unfathomable, as to not paying attention to airspeed or taking off without clearance. Simple things that even a student pilot should know about.

Oops... that last one wasn't very recent, but sometimes we have to look back in history and note that the worst of the crashes (when caused by pilot error) were caused by some very senior captains.

Tons of hours and good pay did not prevent crashes then, and will not prevent them now.

Granted, advanced technology, CRM, and perhaps better training will, and has, but it will never make aviation 100% safe.

We still have humans in the cockpit, and I do not see that changing anytime soon, and neither would I want it to!

Just my opinion- not looking for anyone to agree with me either.

Spanky189

I kind of see where you are going but the Tenerife disaster was directly caused by the Dutch Captains arrogance and ego. No amount of money or training can eliminate that.

You cannot, honestly, say that 'tons of hours' did not prevent crashes. You could say that it didn't prevent ALL crashes. 'Tons of hours' may have prevented thousands of crashes (it can't be proven) but I think that is the safer view.

Technology is great but cannot always replace hand and stick flying skills or human shortcomings.

Fly safe!

gatorbird

Sounds like you may still need some experience. Flying through thunderstorms isn't habit-forming.

TXTECHKA

It sure didn't seem too difficult for the FAA to change the age 65 rule, why would it be so hard for them to require all 121 operators to require an ATP in both seats? I'm 150% for it.