Does anyone know whats going on with this in the Senate?

I hope you are correct, but it all depends on the details. For example, how many hours do graduates of approved flight schools need? I have read they have a waiver on the 1500, but have not seen any details on this. :confused:

These pilot factories can certainly crank out a fair number of pilots so the barriers may not be high enough.

Scoop

Well from what I read they have to be accredited universities so most of the "classic" pilot mills will not be included. Remember, even though B.S. in Aeronautical Science isn't quite a PhD in Theoretical Physics it's still at least a 4 year process. Also these schools do teach a lot about the aviation industry that plain flight training won't do. But the most important thing is that you have to get a degree to get the flying time reduced.

That should prevent the types who just want to fly fly fly and don't care of the consequences of the low pay from running to the airlines. Plus coming up with the close to $200k in student loans isn't quite as easy as it used to plus the cat is out of the bag on the low pay.

And don't forget, we have no idea just how much university training will reduce the 1500 by, could be 100 or 1,000. Just have to see what the FAA comes out with. However, I doubt it will be too generous considering the pressure they're under by the public about experienced pilots. All in all I wouldn't expect too much trouble out of this loophole.

I certainly hope it is not reduced by more than a few hundred hours. 500 hours of experience is 500 hours of experience whether it came from Gulfstream academy or UND. Id say the only difference would be the mindset and maturity of the student.

Progress: S. 1744: Enhancing Flight Crewmembers' Training

Text: S. 1744: Enhancing Flight Crewmembers' Training

Why should it be reduced at all? I thought the whole point was to ensure that we have experienced pilots up front? Sure, the Aviation Science guys know a lot of the theory, but who'd you rather send your family with, a pilot who can say "been there, done that" or "read the book, passed the class"?

I think that you should be required to have your ATP and 1500hrs across the board. Is there any way ALPA can fight this proposed exception? If we're going to raise the standards, we should do it properly.

The bill H.R. 3371 was read in the Senate twice on October 15, 2009 and was referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.

There are a few schools of thought on where it will go from here:

1) The Senate has held hearings in parallel to the hearings in the house and has been creating a parallel bill (one that has not been voted on in the committee). The thought here is that the committee will take the House bill and incorporate it into its version. They will then have a vote in committee before a vote can be held in the Senate and signature by the President.

2) The Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation has been working on H.R. 915 which is the FAA Reauthorization Act. This bill has been passed by the House and could be voted in committee before the winter recess. The thought here is that the bill H.R. 3371 could be incorporated with the vote on H.R. 915 (this is not an uncommon practice in the Senate as it allows a single vote for multiple bills) allowing for a quick vote in the Senate followed by a signature by the President.

3) The House, the families of Colgan Flight 3407, the FAA, and all of you and I may have enough of a voice to get a bill out of the committee before the winter recess allowing for a vote in the senate and subsequently a signature by the president (that is if it passes the vote in the senate).

4) The bill sits in committee until after the winter recess.

5) The "who knows"...Need a crystal ball for this one! HAHA

Unfortunately, at this point it is a toss up as to where the bill is going. The Senate is very focused on Health Care Reform and all other issues are taking a back row seat at this time.

What I would suggest, however, is that everyone call, fax, e-mail, or make an appointment for an office visit with your State Senators. You can use this link to find out the contact information for your Senators U.S. Senate: Senators Home.

I also suggest that you contact the following Senators to express your sentiment of this legislation as they have a large part in getting the bill out of committee:

Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation

The Chairman: Senator Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia
The Ranking Member: Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas

Subcommittee of Aviation Operations, Safety, and Security

Democrats

Byron L. Dorgan
(Chairman)
Daniel K. Inouye
John F. Kerry
Barbara Boxer
Bill Nelson
Maria Cantwell
Frank R. Lautenberg
Mark Pryor
Claire McCaskill
Amy Klobuchar
Mark Warner
Mark Begich

Republicans

Jim DeMint
(Ranking Member)
Olympia J. Snowe
John Ensign
John Thune
Roger Wicker
George S. LeMieux
Johnny Isakson
David Vitter
Sam Brownback
Mike Johanns

I have been following this daily and trying to keep my staff updated as much as I can. I regularly check this site to see if anyone has posted any new information that has come out and if no one has I surely will.

Here's hoping for a quick bout through the Senate!

HA!

Now you're really showing your age there oldtimer;). Trunk carriers and commuters are a think of the past. Now its all a big blurr of dying legacies with regional vultures swarming over their decaying bodies.

I think you are confusing Universities with Puppy mills/Pilot factories. Mega FBO's, ATP, JETU and the like are the factories. ERAU/PERDUE cannot crank them out in less than 3 years.

They can not crank them out in less than 3 years but regardless they are still "cranked" out with less than 500 hours in most cases, 500 hours is being generous.

Just because it takes a pilot 2 more years to get to 500 hours does not make them more experienced or qualified to fill a required position in a 121 operation.

I wish the bill did not have any reduction in hours.