My point is that some routes could stand a reduction in frequency while maintaining capacity with larger aircraft. This just might help congestion at some of the busier airports as well.

Unfortunately this may result in fewer jobs at the regional level but more careers at the majors.

And why should a PFE/A&P have to have an ATP? Yeah, there are still some of those working in 121 cargo operations.

My apologies in overlooking those that are operating as a PFE. My point is that for those manipulating the flight controls in a 121 operation be qualified as ATP's. If the aircraft still requires an FE for operation you hold a FE certificate for that. On a tangent if a commercial pilot can't operate as an FE which is an additional rating, then why should they be allowed to be a copilot in an operation where they may have to assume command of an operation that does require an ATP?

My 2 cents.....if you are in the cockpit of a 121 operation, you should have an ATP. Is an arbitrary hour requirement, yes. However you are one pilot away from flying solo.

An ATP holder has at least demonstrated the ability to perform at that level once. MPL is the most ludicrous concept ever. Then again, a 250 hour Comm pilot is almost the same thing with regards to sitting in a 121 cockpit IMO.

Lee

PFEs don't have to hold an ATP, only the pilots.
I work for one of those operations.

I do too and that was a concern when the highlights of the law were made public. My comment was more for Dosbo and others who may have forgotten there still are some folks sitting sidesaddle.