I'm just reading words on a webpage, but it sounds like you are knocking your GA counterparts here -- as if they deserve some lower grade license. There are part 91 outfits that fly 767's (Google), 737's (too many to name) and many other ex-airline jets are finding their way into corporate flying (not that a G550 isn't more sophisticated than most anything you can get your hands on part 121). Many corporate/charter pilots have a background with as much standardization as yours.

Apologies if I read it wrong, but if you are you saying GA crews don't belong in this mystical Multi-Crew world, you're dead wrong.

"Oh, you don't need to know that."
:rolleyes:

I do not like the sound of those last sentences at all!
I like the sound of at least 1500 hours period.

First 10 hour 2 pilot duty days and now this. Who is the FAA working for anyway?

So you get a tragic crash a year ago and now all of the sudden the airlines don't know how to train their pilots??? I took an FO checkride at a 121 carrier in a jet, then a year later I took a type checkride on a different jet with an FAA observing the instructor doing the checkride. I did not think the type checkride was harder.

How about letting airlines train their pilots and keep the public and politics out of it. 1500, an ATP, and a type checkride is gonna make safer pilots?

But thank you FAA, because now the regionals will have a harder time recruiting pilots when a shortage hit . . . and then maybe that will increase their salaries!!! I am all for that!

FtB;
The problem with the MCL is that its genesis is with less training and solo flying, which will result in a restriction of multi-crewed flight decks.

What it sounds like you may be trying to support is something that is an add on to all of the other certificates once you reach 1500 hrs. It would be almost like an airline endorsement. In effect that is what many of the puppy mills do already. It is "Advanced Turbo-jet training."

What I would prefer to see happen is to move more towards the ICAO minimums to hold a ATPL. They have a stronger hours requirement both with ttl time and with PIC time. Back in the day most pilots only qualified for their ICAO reciprocity with the two for one with their PIC time. (Note: regionals started requiring captain/atp candidates to meeting ICAO minimums to fly to Canada as it limits mirror ICAO)

I would prefer some more formal classroom training, ICAO hrs requirements and the like. Trying to put more lipstick on the current ATP pig does very little to the rest of the world's regulatory agencies.

You could have a ATP-SIC license for 1500 hrs which would be the threshold for 121 operations. It will be in effect what the Commercial MEL is now, but with more robust requirements. The PIC ATP would be an ATPL that mirrors ICAO minima.

It is not about the "average" regional. It is about putting limits there that prevent cost cutting to the point of it effecting safety.

And therein lies part of the problem. The airlines have an FAA approved training program, example 5 FTDs and 5 SIMS + 1 SIM CHECK. Then every couple of years the latest focus items come out due to recent accidents. It may be one thing to focus on these items in recurrent, but then add that in for true competency during initial training on an airplane and you get overloaded.

Yes, the instructors are required to train and check more items, but where does the FAA say that the airlines have to keep maintaining the same number of simulator events? The airlines could easily get approval to add more simulator events, but the airlines have their training schedule to keep and don't want to spend one dime extra unless someone else pays for it.

Funny you ask, I originally posted part 121/large part 135 (2 pilot aircraft over x weight) but erased the later when I decided that it should be more concentrated on scheduled airline ops. My thought was more or less about having a certificate, the atp, that contains the name airline but in no way really represents scheduled airline operations. The ATP of today could be renamed and refocused while a part 121 certificate was created. After all you can get a single engine atp but unless I am mistaken single engine part 121 is prohibited.

Anyways and more importantly no insult intended.

But as to google and other private operations flying large aircraft, I thought they were Part 125? And any given part 125 exemptions will lose those soon for security reasons.

Yeah, they probably are... good point.

I hope this happens, unfortunately I think they railroad in single pilot ops or repeal the 1500 hour rule and we'll all be screwed. There is not a chance in hell they'll ever allow pay scales to come up again. That would threaten management's bonuses :mad: