Not drinking any sort of Kool Aid. I have an opinion on this issue that is not that of a rumored position of ALPA. I have my own opinion. What I am illustrating with the Emirates issues and the Foreign Military Base issues, Cabatoge, and Foreign Ownership issues, the 1500 v 500 hr rule, and the NPRM is that we as pilots like to isolate each issue and take a stand on each issue. Well the ugly truth is that many other entities combine all of it, and it becomes a game of best option for everyone.

Of course 1500 hrs sound great, it is of course the most conservative answer, but is there an underlying threat that if this goes about entities that control certain legislation or Open Skies Agreements threaten something else. Then the answer becomes less clear.

How about the NPRM issue. Of course we want science, science, science. Well science supports a lot of what is in the rule making and a few things that are not. Those are where ALPA is talking an stand on the issues. It may gain crew room popularity to take a hard line and tell the rest to stuff it, but when a case is to be made for something like this the proof needs to be in science not in emotion. As some others have hinted, maybe CAPA is being excluded because of their unwillingness to have a dialogue. That is what ALPA is doing, talking, discussing, not bending over.

In regard to the 1500 hr rule. There is no science to it that I am aware of, and that is the majority of the problem. Just legislation from long ago. If we could have it backed up by studies and science that proved that this magical number made the pilot different, then there may be a case that the ATA, IATA and others could not make this point. In fact most of it is common knowledge and what will probably be used to back up any assertion is LCA data. I would not be pleased with a 500 hr rule as I see that as an area of time that is still in the range of many to purchase. You go to the 800-1000 hr range and it tied with, strict AQP 300 course work, and min standards on a variety of procedures that airline data shows as lacking in addition to minimum work experience you probably have a better safeguard in place. Add to it, having aviators seeking accredited degrees does a lot more for this profession in the long term.

 

Please provide that any age limit for flying is necessary. Or better yet, why have any flight time limit? Yeah, that should fit your agenda nicely.

 

Because APA didn't come to ALPA. The two organizations got together on their own and agreed to mutually cooperate instead of compete. It's so interesting that the ALPA Kool-Aid is so strong in your blood, that you would draw such a conclusion. But I'm sure there's some APA Kool-Aid drinker somewhere that read the same press release and said: "Ahhh HAAA! ALPA is coming to APA for it's considerable support and services."

Kool-Aid drinkers are funny.

Carl

 

Ya can't interject common sense into that argument. Are you crazy?

 

Right out of the ALPA sycophant talking points. You sure cut and paste good PG.

Carl

 

No he's not. Neither is acl, slowplay, sailingfun, reroute.........

Carl

 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Spot on t. Unfortunate as it is, you're spot on.

Carl

 

For those of you that are willing to log in to the alpa site here are some links to a few things:

http://www.alpa.org/portals/alpa/pre...esolution8.pdf


ALPA In Focus-the Science Behind ALPA's Proposal

ALPA In Focus-CIVICS 101: How Regulations Are Made

ALPA In Focus-A Short History of Flight-Time/Duty-Time Rulemaking

 

Dang Homey;

I dont even know the guy, but look in the mirror.

 

Dude...do you not even remember your own posts! Let's review shall we. Here's what tsquare said:

And here was your response:

So do you understand that when you post this:

It begs the question: Why are you asking for scientific evidence to support a statement that you yourself says nobody is asserting?

Carl