Originally Posted by ATCsaidDoWhat

Ladies and Gentlemen:

I have received a very nice private email from Slowplay, offering to continue take the discussion way off topic about me if I don't stop the "anti-ALPA venom."

Originally Posted by alfaromeo

Now, Capt. Sullenburger, and the families of the Colgan flight, and many outside parties have the luxury to act indignant and stand on the outside and throw rocks.

Originally Posted by dumpcheck

I still don't understand why ALPA would support lowering the minimum to 500 hours. How is that more safe? How is that manpower positive? Whom does it benefit other than managements looking to continue the downward spiral?

Originally Posted by acl65pilot

Screaming at the top of your lungs may make you feel good

Originally Posted by Reroute

I think the issue is that ALPA's position is much more comprehensive than an arbitrary number. Saying 1500 hours makes for a good sound bite, but 1500 hours towing a banner may not provide the same equivalent experience as 1000 hours flying a C-130 for example. ALPA, in my opinion, believes that the quality of experience is also important as well as the pilots, training and professional education and that having simply one level of regulation does not equal one level of safety.

ALPA's position is that not only must there be more stringent requirements for hiring, but there has to be more stringent training. No more "warm bodies" in the seat.

We don't need to backwards engineer this. By that I mean pick an arbitrary number and then develop an argument around it. What we need to do is bring to light the short comings as they currently exist and make recommendations. By being a credible voice in the discussion ALPA can bring reasoned, logical arguments that will be heard and will take us to where we need to be.

Here are some of ALPA's recommendations:


1. All airlines’ initial pilot training programs should provide sufficient training in the classroom and simulator to provide pilots with the knowledge and skills necessary to perform proficiently prior to initial operating experience (IOE).

2. Airlines should replace one-size-fits-all training with individualized training that focuses on students’ weaknesses and compensates for their varied backgrounds.

3. Regulators should ensure that airlines are training their pilots to proficiency in the following areas, which have been identified as particularly problematic for low experience pilots:

a. The ability to receive and transmit radio communications with ATC at high traffic-density airports.

b. The ability to maintain situational awareness of aircraft status and position, meteorological conditions, and proximity to other aircraft when accomplishing multiple tasks during high-workload environments and while performing irregular or emergency procedures.

c. The ability to achieve a stabilized approach by maintaining strict airspeed and vertical path limits when ATC gives a clearance to conduct a visual approach.

d. The ability to react and improvise within the limitations of the aircraft in order to accept changes from ATC or as dictated by meteorological conditions.

4. Regulators should implement more rigorous academic requirements, including multiple aeronautical knowledge exams to ensure adequate knowledge in all appropriate facets of aviation (e.g., weather, aerodynamics, weight and balance, etc.) for a pilot to qualify as a first officer under FAR Part 121 or CAR 705.

5. FAA should eliminate the “SIC privileges only” rating.

6. First officers should be trained to the same standards and at the same intervals as captains.

7. Regulators should require airlines to develop and implement thorough screening processes to help ensure that those hired have the aptitude to maintain the highest levels of safety, professionalism, and performance.

8. Airlines should provide aircraft training and practice in both manual mode and in varying levels of automated flight modes. An educational focus on remaining vigilant to monitor, track, and manage automation when it is engaged is required.

9. Airlines should provide specific command training courses for new captains to instill in them the skills to lead on the flight deck. In addition to basic skills such as aeronautical decision making and crew resource management, new captains should receive training to reinforce the skills, aptitudes, judgment, and professionalism necessary to properly lead a crew, exercise command authority, and maintain the highest levels of safety in the face of internal or external pressures.

10. Regulators should require airlines to develop formal programs to mentor and assist in the career development of pilots.

11. More extensive initial airline indoctrination training programs, including additional
IOE and more frequent line observations are needed to mitigate the deficiencies that low-experience pilots exhibit.

12. Airlines should collect and analyze operational safety data specific to pilot experience levels on an ongoing basis to develop and implement appropriate training improvements proactively.

13. Regulators should increase the ground school and testing requirements to qualify to be an airline instructor. Airlines should develop and implement improved instructor screening processes and instructor training to ensure that motivated and highly skilled instructors are provided to train their line pilots.

14. Regulators should require that airlines employ a director of Pilot Training who is specifically responsible for the functions, content, and direct oversight of the pilot training program.

15. Regulators should ensure that there is an adequate surveillance and audit program conducted by mainline carriers when they utilize regional airlines in a code-share agreement. This surveillance and audit system should ensure that pilot training by the regional code-share partner produces proficient, professional pilots.

16. Regulators should require airlines to incorporate Safety Management Systems
(SMS) to help cultivate an appropriate safety culture that encourages quality pilot training.

17. Training providers that offer flight training programs designed for individuals pursuing a career as an airline pilot should incorporate the following into their curriculum:

a. Multi-crew training, including crew resource management, in advanced aircraft with advanced avionics and other aircraft systems (e.g., FMS, turbine systems, aircraft controls, automation, etc.).

b. Sufficient actual aircraft flight time to develop good communication skills with ATC and the ability to demonstrate good aviating skills in the real world.

c. Transition training from piston-aircraft to transport-category turbojet aircraft, as needed.

d. A strong career track for instructors within their organizations resulting in the hiring and retention of skilled instructors.

18. Regulators, airlines, and training providers should, in consultation with official pilot representatives of pilot representative associations, develop training curriculums that focus on proficiency and academics rather than hour-based licensing minimums.

19. Regulators should require airlines to have a direct link with FTOs providing competency- based (e.g., MPL) training or its equivalent to pilots they plan to employ at the completion of the training program. This link must result in use of that airline’s operating procedures and aircraft equipment throughout the training.

20. When training relies primarily on flight simulators, regulators should require motion in the simulators when used for flight training credited toward a pilot certificate, rating or currency, as appropriate to the task. Simulator manufacturers and aircraft manufacturers should collaborate to enhance simulator fidelity in regimes outside normal flight so that maneuvers such as aerodynamic stalls can be trained, practiced, and evaluated in a realistic manner.

Originally Posted by FedElta

I'm no ALPA apologist, and I hope Carl will take a cleansing breath before dismissing this: Many years ago in a former life, I gave a jumpseat ride to a USAIR guy.

In the course of our chat, he mentioned that he had just had FAA certificate action against him dismissed. He stated that ALPA had spent 250k and four years defending him, and the FAA had spent more than that prosecuting the case.

I asked him how he felt about paying his dues now, and he said it was his favorite check to write every month. I've always remembered that.

The FedEx Pilot Association did not have the resources to provide this level of protection......and many other services we now enjoy at DAL.

ALPA desperately needs to be fixed, but let's be careful about throwing out the baby with the bathwater......in the end, it may be necessary. Mainline needs a strong advocate at National, and I'm not sure we are hearing it yet.

Back to colorin'

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

Feel better...ALPA is still broken.

Sorry t...it was too good a line not to steal.

Carl

Originally Posted by Splash

Am I the only one who wonders how successful ALPA would be if passionate but misguided folk like Carl harnessed their energy to improve ALPA, instead of attacking it with 7/8 logic?

Never mind. It would require doing more than typing on a keyboard...

Originally Posted by tsquare

Wonder where Prater will wind up?

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

Slowplay does this all the time man. He recently started the subtle threat with me about exposing my identity to get me to stop posting. It's the last refuge of someone who has no argument left. He can only threaten and deflect.

I hope you don't stop posting here, because I think you add a lot with your opinions. If you do stop, please feel free to PM me if you read anything here from the apologists that needs refutation.

Moderators, it's time to stop this activity from Slowplay. Threatening other members if they don't stop posting the way he wants is over the line. You should be ashamed of yourself Slowplay. You are low!

Carl