pete2800

Everyone in the airline profession benefits from the new rules.

LarryDavid

The biggest joke was making current FOs get their ATP rating. First of all the check ride was not even a real check ride, they pretty much spoon fed the FOs at my airline. Boy I sure feel so much safer now that the FOs I have been flying with for years have an ATP rating. It is a miracle we didn't crash before they went through the paperwork and got an ATP.

Cubdriver

FAA may not think much of doing an overnight swap of 121 for 135 at GLA, but the truth remains it is a slippery swap aimed at saving GLA money, at the direct expense of airline safety. Safety is both the appearance of safety as well as the spirit and practice of safety. Regional airline safety is a hot button topic since Colgan 3407. GLA apparently wants to do a simple rule swap to circumvent 121 safety rules which were put there for a reason. I doubt they will get much traction with the FAA due to the current political environment and their 135 certificate will be denied. I am really not arguing whether it is a substantial difference in safety, as GLA has always tapped the least experienced pilots and they would simply do the same (if allowed to) under 135 rules. On the personal side, I feel this is a slippery maneuver to circumvent safety in favor of making a buck, and it is also a direct attempt to circumvent the will of the Congress. Again, it is not the safety I am concerned about as much as the attitude and lack of care about appearances GLA shows here.

rickair7777

Back in the day. That changed when almost all scheduled 135 was rolled into 121.

rickair7777

That sounds good on paper, but the real reason for the extra credit is that the big aviation schools lobbied for it.

Military got included because their programs are obviously structured as well, and the aviation schools could not justify excluding them. they would have preferred to exclude military, so as to solidify their monopoly as being the only fast-path to a 121 cockpit.

Me too. I'd keep the mil exemption but that's it.

BenS

This is what I've wondered about the whole thing.. is the FAA really going to enjoy hearing the only reason lakes is getting a 135 is to circumvent new safety rules, and the FAA is just supposed to smile and nod?

But does getting this open the floodgates to pilot applications? I just cannot see people knocking down the door for a 135 operation and a 3 year $17,500 training contract.

rickair7777

If they are allowed to do this it would, to a degree, defeat the spirit of the new rules and circumvent the possible increase in safety.

I hope they don't get away with it, but I suspect they will because the FAA can't discriminate against GLA while allowing all those operators up in Alaska to keep providing their vital services under the same provisions.

M20EPilot

If GLA pulls it off.... it is a genius move if you think about it. If not, something has to give.

But WRT circumventing rules, it won't be the first time: GLA already operates part 121 using less-restrictive part-135 rest rules. The Colgan incident was also a catalyst to improve things fatigue-wise, yet GLA already has an 'out'.

I don't think any of this is right, but it is the way it is.

hypoxia

Does the Captain need an ATP for 135 scheduled operations? My understanding is a Captain operating under 135 IFR needs 1200 TT? Heck for that matter, GLA can hire Captains or F/O's that are over age 65 for the 135 side! Beats being a greeter!

I can just read the help wanted ads. GLA hiring retired greeters to be an on call First Officer. Who said this was a young man's game? Of course if you keel over before your contract to pay back training costs lapse, we'll go after your estate!

pagey

Yes....with pax