Maintaining current minimum FO qualifications
 

As your constituent, a professional airline pilot, and a member of the Air Line Pilots Association, Int’l (ALPA), I am writing to bring your attention to a matter that is important to pilots, the flying public and me personally: upholding landmark aviation safety legislation, the Airline Safety and FAA Extension Act of 2010. This law significantly improved training and qualification requirements for first officers – and improved the safety of our skies. It is a measure that was written in blood, and should not be weakened in any way, shape or form. I am asking you to ensure that any pilot flying with me has the training necessary to be a safe and successful commercial airline pilot.

The Federal Aviation Administration has identified 31 accidents over a nine-year period that government and industry designed the current minimum qualifications to address. These included four fatal accidents that cost 150 people their lives. Since the FAA implemented the new qualifications in 2013, our country has not had a single passenger fatality due to an accident on a scheduled U.S. passenger airliner (Part 121). The qualifications include a minimum number of hours controlling aircraft (1,500 hours for pilots without formal classroom training), training specifications, and other safety protocols. There is a direct correlation between the decline of accidents and these mandates.

There are special interests in Washington, D.C. who, for reasons of profit, seek to weaken our air safety regulations. Some claim these standards are too stringent and reduce the number of pilots available. But let’s be clear; there real shortage falls with our regional airlines and its willingness to pay qualified pilots a decent salary. That is where we should focus. Degrading U.S. aviation safety requirements is not the solution for our airlines’ economic problem.

Furthermore, the facts clearly show that there is not currently a pilot shortage in the U.S. Since July 2013, the FAA issued more than 25,500 active Air Transport Pilot (ATP) certificates, the certification required to serve as a professional commercial airline pilot. That number exceeds even the most optimistic pilot forecast needs.

Most airlines enjoy an excess of pilot applicants. Regional airlines that have increased compensation, added flow-through opportunities to mainline carriers, and created better working environments have seen a large increase in applicants for pilot jobs. The small number of carriers unable to attract pilots offer poor compensation packages and working conditions, and inadequate career opportunities. We should not jeopardize safety because some small air carriers aren’t willing to fairly compensate commercial airline pilots.

Professional pilots are highly qualified, technically trained individuals with the skills to choose many other career paths. Your safety is my top priority on each and every flight. Join us in keeping our air safety system the safest mode of transportation in the world. I urge you to support common sense and oppose any attempts to change the Airline Safety and FAA Extension Act of 2010. I look forward to hearing back from you on this very important issue.

PS Keeping the first officer qualifications where they are also enables student pilots to complete training. Flight schools are actually very happy that their instructors must stay to build experience, while at the same time teaching our next generation of pilots. Lowering first officer hiring requirements will impact the training process, leaving no one qualified to teach.

I do have to say I didnt come back into aviation until I saw the 1st year pay go up, before that I was fine flying for fun on the weekends.

I also know a buddy of mine leaving the military (rotary) because he can now afford to feed his family on current regional pay, so I can see there is no shortage of pilots, just a whole group that wont work for peanuts.

Correct. Embry-Riddle did a study about 2 years ago asking how much would the regionals have to pay for you to return to aviation? $40k was pretty much the low end of what people would accept. The majority want to see $60-70k enrty level to make a jump.

https://youtu.be/Mx9Ry4ocy98

The video is a recent Embry-Riddle discussion of the "pilot shortage," the current airline pilot says there is an applicant shortage, not a pilot shortage due to lack of compensation and work rules...on the regional level.

The Dean of the college of aviation goes on to say that the ATP rule allows his school to keep flight instructors just barely long enough to teach the next CFIs. Also attrition is down for students since they can finally see career progression.

This isn't a discussion, it's propagandaaaaaaaa.

We get it ALPA. Restricting the pilot supply raises wages. But do we all really have to join in in pretending the 1500-Hour Rule is about safety? Political BS is at an all time high in this country. Don't foist more of it on us.

Actually it is a discussion. To argue the point of safety...AF447.
Pierre-Cédric Bonin, the flying pilot was a company baby with only a few hundred hours (read his CPL training) before he was placed into jet transport operations​.

How will putting a wet commercial certificate pilot next to a 1000 hour or if they can swing it a wet ATP Captain go? When we last saw guys getting hired with 250 hours and a wet commercial there were a lot less automated aircraft and more experienced Captains​ at the airlines with more automation. We really didn't have everyone upgrading in under a year onto jets. Mostly turboprop operators​ had quick upgrades, but people had to do a lot more hand flying.

Part of experience is knowing that the aircraft is not doing what you'd like, and having the sense to kick off the automation until it is on the correct path at an appropriate altitude. If the pilot feels it's appropriate to re-engage the automation, then they can choose to do so.

Mostly there needs to be more emphasis on curriculum for hand flying. The pitch/power (thrust) relationship.

Yeah but the "experience" they are getting to the 1500 hrs isn't this amazing quality that in and of itself making safer pilots. I had a 1300 hr CFI that can most likely kill most of us on the Private Pilot maneuvers fly me out to KS to ferry an airplane about a month ago. I can tell you that 95% of his "flying" is not flying at all but monitoring a student. I could fill a page worth of stuff this guy was VERY rusty of not dangerous on (ATC radio comms, hand flying and trimming the plane, looking down and then back up and we're 30 degrees off course, etc, etc...)

1500 is not a magical number, it is how they are being trained and how they are flying.

Great topic. Its not the number of hours, but the quality of them. I know plenty of 5-800 hour pilots who scare the **** out of me in a Cessna, and I know some 100 hour privates or some not even there yet who I know would be more careful behind the yoke. 1500 is political, yes theres a level of experience obtained by 1500 but every airline pilot who has discusses this topic with me has said.... "wohhh theyre upgrading at 12-18 months??? that's far too soon. That captain is way under qualified to fly!!! The 1500 desperation has caused an unseen issue with flow to captain or upgrade. These Fo's going captain are no more squirly than a 3-500 hour "atp"

I agree that it's not the 1500 hours that make a pilot, but rather the quality of the time. I'd much rather a 500 hour UND, ERAU, WMU.. etc grad in the right seat than some guy who rented a 150 and did circles in it.

But with that being said, I think the ATP/R-ATP rule weeds out the guys who don't have the motivation to CFI.

Plus who will instruct if we do lower the FO minimum qualifications?

Interesting statement. I didn't feel like getting a CFI rating... Yet. I'm saving that for my retirement job. There are other ways of building experience. A summer of banner towing followed by a winter of Picto survey work put me over the top. It's not for everyone but worked for me. Should I be weeded out?

I should add; There was I survey pilot I did a project with. He was a CFII/MEI ERAU Grad. He busted CVG's Bravo 3 times in one day. He got lost trying to find a hotel in a small desert town with one main road. He was given a vector in Phoenix's bravo to a VFR corridor and dang near busted that airspace too. He is a FO and a regional now.

I don't believe requiring 1500 hours is the magic formula to a perfectly safe industry. As we all know, results will vary drastically based on the pilots natural skill, intellect, coordination, and experience. Having said that, I do believe the 1500 hour rule has and will continue to improve safety.
I realize the naysayers argue that it doesn't help to require 1500 hours because people can just tow banners and flight instruct their way to the airlines instead. I partially agree- We might really see some improvement if there were some kind of clause in there requiring certain type of operations (for example 500 hours flying charter operations in certain types of aircraft). However, with the current rule requiring 1500 hours we are at least forcing hours to gain experience. Some might get all those hours towing banners and flight instructing, alright fine. But others might instruct for a 6-12 months and then a charter job might be offered their way and they finish their hours doing that before heading to the regionals.
My point is even though it isn't the magic solution, I think the results of the 1500 rule are an improvement on safety if anything. Accident statistics speak for themselves. My only wish to improve it more would be to further require different types/operations to force the experience.

I don't want to instruct either. I would rather do cargo or drop people until my 1500, do I deserve to fly an Rj?

I would rather see you do that as well. You learn a lot more flying 135 freight.

You deserve to fly a mainline aircraft, or an RJ at close to mainline pay.

Regional flying, if you can really call it that anymore, is just a way that the legacies have outsourced their own flying to lower costs. Keeping the minimum requirement to become a pt121 FO means that people have to instruct or do cargo etc like you did.

Sure people can list examples of some idiot that violated a bunch of airspace from ERAU, but think about this, at least they did it in a 172 and not a transport category aircraft with paying passengers in the back. So from that perspective it is an argument for the ATP qualification.

In other words, does a person have 1500 hours of experience, or an hour's worth of experience 1500 times?

There aren't as many low hour non-CFI opportunities as there used to be. 135 operators willing hire SIC's at 250 were a dime a dozen, now we probably don't even have a dozen.

The landscape has changed a lot, it's more difficult of a path than ever before and perpetrating it really fits the "FU, I got mine" narrative.

I believe your decision making skills should be questioned if you go to ERAU. Spending god knows how much on your flight training when it doesn't mean anything to the people hiring.

Yes, I'm sitting at 500hrs and cannot find any work whatsoever (I refuse to do banner towing). So going to get my CFI. :mad:

What a pity you actually have to work and pay your dues to achieve your dream. How terrible that you might have to go CFI.

Having CFI'ed to get into the airlines, it's not the "FU, I got mine." Trust me, I have watched the industry changing and was flight instructing PART TIME in 2008 when there were NO jobs, and places were furloughing. When the legislation came out suggesting that you would need to meet ATP minimums to work for an airline it seemed dismal, how could you get all of the cross-country time required etc. Since then I have had a change of perspective, and honestly you become a much better pilot by teaching. You will also appreciate your next job more knowing how hard you worked to get there.

"Those that know do. Those that understand teach." -Aristotle

Actually UND, ERAU, WMU etc go into the algorithm, so there is a point value to it. How many points is it idk but it might be the difference between two otherwise equally qualified (flight time, volunteer work etc) candidates. I see where you are coming from, a name on a piece of paper does not necessarily mean the person learned as much as a graduate of a non-aviation school who worked hard (and spent a fraction of the money).

So you can find work, but choose not to banner tow. As you can see from my reply above I get your frustration being a low time pilot, especially when it seems like there are no jobs, but just imagine being a pilot in 2001, or 2008 when there were literally NO jobs, if you had one you were lucky. Remember we didn't just pop out of the womb airline pilots, those ahead of you had to get where they are somehow too.

Also I have very bad news for you if you intend to become a captain for a regional...you are essentially a CFI at times. Sure the guy in the right seat is fully qualified to fly, but it is like having a student (lets say instrument or commercial) they can fly the plane, but there are going to be situations where you will either be giving guidance or on rare occasions taking controls. With all of the movement you are going to fly with guys getting into their first jet, they can do the houses get bigger, houses get smaller, but they will take time to get energy management.

So if you CFI now, you will be better prepared to become a GOOD captain. That's not to say that someone who did not CFI will be a bad captain, but rather you will have already had experience with students.

Great quote!

There's also another version of that. "Those who can, do; those who can't, teach." :)

That is an equally great quote

The irony is that some of us would happily teach and were doing that until the pay scales all flip flopped and dare I even say, better QOL at an airline than most flight schools...
I get that not everyone wants to instruct though and yes, the low time jobs are disappearing but if you want something bad enough you'll challenge yourself. It's not rocket science teaching the beginning stages of any skill, so to whine about having to instruct for a couple years probably means you should pick another field. My .02 anyway.

Confucius also said, " Man who walk through airport turnstile sideways going to Bangkok." But im not basing my flying experience or quality on a quote lol

Agreed, and I heard that quote in the past!

Took me a few to get that one. lol.

Your second argument really kills the validity of your first one.

The 1500 hour rule is a manufactured shortage. Many on this board and myself included never touched the CFI.

"Hey we know you can drive a truck, why don't you go teach everyone else how to drive a truck for a few years so you can create a ponzi scheme to protect our lifestyle we 'earned'." :rolleyes:

How much do you value this profession? The minute they can start pulling folks in with wet tickets the pay goes to crap and we're back to the awful system it was. Are you management or a future scab when the opportunity presents itself?

Even if the 1500 hours do nothing to improve safety I'm pretty surprised how many people are against keeping it. I guess $16-22/hour first year is what people want to see come back.

The $16-$22 first year pay still exists. Its the 1,250 hours you CFI at a flight school.

6 of one, half a dozen of another.

Please explain. Seriously because I don't understand how spending time at a flight school instructing (gainful employment and experience) can be equated to shelling out money.

Not really, $16-22 @ 40 hours a week vs 75 hours a month.

At an airline you're paid 75 hours a month on reserve, but I'll entertain the idea that some how your doing 100 hours. That's still less than the 160 hours of pay at a flight school doing ground, sim and flights. But if you're ambitious you could do 200 hours at a flight school. Add an extra activity each day.

Are you serious :confused:

If you think flight instructors are getting paid for 160-200 hours a month you are severely out of touch. A good month would be half of that.

Not out of touch. And yes I'm dead serious, at a college flight program like ERAU people do get paid that much.

Maybe someone with experience at ATP or Aerosim (Delta Connection Academy) can chime in on their pay structure.

ERAU example:
Let's say a full time CFI has 8 students​, that's 4 activities a day at an average 2 hours per activity that's 8 hours of pay per day without picking up additional work. Students are MWF, TTHS.

Full time CFIs have the option to work Saturday or take the day off. If a CFI chooses to take Saturday off they are working 40 hours a week. There's 4 weeks in a month.
40*4=160.

Where are you instructing or referring to that amount of hours is a pipe dream? On a slow week at the schools, 30 hours was bad. Having your II and MEI helps though and a lot of those places are willing to pay for it with a time commitment.

A commitment which with the ATP/R-ATP rule doesn't slow you down from getting on a seniority list. So the CFI benefits twice, a MEI paid for by the school (under a contract that's as long as it'll take to get your time, or it might even take you longer than the contract, depending on your total flight time when hired).

Second, everyone else has to get the same flight time, so a guy who can afford to buy multi time does not bypass you. Which used to happen when the ATP requirement was not in effect. The multi engine time required was higher. 100 hours at some places, 50 at others and 25 at the less desirable outfits.

Maintaining current minimum FO qualifications
 

"Some industry representatives who had initially been very supportive of the new regulations have since become critical of the new rules, arguing that they have created a pilot shortage. There is no reliable data to support this position. In fact, there is an adequate supply of qualified pilots and a robust pipeline of pilots to meet the needs of commercial aviation. In 2015, the FAA issued 6,430 ATP certificates, and in the first eight months of 2016, the FAA reported that they had issued 6,530 ATP certificates, including 599 R-ATP certificates. Regional airlines that report a shortage of pilots typically offer lower salaries, poor work-life balance, and fewer opportunities for career progression. Qualified pilots have many employment opportunities, and some regional airlines have realized that to attract qualified candidates they have to make competitive offers and invest in their pilots. Safety regulations should not be driven by the economic decisions of airlines."

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-d5TT2...ature=youtu.be