That's right, the military screens out anyone who is not special to a congressman. Civilian pilots get trial by fire and almost everyone survives it. Military pilots get carefully spoon fed and burped twice before allowed to fly and they still crash. Quit making a big deal about being a pilot, it's really easy to do anymore.

This couldn't be further from the truth. There are plenty of ways to get into an Academy without being friends with a congressman. And ROTC requires no Congressional interview. Sounds like someone couldn't get through the nomination process and is bitter about it.

By the way, as a Captain at my regional, while they weren't as versed in 121 ops, the military pilots were heads above the FOs of similar experience. It wasn't even close. This includes FOs from previous regionals.

You have to be kidding. 1/3 of my AOCS class couldn't make it through Officer Candidate School, much less Navy flight school. Military flight training is highly structured and graded. Fail and there aren't many second chances given.

That's the reason the airlines prefer ex-military aviators. They recognize the standardization of training and the discipline required to be successful in the squadron ready rooms.

With civilian trained pilots its an open question about what you're getting. A well trained individual or a Colgan 3407 Captain.

I don't agree with this but I also think some were lying about their military aviation experience. I had a guy that claimed to be a C5 driver bounce a 200.....bounce.

They aren't crashing enough to justify any meaningful improvements. You are trying to place value on unrelated qualities. Captains want good subordinates, that is what the military provides. The FO can never be better, even if he is.

All good points but the recent exodus to the airlines has also affected the military standards and not for the better with respect to training. A lot of experience headed out the door and I like others am afraid the military mishap rate will go up in the future as a result. I also mentioned in another thread the J-bad Afghanistan C-130 mishap in 2015 and how the crew forgot the NVG case they placed between the yoke and panel with 11 killed as a result. No one is immune. Yes I've done the OIF and OEF gigs.

Here's why I think nothing will come of the 1500 hour rule, although I admit to my bias of not wanting this to happen so Im trying hard to not let that influence me. (Copy pasted from another thread I posted on)

1. ALPA is against it and is a powerful lobby group

2. Colgan family lobby group is against it.

3. Senate democratic minority leader is against it and has in so many words said he'd filibuster it if there is a further reduction in the 1500 hour rule.

The first two reasons are important, although I'm sure the airline lobby is more powerful- still there is plenty of pull in the other direction to keep it somewhat in check.

Most important is the filibuster threat- the only way around that would be changing senate rules (nuclear option), but 50 senators have signed a petition against the nuclear option for legislation so I think we are safe for the near future.


In my opinion, reducing the 1500 hour rule would be a bad thing, as the regionals are finally starting to pay reasonable wages for FO's. We really don't want to go back to the days of $20k/year FO's. If the 1500 hour stays, we should see more people out of flight school going right seat in corporate/charter then move to the regionals..Sort of a progression that makes more sense to me.

I agree with the sentiment that 1500 hours of 172 time is not of much value, I'd be for the rule changing to require 1000 hours turbine time.

Uh last time I checked those jobs were very rare and hard to come by. And in many cases they actually pay less than aerial photography or instruction.

I was offered a job in the right seat of a 135 Lear for $30k a year. On call every day except a week a year. I made more flight instructing and after first year at a regional, made well over $30k.

It was my understanding that the "1500" hour rule was more like this.
NTSB: So both pilots were trained the same?
Colgan: yes
NTSB: so why don't they have the same rating?
Colgan: er ah uhm well that's just how it is, the SIC rating is exactly the same.
NTSB: well if it's the same why aren't they the same on their certificates?

Therefore the ATP rule went into effect, which states a pilot must have 1500 hours.

I am not saying that it has produced better pilots, but that appeared to be the rationale.

As far as scope, it can change faster than you can say "Make Merica Great Again" ask any old guy, they all claimed "if it's a jet, it's mainline", well how'd that work out?

There needs to be training reform, you can't equate it to hours. And being a pilot isn't for anyone with the ability to borrow 200k.