Originally Posted by pilotwifey

1. Does an extra few hundred hours instructing in a cessna really help prepare you to be in the right hand seat of a jet? A low-hour pilot goes through the same IOE and the same FO training as a 1000 hour pilot.
2. Since when was being confident and self-assured a bad thing? There are cocky high-time pilots (just check out some of the posts on this thread) and cocky low-time pilots, this has to do more with a pilot's personality rather than his actual flying experience.
3. Most pilots who attend PFTs are flight instructors, and they usually become flight instructors sooner than those who train in other ways. Just because a pilot trains at a PFT doesn' mean they don't flight instruct. They also get paid for being a flight instructor, and often at a higher rate and are able to flight instruct more often.
4. This is ridiculous! Plenty of pilots who fly at PFTs don't have alot of money and take out loans, just as there are many rich folks who train at FBOs or other places. Whether or not someone has money is completely irrelevant to what kind of pilot they wil be.
5. Obviously, working as a flight instructor for an extra 500 hours does not give you a "higher level of maturity" as evidenced by the posts on this thread. Maturity is not gained solely through being a flight instructor for extended periods of time. This again is a generalization, and it is ridiculous to claim that low time instructors are necessarily immature.
6. Look at the boards- there are just as many rants and expletives made by high time pilots. AGain- a generalization.
7. Why shouldn't a pilot pay for a type rating? People across the nation in may different walks of life make investments in their careers and educations. Lawyers often pay tens of thousands of dollars for LLMs in specific areas of law, Professors pay for additional masters degree that are "unnecessary" but may open doors, employees pay for unnecessary degrees that may help in job protection. Why is it so ridiculous for a pilot to make the same kind of investment? Airlines know that pilots with type ratings are traininable and are more likely to hire them.

Is an extra 500 or 600 hours training in a single engine aircraft really so valuable that it means the difference between a good pilot and a bad pilot? Many of the high time pilots have accused low time pilots of being in it only for the money and degrading the profession, but that is silly. Someone plannign their life and career must make decisions on how they can make the best of their career. If given the opportunity to get into a profession that is based PURELY on seniority a year or two earlier, then why would they pass that up? I do not see how this degrades the profession in any way. Putting more pilots in the pool means employers have more to choose from, can be more selective which results in better pilots. Obviously, employers do not see low hour as a hinderance. If they did, they would not hire low time pilots, the demand would decrease, and pilots would stop paying for type ratings. If you are going to knock low-time pilots, why don't you grumpy high-timers provide a little logic to back up what you are saying instead of drawing an arbitrary line in the sand. Is 800 okay? 900? 1000 tt? or should they fly for 10 years in a cessna before they are "ready" to be a "real pilot"?

Originally Posted by Casper

You guys make it seem like you would "like" an FO with 600TT if it took them 8-10 years to get it but if they got that in 2 years they are losers.

Enlighten me

Originally Posted by directbears

I will try. First it’s not necessarily the amount of total time or how long it took you to get your time, but the QUALITY of your flight time and the EXPERIENCE that you have.

Let's take your 400-500 PFT that has flown around the patch doing the required "training" (half of which is probably in some sim) and doing some cross country work mostly VFR. Then you have two other groups of pilots. Military and civilian 135/CFI types. Both are excellent ways to gain QUALITY EXPERIENCE and not just flying around under some 91 or 141 ticket.

First Military.
While I personally believe from having flown with ex and current military guys that they do well learning systems, flying the aircraft, and making command decisions, they are initially soft in areas such as working in the ATC environments and with an airline/ATC hectic schedule (at times). However, they quickly adapt and draw off of their military flying experience. I’m not military, but I do respect them and have confidence in their ability to fly 121 aircraft.

Second 135/CFI types.
The CFI route, IMHO, is a good starting point because it allows you to hone in on your aircraft knowledge more than you could imagine as a newly "qualified" commercial pilot. The flying experience gained is OK up to a point. Teaching and observing other pilots will give you a sharp eye and some experience but it does fall short in some areas like dealing with "real" weather and fast paced schedules. Again IMHO, the best place to gain some "real" world experience (i.e. aircraft emergencies, bad weather, schedules, etc.) is at 135 operators, preferably cargo ops. You will find yourself in some real interesting situations flying 135 cargo, and you will be able to take a wealth of knowledge and experience away from that. I have done both, so I know what I’m talking about. I have the utmost respect and confidence in a pilot who has spent some time chasing TS and knocking ice of the wing under 135 cargo ops.

What does a PFT with 500 hours have to show other than the ability to pass a check ride and possibly hold a type rating that doesn't hold water without any actual PIC time using it? It's amazing to me reading the PFT folk’s posts here. It's amazing how arrogant most of you come across, and how you CONSTANTLY miss the point. YES, you can pass a check ride that ALL of us can pass including “Bam Bam” the monkey, but when the doo doo hits the fan in the real world, in the real aircraft, in the real weather, while being pushed by a real schedule, what EXPERIENCE are you going to draw off of? Can any of you answer me that?

Respect the profession and gain some “real” experience is all I have left to say. It very well might save your life and bring you out of an ever deepening pit of overworked, underpaid treatment by airline management scumbags who will use your own desperate desires to be a shiny new airline pilot against you.

Originally Posted by de727ups

"Isn't it true a lot of 135 guys fly solo? If so, that seems like a better way for a low time guy to eat it rather than gain knowledge from a captian"

There are no low time guys who fly "solo" IFR 135. You gotta have 1200 hours to meet the mins. Another reason pax airlines shouldn't be hiring 121 F/O's with 300 hours. Heck, you gotta have 1200 just to fly IFR 135, what does that tell ya?

135 freight won't touch low timers cause the FAA says they don't have the experience to do the job safely...and their right.

Originally Posted by Casper

You know, I think there are many more pilots/captains who feel the way EagleEye feels. Those are the guys who understand that getting educated at a flight school through an accellerated program can be a very POSITIVE thing.
The reason they don't post too much is because they are positive people, not bitter like so many of the higher time guys on here seem to be.

As for Rickair7777... guys in my flight school (ATP) also work as CFI's before they go job hunting. So, by reference to your comment, we (as well as RAA guys instructing) are ok by you. Just give us a break and realize most all of the PFT guys also instruct.

Too many of these threads start with someone asking for real advise, guys looking for help from our "seniors", yet they all too often turn into smear campaigns by the very guys we are looking to for help.

Just telling a guy not to go to a flight school is not only lame advise, it is closed minded.