Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Regional
Regional airlines want to axe 1500 hour rule >

Regional airlines want to axe 1500 hour rule


Notices
Regional Regional Airlines

Regional airlines want to axe 1500 hour rule

Old 10-02-2021 | 02:41 PM
  #51  
Banned
 
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 4,208
Likes: 7
Default

Glad to see most people understand that the 1500 hour rule wasn't about safety, it was about the unions
Reply
Old 10-02-2021 | 04:13 PM
  #52  
rickair7777's Avatar
Prime Minister/Moderator
Veteran: Navy
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 45,126
Likes: 796
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
Default

Originally Posted by SonicFlyer
Glad to see most people understand that the 1500 hour rule wasn't about safety, it was about the unions
I think it was about safety.

It had a fringe benefit to unions too. But do you really think that commercial pilots should be making $15-19K to fly the public? Also safety related, because people making <$20K aren't going to get much rest since they can't afford to live in the vast majority of domiciles.
Reply
Old 10-02-2021 | 07:12 PM
  #53  
Banned
 
Joined: May 2017
Posts: 2,012
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by SonicFlyer
Glad to see most people understand that the 1500 hour rule wasn't about safety, it was about the unions
oh it was 100% about safety. Whether it promoted safety is a separate discussion
Reply
Old 10-02-2021 | 07:12 PM
  #54  
Banned
 
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 4,208
Likes: 7
Thumbs down

Originally Posted by rickair7777
I think it was about safety.
Well you're wrong.

If it was about safety they would have made the rule qualitative instead of quantitative.



Originally Posted by rickair7777
But do you really think that commercial pilots should be making $15-19K to fly the public?
False dichotomy.
Reply
Old 10-02-2021 | 07:48 PM
  #55  
TransWorld's Avatar
Gets Everyday Off
 
Joined: Aug 2016
Posts: 6,995
Likes: 1
From: Fully Retired
Default

Originally Posted by SonicFlyer
Well you're wrong.

If it was about safety they would have made the rule qualitative instead of quantitative.



False dichotomy.
Qualitative in most anything is open for debate and difficult to measure. Not saying quantitative is perfect. But you cannot look me straight in the face and say 1,500 is no better than 250. Now is it better than 1,400 is open for debate.
Reply
Old 10-02-2021 | 10:24 PM
  #56  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Sep 2016
Posts: 1,957
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by SonicFlyer
Well you're wrong.

If it was about safety they would have made the rule qualitative instead of quantitative.



False dichotomy.
Could you imagine the whining if they tried to make it qualitative?

Is 300 hours of turbine time with 60 landings more valuable than 200 landings in 50 hours in a 172? Does private pilot dual in a Cirrus count for more than banner towing in a taildragger? What about 50 hours of burning up the pattern doing soft field landings on a grass strip vs operating IFR in SoCal or New York?
Reply
Old 10-02-2021 | 11:36 PM
  #57  
In a land of unicorns
 
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 102
From: Whale FO
Default

Originally Posted by DarkSideMoon
Could you imagine the whining if they tried to make it qualitative?

Is 300 hours of turbine time with 60 landings more valuable than 200 landings in 50 hours in a 172? Does private pilot dual in a Cirrus count for more than banner towing in a taildragger? What about 50 hours of burning up the pattern doing soft field landings on a grass strip vs operating IFR in SoCal or New York?
They should definitely give credit to 135 time over CFI time.
Reply
Old 10-03-2021 | 05:51 AM
  #58  
Banned
 
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 4,208
Likes: 7
Default

Originally Posted by TransWorld
But you cannot look me straight in the face and say 1,500 is no better than 250. Now is it better than 1,400 is open for debate.
In my experience and observation, 700-800 total time is about where things start to finally settle in. But of course that is anecdotal.
Reply
Old 10-03-2021 | 05:53 AM
  #59  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 647
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by rickair7777
I think it was about safety.

It had a fringe benefit to unions too. But do you really think that commercial pilots should be making $15-19K to fly the public? Also safety related, because people making <$20K aren't going to get much rest since they can't afford to live in the vast majority of domiciles.
This is 100% true. If I were making $19k/yr, I'd be living in a van, and not one of those nice Instagram vans with Ikea cabinets and a fold-out memory foam mattress. I mean one of those old, rusted-out service vans that get the cops called on it. No way I'm getting good sleep if the stray cats are particularly aggressive or there's a cold snap that night.
Reply
Old 10-03-2021 | 07:24 AM
  #60  
rickair7777's Avatar
Prime Minister/Moderator
Veteran: Navy
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 45,126
Likes: 796
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
Default

Originally Posted by SonicFlyer
In my experience and observation, 700-800 total time is about where things start to finally settle in. But of course that is anecdotal.
That's not unreasonable. But 200 hours is to low for 121 (yes there were 141 CPL's with 200 hours flying RJ's 20 years ago).
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Guard Dude
Delta
201736
04-06-2022 06:59 AM
172 Captain
Regional
35
12-14-2012 08:30 AM
aafurloughee
Fractional
41
06-25-2008 06:43 PM
groovinaviator
Regional
24
02-11-2008 03:34 PM
WatchThis!
Major
0
07-10-2005 03:55 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices