Do they really go interview every person on your references and then go interview people those people mentioned for a SIDA badge? I don’t think SIDA would make it a TS definite. TS investigations take months and are much more than a criminal check. Have poor financials? No TS. Along with a myriad of other reasons to be denied.

WAAAAAAAA!!! I just got my wet Commercial Cert, I want to fly for the Airlines now!!! WAAAAAA!!!!!! It's not fair WAAAAA!!!!!!!

The reasoning is that the Universities have a more structured program. The Feds obviously believe the product is better at a structured collegiate program as well, hence the lower requirement.

You mean the universities lobbied more more to the Feds than the Mom & Pop FBO’s. If the Checkrides are to PTS Standards, the school name on your degree should not matter.

There are minimum standards, and there is training above and beyond the minimum standard.

Nah, that’s not accurate at all lol.

You’re required to take 60 credits specific to aviation and graduate with a degree in aviation to meet the 1,000 hour ATP minimums. BECAUSE you took 60 credits (or more) specific to aviation, you’re reduced 500 hours, that’s fair.

A lot of those courses also take a deeper dive into different aspects of aviation as well and isn’t just flying a aircraft. Examples are deeper dive into weather theory (something that Part 61 pilots don’t dive much into) and deeper dive Human Factors (something that Part 61 pilot isn’t covering.) Just some examples.

Not all 135 PIC ops requires an ATP.

And the Airmail act, which is important. 61/141 isn’t college/no college
The advice prior from grads was always to get a degree is something else to fall back on, but now you and the school got something out of it so it’s sooper important. It was always about money like nearly everything.

I can attest to that. The 141 college/program I went through dove pretty deep through the aviation/airline industry including history, law, policy, systems, power plants, aerodynamics, etc. 60 credits is the minimum and a low ball on the amount of actual aviation credits these schools require. I ended up with well over 60 aviation credits throughout my time there.

ALL part 141 approved universities are going to put out graduates who can fly to ACS standards AND be well versed in ground knowledge and theory.

SOME part 61 students will also have comparative ground knowledge.

Other part 61 students will simply memorize Sheppard air and pass their written with a 90% or higher. Then they will memorize the ASA oral exam guidebook at best. Alternatively, they will memorize a 1 page printout of checkride gouge detailing exactly what questions to expect on the oral. They might pass their checkride with flying colors despite having a very thin layer of knowledge


Both part 141 and 61 can pass the same checkride and still not be equal.

Went back and re-read those regs and got it now. Somehow, I missed the fact that 135.243(a)(1) requires an ATP. Thanks.

Yes, exactly. However if they can pass the exact same checkride, then they should be equal in the eyes of the law.

Hiring is of course a different matter.

But legally they should all be treated the same. The current rules smack of favoritism and elitism.

And it forces people who have no interest in being a CFI, teach students. They will do the bare minimum and just blow through it as fast as they can, building hours, giving sub-par instruction. Maybe they should make regional FO's only have to have 250 hours, and a CFI have an ATP...LOL

CFI has never been a good job. It wasn’t 40 years ago, it won’t be 40 years from now. What is different, and I agree with some posts I’ve read, is that now we are almost forcing CFIs to instruct 1200+ hours, where before the 1500 rule, they would just teach long enough to be sick of it and bail to a real job. There are other, much better options to time build, CFI is obviously still the most prevalent. Who knows, if majors keep sucking the regionals dry, and they dry up and stop service to small podunk towns, the Fed may open up more EAS that would allow more lower time pilots to have a stepping stone between CFI and FO.

And the whole “I’m a better pilot because I learned pt141 and you did pt61” is ridiculous. We all watch the same UND/King Schools/YouTube videos and study the same books now days. You still have good and bad students either way. You’re not the Second Coming of Bob Hoover because you learned pt141

Have you been a student at part 61 and part 141 flight schools?

Have you taught at part 61 and part 141 flight schools?

Have you ever had an examiner who gave you a really easy checkride and one that gave you a really hard checkride?

That's why I said "probably". Most of the pilots I know would be good for a TS. Just because they dig into your background doesn't mean they actually find very many people with an aunt who's a KGB sleeper agent.

You’re right. Except most 141 programs have you go through every single task item in the ACS for their checkrides. That’s not including stage checks that come prior to that to be eligible for an end of course ride.

I’ve been a student and taught in both part 61 and 141 programs. 141 programs are tougher to succeed in. My school had a 60% dropout rate in their 141 program due to the rigerious curriculum. It’s unfortunate those folks weren’t able to make it through, but that’s just how the program is.

So yes, we may all study the same material and source information, but the evaluation processes are completely different.

Additionally, in my airline new hire class you could easily tell who was a 141 student, a 61 student, or those that went through the military. Take that as you will

I call complete b.s. on this statement. I’ve never been in an Indoc class where we discussed what part we did our training under.

additionally, I’ve never had any instructors at any airline ask us if we were 141 or 61 students. So there is no way to just tell by how someone performs what type of civilian initial training one did.

where the separation occurs is how one builds time. CFI, banner tow, survey, plane owner going $100 hamburgers. Yeah, you can separate some wheat from the chaff there. But 61 vs 141. Hell no. And I’ve done both.

I’m simply speaking from performance in training at the airlines. Additionally, everyone talked about to some extent where they went to school or their backgrounds regarding time building. If you don’t think pilots talk about themselves, then you must be living under a rock

That’s a real load of manure about 141 programs. I get that you went through one and you may be a bit biased towards 141. I’ve taught military in a highly structured environment, and civilian part 61. Never taught in a 141 program, but I have had my share of students coming from some of those places because of problems with the school in question, and was not impressed very much. The fact that your telling us that it had a 60% pass rate means it’s the instructors who are probably responsible for that, and not so much the students. Good, competent instructors wouldn’t have a failure rate that bad. That sounds like needless chest beating and trying to send a message that it’s ‘hard for the sake of being hard’ and nothing else. Sounds like it’s just for bragging rights-purposes only.

I’ve learned over the years that 141 students may be good at excelling in a structured course, and there’s definitely more of a roadmap if you will with the requirement for a syllabus. But, let’s face it, 141 is overrated. Once somebody gets to the 1500 hour mark and they’re still bragging that 141 is better or ‘harder,’ save it. It’s not. Don’t take my word though, I can’t tell you how many people who came out of 141 programs tell me that exact same thing. Often times I’ve seen 141 students don’t have the best hand flying and decision making skills once they complete all their checkrides. One of the previous posters said it correctly in that it’s what you do AFTER your training days that matters. Is when you’re building hours that really counts. How are they building those hours? Got a lot of instrument time/hard IFR skills? Operations in very busy tower controlled airspace? (And no not the typical busy flight training environment, that’s a different kind of ‘busy.’ Not the same thing that you will face in real world 121 ops) got some turbine experience? And no not necessarily the right seat opportunities that’s typical for time builders (seat warmers for insurance purposes) flying in a Pilatus or caravan and thinking they can log that as SIC. I’m talking actual legit turbine PIC. Not that it ‘matters’ in today’s hiring environment, but it definitely does help in the training environment at your first airline.

‘The degree didn’t bother me, it was just a means for me to get from Point A to where I am currently at and trying to get to get to quicker. I used my GI Bill and have a different skill set to fall back on.

‘Of course it’s about, however. The fact remains, students that attended a Part 141 university 9 times out of 10 have taken courses that takes a deeper dive into other aspects of flying outside of just flying a airplane. Now if the students don’t get much out of it because they are focus on checking a box and getting their degree and flight time. That’s on them. This is just my observation from learning and teaching both in a Part 61 and Part 141 environment.

141 flight schools who claim they’re 141 solely for the purpose of a training syllabus and 141 schools associated with a 4-year institution are two different entities.

Like I’ve mentioned before, it’s most 141 schools. Those whom you have may encountered were probably from the former.

Turbine time with a fresh commercial license? Good luck getting a gig like that out the bat. Most low-time time building jobs are either CFI, banner towing, or pipeline patrol. Most people won’t be going to their first airline with turbine time unless your daddy has a jet, you built military turbine time, or you just plain old got lucky.

Was just talking to a Delta 717 Captain who mentioned one of the newer guys he’s flown with was a military guy and he was struggling in the “busy” 121 environment. But oh wait, doesn’t he have turbine time? What type of airplane you sat your @ss in to build time doesn’t necessarily help you in the 121 world in some cases.

Also, most students won’t be the most confident in those aspects after passing their checkride because of exactly that. They just passed their checkride. Time building is where you build confidence, so on that I agree whether 141 or 61. But knowledge wise? 141 trumps most times. That’s seriously not even an opinion. It’s fact. Like I’ve mentioned, I’ve been in both part 61 and 141 training environments as both a student and instructor. My experience and I’m sure those of many others who’ve done 141 can also agree it’s more in depth. Not trying to sound “superior” but those who didn’t participate in a legit 141 program at all won’t understand.

Considering you’ve only been in a 61 environment, albeit your 141 students coming over, you’re more biased than others trying to explain this to you

Not all 141 schools are not equal. There is a difference between a flight school that just that a flight school that runs 61 and 141 programs in parallel and there’s Part 141 University schools. The folks are talking about Part 141 university schools just just the structure and curriculum that is required for the R-ATP reduction results in students taking a deeper dive in various course subjects outside of just flying unlike say a Part 141 pilot factory that just has a flying curriculum. So sure, I do believe because of that structured and more in-depth training, yeah there should be a reduction. I say this with both a 61 and 141 background.

‘Sure I’ll give you that the structure environment and tight restrictions at Part 141 universities and handicap students some limiting exposures to a more challenging operating environment and lack of flexibility can lead to slower area development of decision making. But the lack of Hand Flying thing, come on man. That’s showing up from all backgrounds even military…. I tell you what, I enjoyed teaching in a 61 environment with my background as a military vet, Part 61 and 141 uni student. I was able to create a structured training plan for my students and leverage the flexibility of Part 61 to really tailor their training for them.

This is exactly it man. I don’t have a military background, but did exact same with my students. And for the other poster, may I add that not only was I in a “CFI bubble” but have experience flying literally all over this country including Hawaii (IFR and VFR) in all different types of busy airspace. I have low altitude pipeline experience, mountainous terrain, etc. And in all different types of single and multi-engine airplanes. Not trying to build a resume, but proving a point that hand flying and decision making comes from time building experience. Not after a checkride regardless 61 or 141.

Got any hard data to prove your point on 141 ‘collegiate’ program graduates performing better? My point still stands. Change my mind.

I’ve learned through experience that skill is important, to an extent. If you flew king airs for 9,000 hours and nothing but king airs, and then go to the airlines, and it’s your first 121 job, yea it’s going to be a learning curve alright. Whereas the guy that flew to 1500 hours and got a good variety of experience along the way will fare much better more than likely. But where they went for flight training doesn’t really mean diddly squat. After a certain point, what it REALLY boils down to is attitude and how you approach the training. That’s what I left out in my previous post, and it’s so important.

You can have people with good attitudes at both types of places we’re talking here, and people with bad attitudes. Regardless of training footprint, and I should also add regardless of experience level, the ones with the bad attitudes don’t fare well and often won’t make it. That said, sometimes even folks with good attitudes can fail as well. Doesn’t mean they’re bad. The more important thing is those are the people that learn from their mistakes. The ones with bad attitudes usually don’t learn from mistakes. They think they are better than everyone else and it shows. People know who they are.

Now, on the subject of the training institution. Training institution doesn’t really matter. The instructor(s) you get matters more than the name of the school/institution you attended. You could attend a brand name institution that everyone knows about or has heard of, but it may not have instructors who are doing a great job at getting people up to, and more importantly beyond the minimum standards. Since this industry always has a high turnover of CFI’s, it’s hard to determine if a particular school is good at teaching students simply because what may be good today, may turn out to be a bad school 3-4 months from now as newer CFI’s come in and the experienced ones are leaving for better jobs. The quality of the school ebbs and flows so much with 99% of civilian schools it’s not even funny.

Big name universities with flight programs are nothing special. Again, change my mind on how it affects a pilot in the grand scheme of things throughout his or her career. We all know that there’s too many CFI’s out there that are just building time, and not really vested in teaching. I’ve had 3 of them. I fired all 3 of them. Found one that cares about teaching. These types can be found anywhere.

I was ‘building time’ too, and told my students upfront when we first met, but I would shut up about it after that unless I was asked. Your success in flight training comes down largely to the instructors you get, and more importantly your attitude. All this 141 university flight training is better than 61 is nonsense, and your just pulling that out of your rear end. When you come out of brand name institution, you are not an ‘all-knowing Chuck Yeager super pilot.’ I get that vibe coming from people like you who went to ‘hard and rigorous’ 141 schools and they are nothing special dude.

You clearly can’t read. I never said part 141 pilots are better than 61 pilots when it comes to skill. If anything, I said it all comes down to building skill in time building.

What I did say though is that 141 programs associated with an institution go way more in depth than your average 61 school. There’s nothing wrong with that, it’s just how those programs are built.

Considering I’ve experienced both sides of that flight training realm, I am fully entitled to say so. Again, from what you’ve said, you haven’t. You’re so stuck on the notion that 141 pilots think they’re “better” or more “superior” than those not and from my personal experience that’s not true. If you met some bad apples, you should probably just act like a grown man and let it go.

How about you go spend a few days at an AABI accredited 141 school and see for yourself? The flight training, and I mean the flight training when it comes to ground school based items is much more enhanced than any 61 school I’ve had experiences with.

Stop being so biased, it’s not a good look

He is clearly missing the point… He has made up his mind…

Ok so I misquoted you and meant to quote the other kool aid drinker. Until you both can produce some hard data showing that 141 collegiate program flight students are superior pilots, my point still stands. If you can’t, then take a walk.

Nah my guy. There’s actually something wrong with you. I’ll say it slower for you: 141… pilots… are… not… better… than… 61 pilots. And I never said they were. So by your “you both” statement, you can take that and stick it where the sun don’t shine.

There’s no data to produce. Only experiences. Which you only have one side of. Go take a walk into an AABI accredited institution and then come back and share your experience.

Nobody said 141 pilots are better…. Otherwise, point to the quote that says otherwise.

https://www.flightglobal.com/safety/...148574.article

Well this happened. Wonder if others will follow suit, and if it has any chance of going through.


Edit: Since this has a paywall, basically YX is looking to get the hour requirement reduced to 750 for students from Republic’s LIFT academy. Not for anyone off the street apparently.

I really doubt it to be honest. With the current regulations in effect, I don’t see them reducing them in the foreseeable future. There’s a reason they’ve been put there in the first place. Either way, even if they did consider their request, none of that would be finalized for a long time considering the pace the FAA typically works at and all of the legal implications that go with it.

If the regionals are having trouble retaining pilots they should increase their wages, not plead to the FAA to reduce legal hour requirements so that they can get more people faster. That’s typically how competitive industries work.

Yeah, doubt it. They're trying to make the case that their puppy mil is equivalent to mil training + 500 hours of operational mil flying. Uphill battle.

It’s actually kind of funny that Republic thinks the FAA would even consider that request, let alone comply and implement it promptly LOL

https://www.regulations.gov/document/FAA-2022-0535-0001

here is the request.

I don’t think any politician is going to risk signing off on something that implies a reduction in safety.

Especially considering this “1500 hour” rule was created so recently. It would be different if the rule was 50+ years old and they could argue advances in training/equipment/procedures make it obsolete.

Not the case. Additionally, all of the families from the Colgan crash are still around to show up to the court hearing if this rule was to be challenged (yes, I realize that both of those pilots had 1500+ hours, but that crash still seems to be the poster child for inexperienced pilots getting in over their heads.)

RPA seeks 1500 hr exemption
 

US regional carrier Republic Airways has filed for an exemption to pilot aeronautical experience requirements set by the Federal Aviation Administration, in an effort to alleviate the pilot shortage.

The Indianapolis, Indiana-based airline, which flies regional routes for American Airlines, Delta Air Lines and United Airlines, wrote in a 15 April application to the Department of Transportation (DOT) that its rigorous selection process and structured pilot training programme make it comparable to a military pilot education.

Therefore, its pilots would be highly-qualified to earn what’s known as a “Restricted Air Transport Pilot” (R-ATP) certificate with about half of the flight time usually required for civilians pilots to begin flying for commercial operators.


“The requested exemption would allow selected civilian pilots who complete the rigorous Republic R-ATP programme to apply … for an airline transport pilot certificate concurrently with a multi-engine airplane type rating with a minimum of 750 hours of total flight time as a pilot,” Republic writes.

Military pilots aiming for a commercial aviation career only need 750h of total flight time to qualify for an airline job. Most other candidates require 1,500h.

Collecting those hours is expensive and time consuming, creating a bottleneck in availability of new pilots that is not easily solved, say critics.

Republic says in its application that once students are accepted into its programme they follow a “highly structured training curriculum where they train as a full-time employee”.

“Within the programme, students will complete courses in advanced airline academics, complete command experience, receive a Republic mentor and complete supplemental advanced aviation training to help them better prepare for a career as an airline pilot,” the filing says. “To uphold the rigour of the training, students will be assessed and are required to pass multiple knowledge and skill validation gates throughout the programme life cycle. Failure to pass any gate will result in the student to be transitioned out of the Republic R-ATP Program and continue through the standard ATP pathway.”

The programme, to be carried out at Republic’s own flight school, Leadership In Flight Training (LIFT) Academy, “is designed to meet or exceed the safety of the military R-ATP. In addition, this programme will support aspiring aviators from underserved communities and diverse backgrounds to pursue careers in aviation,” Republic writes.

Republic Airways, which operates a fleet of 200 Embraer 170s and E175s and offers scheduled passenger service with nearly 1,000 daily flights to 100 cities in 40 US states, did not immediately respond to a request for information about the proposal.

SOURCE:
https://www.flightglobal.com/safety/...148574.article