Lobbying to roll back 1500 hr rule:
05-06-2022 | 11:55 AM
#21
Perennial Reserve
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 14,248
Likes: 257
So what’s your suggestion? Repeal the 1,500 hour rule because it doesn’t benefit you personally?
Also, the fact that you even have an R-ATP is because someone agreed with you about the quality of the flight time. Instead of feeling sorry for yourself, you should be thanking your lucky stars you can go straight to a regional instead of hacking out hundreds of hours as a CFI.
Also, you should have known what the requirements for airlines were before you jumped ship. Being salty about a rule that benefits the profession as a whole because of your (possibly) poor planning is not a good look.
And this is no hate toward mil guys, I was/am one.
Also, the fact that you even have an R-ATP is because someone agreed with you about the quality of the flight time. Instead of feeling sorry for yourself, you should be thanking your lucky stars you can go straight to a regional instead of hacking out hundreds of hours as a CFI.
Also, you should have known what the requirements for airlines were before you jumped ship. Being salty about a rule that benefits the profession as a whole because of your (possibly) poor planning is not a good look.
And this is no hate toward mil guys, I was/am one.
https://youtu.be/syV2LkGpQB0
05-06-2022 | 01:49 PM
#22
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2021
Posts: 661
Likes: 0
They need to readjust the rule. 1000 because you paid an enormous amount of money to get a 4 yr degree in Aviation doesn’t make you a better pilot than someone who passed the same checkrides with 1000TT but has a 4 yr degree in a different subject matter. Actually the 2nd student is smarter so when he/she gets furloughed (not if but when), they have another field to fall back on. So if you want to change anything, make the Mins 1000TT with any 4-yr degree. (Now here come the Aviation Universities whining and protesting that idea)
05-06-2022 | 03:01 PM
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2016
Posts: 1,957
Likes: 0
They need to readjust the rule. 1000 because you paid an enormous amount of money to get a 4 yr degree in Aviation doesn’t make you a better pilot than someone who passed the same checkrides with 1000TT but has a 4 yr degree in a different subject matter. Actually the 2nd student is smarter so when he/she gets furloughed (not if but when), they have another field to fall back on. So if you want to change anything, make the Mins 1000TT with any 4-yr degree. (Now here come the Aviation Universities whining and protesting that idea)
05-06-2022 | 04:46 PM
#24
Line Holder
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 381
Likes: 0
Agreed. It should be 1500 regardless of background. No military exceptions either.
05-06-2022 | 07:03 PM
#26
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2019
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
From: Yes
There is a shortage of Military pilots because of it. They can stay there to the full 1500.
One could argue it shouldn't apply equally either. An army helicopter pilot has no business with an ATP at 750 hours, I'd rather have a green CFI next to me.
One could argue it shouldn't apply equally either. An army helicopter pilot has no business with an ATP at 750 hours, I'd rather have a green CFI next to me.
05-07-2022 | 03:58 AM
#27
Line Holder
Joined: Jul 2018
Posts: 1,128
Likes: 35
I agree with the rest though.
05-07-2022 | 06:17 AM
#28
Perennial Reserve
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 14,248
Likes: 257
There is a shortage of pilots because they no longer train the number of pilots they once did. BRAC closed UPT bases like Reese, Williams, Laredo, Webb, Craig and allowed NATO allies to do their training at others like Sheppard. Their Associated MOAs and training areas went with them and will never be recovered. Back in WWII the military turned out 50,000 pilots a year. Then came the post Cold War drawdown of active squadrons.
From a recent RAND study:
https://www.rand.org/content/dam/ran...GSDA1530-1.pdf
Today the three remaining UPT bases struggle to turn out 1100 pilots a year.
From a recent RAND study:
Origins of the Current Pilot Shortage
To ensure the Air Force remains staffed with the appropriate quantities of all types of pilots the Service monitors the aircrew management pipeline. This framework encompasses three components: pilot production, absorption and retention. Each segment is equally important, and the flow of pilots through each phase must be balanced to ensure aircrew communities are fully staffed with pilots of all experience levels. Following the end of the Cold War, the USAF underwent a massive drawdown that limited production and absorption capacity. The drawdown decreased USAF manpower end strength which greatly reduced the number of pilot positions, and decreased the total number of flying units. The active component endured a 48% decrease in the primary mission aircraft inventory (PMAI) (Taylor, Bigelow and Ausink, 2009). With fewer line aircraft on the tarmac, fewer sorties could be flown each day. This reality was felt most severely by junior pilots, who needed to fly frequently in order to promptly complete their training objectives. With a decreased stock of aircraft, the service could not absorb as many new fighter pilots. The scarcity of training sorties increases the challenge for new fighter pilots to fly 500 training hours, and officially be recognized as “experienced” pilots.1
The post-Cold War drawdown also motivated the closure of one of the service’s four primary pilot training bases (Taylor, Bigelow and Ausink, 2009).2 The Air Force closed Williams AFB in 1993, decreasing the USAF’s pilot production capability. With only three undergraduate pilot training (UPT) bases remaining, the USAF simply could not produce as many pilots per year as it could during the Cold War
To ensure the Air Force remains staffed with the appropriate quantities of all types of pilots the Service monitors the aircrew management pipeline. This framework encompasses three components: pilot production, absorption and retention. Each segment is equally important, and the flow of pilots through each phase must be balanced to ensure aircrew communities are fully staffed with pilots of all experience levels. Following the end of the Cold War, the USAF underwent a massive drawdown that limited production and absorption capacity. The drawdown decreased USAF manpower end strength which greatly reduced the number of pilot positions, and decreased the total number of flying units. The active component endured a 48% decrease in the primary mission aircraft inventory (PMAI) (Taylor, Bigelow and Ausink, 2009). With fewer line aircraft on the tarmac, fewer sorties could be flown each day. This reality was felt most severely by junior pilots, who needed to fly frequently in order to promptly complete their training objectives. With a decreased stock of aircraft, the service could not absorb as many new fighter pilots. The scarcity of training sorties increases the challenge for new fighter pilots to fly 500 training hours, and officially be recognized as “experienced” pilots.1
The post-Cold War drawdown also motivated the closure of one of the service’s four primary pilot training bases (Taylor, Bigelow and Ausink, 2009).2 The Air Force closed Williams AFB in 1993, decreasing the USAF’s pilot production capability. With only three undergraduate pilot training (UPT) bases remaining, the USAF simply could not produce as many pilots per year as it could during the Cold War
Today the three remaining UPT bases struggle to turn out 1100 pilots a year.
05-07-2022 | 07:10 AM
#29
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 45,127
Likes: 796
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
There is a shortage of pilots because they no longer train the number of pilots they once did. BRAC closed UPT bases like Reese, Williams, Laredo, Webb, Craig and allowed NATO allies to do their training at others like Sheppard. Their Associated MOAs and training areas went with them and will never be recovered. Back in WWII the military turned out 50,000 pilots a year. Then came the post Cold War drawdown of active squadrons.r.
There is a huge retirement wave to age demographics in the US pilot force right now.
Military aircraft tend to be more capable than they used to be, and therefor more costly. Especially tacair... to do X warfighting you need Y logistic aircraft and that hasn't changed much. But you can get by with a lot fewer fighters today, and as always budgets constrain.
The military is a minority producer of airline pilots and will stay that way for the foreseeable future. Our opponents may increase numbers but they can neither develop nor afford the kind of bleeding-edge hardware that would be required to force us dramatically increase our tacair inventory. In fact the DoD is actually now buying updated 4th gen fighters as a cheaper, faster alternative to costly 5/6 gen hardware... 4-1/2 gen hardware is plenty sufficient for many roles in a peer fight.
The reason we have a pilot shortage, fundamentally, is that the industry somehow disregarded the very simple math involving retirement age, mil pilot output, and civilian flight training output. Also maybe blind to the fact that younger generations are not quite as oriented to get away from the farm and have some adventures as the pre-internet demographic. They could very easily have solved this in advance by setting up schools, recruiting suitable and applicants, then paying them to do primary training. The problem with that is long lead-time and they missed the boat.
If push comes to shove you can give somebody 1500 hours in a crew-oriented program (you can do simulated crew ops in a 172) and put them in the right seat of a legacy narrowbody.
05-07-2022 | 07:36 AM
#30
Perennial Reserve
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 14,248
Likes: 257
It's not as simple as Drawdown/BRAC.
There is a huge retirement wave to age demographics in the US pilot force right now.
Military aircraft tend to be more capable than they used to be, and therefor more costly. Especially tacair... to do X warfighting you need Y logistic aircraft and that hasn't changed much. But you can get by with a lot fewer fighters today, and as always budgets constrain.
The military is a minority producer of airline pilots and will stay that way for the foreseeable future. Our opponents may increase numbers but they can neither develop nor afford the kind of bleeding-edge hardware that would be required to force us dramatically increase our tacair inventory. In fact the DoD is actually now buying updated 4th gen fighters as a cheaper, faster alternative to costly 5/6 gen hardware... 4-1/2 gen hardware is plenty sufficient for many roles in a peer fight.
The reason we have a pilot shortage, fundamentally, is that the industry somehow disregarded the very simple math involving retirement age, mil pilot output, and civilian flight training output. Also maybe blind to the fact that younger generations are not quite as oriented to get away from the farm and have some adventures as the pre-internet demographic. They could very easily have solved this in advance by setting up schools, recruiting suitable and applicants, then paying them to do primary training. The problem with that is long lead-time and they missed the boat.
If push comes to shove you can give somebody 1500 hours in a crew-oriented program (you can do simulated crew ops in a 172) and put them in the right seat of a legacy narrowbody.
There is a huge retirement wave to age demographics in the US pilot force right now.
Military aircraft tend to be more capable than they used to be, and therefor more costly. Especially tacair... to do X warfighting you need Y logistic aircraft and that hasn't changed much. But you can get by with a lot fewer fighters today, and as always budgets constrain.
The military is a minority producer of airline pilots and will stay that way for the foreseeable future. Our opponents may increase numbers but they can neither develop nor afford the kind of bleeding-edge hardware that would be required to force us dramatically increase our tacair inventory. In fact the DoD is actually now buying updated 4th gen fighters as a cheaper, faster alternative to costly 5/6 gen hardware... 4-1/2 gen hardware is plenty sufficient for many roles in a peer fight.
The reason we have a pilot shortage, fundamentally, is that the industry somehow disregarded the very simple math involving retirement age, mil pilot output, and civilian flight training output. Also maybe blind to the fact that younger generations are not quite as oriented to get away from the farm and have some adventures as the pre-internet demographic. They could very easily have solved this in advance by setting up schools, recruiting suitable and applicants, then paying them to do primary training. The problem with that is long lead-time and they missed the boat.
If push comes to shove you can give somebody 1500 hours in a crew-oriented program (you can do simulated crew ops in a 172) and put them in the right seat of a legacy narrowbody.
There are a variety of things causing the overall shortfall. Just the demise of general aviation for example. CFIs need more people to teach than just other aspiring CFIs (and eventual ATPs) but with 172s going for $400k and a Cirrus going for $750k, general aviation has become an exceedingly expensive hobby.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/ericteg...of-the-market/
Most trainers are going to burn 7-8 gallons per hour and at $7 a gallon for avgas 1000 hours of time in anything is going to cost $50k in fuel alone. Add in insurance, Mx, tie down/hangar, initial instruction, BFRs, and it starts to add up to real money. And that’s for a simple trainer. Anything multi engine and it starts to get much worse.
Well, not ANYTHING maybe:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colomb...2007-05-12.jpg
but damn near anything.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
