rickair7777

Battery powered light ASEL trainers are available. Expensive up front I'm sure, but the fuel and mx costs will be much lower so there's an ROI if you plan on putting a lot of hours on them, which would be the whole point.

Regionals already hire at 25 ME hours. In fairness the old standard of 300-500 ME hours isn't really about OEI handling, it's more about experience with complexity and speed. For OEI experience, better to just do it in the sim. Out of my hundreds of ME hours prior to 121 I never had an engine out, and twins flew just like an ASEL.

Current requirements for complex/TAA time for the CPL are also pretty minimal.

Cost could be offset by offering three paths for post-CPL time building. Everything up to CPL would be sponsored...
1) Paid to burn holes in the sky for 1500. Incurs the longest payback obligation, no CFI ratings required. Easy.
2) Paid to teach, medium-duration obligation, CFI ratings provided by the sponsor.
3) DIY. Get your sponsored CPL, them go build time on your own any way you like. Shortest obligation, and you're allowed say two years before you need to be at R-ATP mins and start work.

Considering they pay major FO's $200K+ year in and year out, spending $100k to create a new pilot who is obligated for say five years is not a real economic stretch. The problem is that they're in denial and always assumed the problem would fix itself, or somebody would fix it for them.

Also the rapid, mass retirements reduce the average longevity on narrowbody fleets, so there's some silver lining there. That doesn't apply much to WB's since almost all CA's and most FO's are probably maxed out at 12 years.

hydrostream

Nevermind.

FAR121

With reducing the 1000 hr upgrade think of the quality of captain you would get. Heck the way some FOs perform make you feel like you are flying single pilot ops with 76 random strangers in the back.

highfarfast

Definitely think the 1000 hr rule should stay.


Further wish people would quick referencing the "1500 hour rule". It's 1500 hours for an ATP. Has been as far back as I can remember. What they did was make ATP a requirement for FO and actually added a relaxation on the 1500 hours via certain avenues. If you don't think FOs should need ATPs, say so (not pointing fingers at you per se, just this thread in general).

AirBear

I flew the CRJ at Mesa before the ATP was required for F/O's. They had a flight academy that fed pilots into Mesa. I loved to do checkrides in the sim with those folks because they knew procedures inside out. But when it came to flying a visual pattern they were clueless. No sense of energy management at all. I frequently had to say "you really think we can get down from this altitude?" As an F/O (furloughed from USAirways mainline) I even had to correct a new Captain who upgraded from the Beech 1900 left seat. On a night visual he turned base way too soon and I had to remind him he didn't have those big props out there adding drag.

As a Captain I was worried about knowing when to take control from the F/O. I had never been an instructor. All my friends said "don't worry, you'll know". They were right. I was flying with a 500 hour F/O who had just finished IOE and almost all her landings were in the CRJ700 or 900, she just got the min required in the 200. We got slam dunked into 18R in CLT. She did mostly OK until she flared 50 feet too high. I saw the airspeed rapidly going below ref. Just like my friends said it was totally automatic, no thought process involved. If I had become incapacitated I don't think she could have landed the jet in one piece. Not her fault, they should have required more landings in the 200 since it's a very different picture from the 700/900 due to no leading edge slats.

They really need to keep the ATP requirement. As someone already posted it's just going to decimate the CFI ranks if they lower it.

SonicFlyer

Alternate take:

1500 hour rule makes us less safe.

Why?

Because now the regionals are so desperate to put someone in the right seat, they will hire nearly anyone who meets the hour time requirement ignoring other potential factors. Quality of FO's decrease as a result.

FlyGuy99

To add to that, I don’t think even reducing the 1500 hour rule nor the 1000 hour rule to upgrade is a good idea. A 1000 turbine hour CA and a 1500 hour ATP mins FO can make for a really unsafe situation. Many accidents in the past have turned out from low time crews being paired together.

Unfortunately, we may not be able to avoid this with today’s hiring environment and movement in the airlines

CX500T

I was out of engineering for over a decade when I got let go by the Navy in 2011.

Had a six figure engineering job before I was off terminal leave.

And no, it had nothing to do with the military nor did it require a security clearance.

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

rickair7777

Yes, engineering grads (most other stem too) are usually in demand one way or another... if not personally designing the core flowpath for next generation of ultra-high efficiency turbines, as coordinators, liaisons, administrators, even sales. Get a related masters or MBA on the side while working and your career will open up nicely.

Being security clearance eligible is a very nice enhancement, there are many projects which DoD won't let mfgs outsource to New Dehli. Of course having an active clearance is the best icing on the cake, but even eligibility is enough. If you're SIDA eligible you're probably good for a TS.

QRH Bingo

I don't have any 121 time but wondering about this thought of reducing the SIC time needed to upgrade. Quality of time does matter, yeah? That is why they offer an exception for 135 PIC but they add in that it must be passenger ops, while excluding others like cargo. Why is that? Does my E120 PIC time somehow count less because I don't have any panicky passengers in the back leaving nail marks on the armrests?
Instead of reducing the 1,000 hrs 121 SIC required, how about just making ALL 135 PIC time count toward that? (Not that anything I say on here is going to change the rules, just asking. lol)