Lobbying to roll back 1500 hr rule:
#1
#2
Line Holder
Joined APC: Apr 2022
Posts: 39
#3
Yeah. Right now the biggest constraint is getting the SIC hours needed to upgrade in the regionals. Not enough CAs sticking around long enough to furnish the FOs with the SIC they need to upgrade.
Anyone remember where the 1000 hr requirement came from? Most study derived numbers don’t end in three zeroes. That’s more the number you get when you pull it from some administrator or politicians orifice.
Anyone remember where the 1000 hr requirement came from? Most study derived numbers don’t end in three zeroes. That’s more the number you get when you pull it from some administrator or politicians orifice.
#4
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2016
Posts: 1,948
Yeah. Right now the biggest constraint is getting the SIC hours needed to upgrade in the regionals. Not enough CAs sticking around long enough to furnish the FOs with the SIC they need to upgrade.
Anyone remember where the 1000 hr requirement came from? Most study derived numbers don’t end in three zeroes. That’s more the number you get when you pull it from some administrator or politicians orifice.
Anyone remember where the 1000 hr requirement came from? Most study derived numbers don’t end in three zeroes. That’s more the number you get when you pull it from some administrator or politicians orifice.
the 1498.666666 hour rule just doesn’t roll off the tongue quite as well.
#5
Yeah. Right now the biggest constraint is getting the SIC hours needed to upgrade in the regionals. Not enough CAs sticking around long enough to furnish the FOs with the SIC they need to upgrade.
Anyone remember where the 1000 hr requirement came from? Most study derived numbers don’t end in three zeroes. That’s more the number you get when you pull it from some administrator or politicians orifice.
Anyone remember where the 1000 hr requirement came from? Most study derived numbers don’t end in three zeroes. That’s more the number you get when you pull it from some administrator or politicians orifice.
Not taking a stand one way or the other. Just asking the question?
#7
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: guppy CA
Posts: 5,160
The 1500 hour rule for ATPs isn't really 1500 hrs. It's 1500/1250/1000/750 hrs, depending on how you accumulated your hours.
Plus, you can get the restricted ATP at age 21.
Are they trying to roll FO minimums back to Commercial license?
Plus, you can get the restricted ATP at age 21.
Are they trying to roll FO minimums back to Commercial license?
#9
The guys (and gals) who left you are not going to get back. They are either drinking Margueritas on a beach somewhere or have already found a job flying a Pilatus or Bizjet for someone. At 65, a lot of their pilot brethren will join them - far more than would keep flying until 67. And your chances of changing the federal law in the five months run up to an election are pretty near nil anyway.
#10
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2017
Position: Retired NJA & AA
Posts: 1,918
When many EAS routes stop getting serviced there's going to be a lot of unhappy politicians. For those familiar with flight training, wouldn't cutting the 1500 hours to a lower number decimate the CFI ranks? Just robbing Peter to pay Paul? Age 65 wouldn't do much as already posted above, but the 1000 hour rule would be the most effective I'd guess. I'd also guess the FAA will push back hard on that thou.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post