ALPA says there is no pilot shortage
08-15-2022 | 10:23 AM
#51
Line Holder
Joined: Oct 2019
Posts: 1,323
Likes: 1
Did somebody actually just say "show me some peer reviewed studies"? lolol, reminds me of some of the cringe worthy Reddit arguments I've seen in the past. Are there even any "peer reviewed studies" in aviation at all, on any subject? I mean, if so please direct me to that scientific journal, I'd like to subscribe. lol
Look, it's not that difficult. The simple time tested adage applies here: If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Fact is that there is no denying that safety in the Part 121 passenger world has increased dramatically since the passing of the requirement. Whether if it was directly related to that or not, who cares? If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Look, it's not that difficult. The simple time tested adage applies here: If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Fact is that there is no denying that safety in the Part 121 passenger world has increased dramatically since the passing of the requirement. Whether if it was directly related to that or not, who cares? If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
08-17-2022 | 10:04 AM
#53
Thread Starter
Banned
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 4,208
Likes: 7
08-18-2022 | 04:00 AM
#54
Porco Rosso
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 2,522
Likes: 0
08-18-2022 | 05:48 AM
#55
Gets Everyday Off
Joined: Aug 2016
Posts: 6,995
Likes: 1
From: Fully Retired
08-23-2022 | 03:36 AM
#56
On Reserve
Joined: Sep 2021
Posts: 55
Likes: 1
Many of the regionals have huge training delays for new FO’s. Wait months for a class date, then wait for simulators, then wait for IOE. I don’t buy the argument when their waiting lists for training are filled with qualified pilots.
I think it’s more about being able to hang on to pilots longer before they become competitive for the majors.
I think it’s more about being able to hang on to pilots longer before they become competitive for the majors.
08-23-2022 | 04:44 AM
#57
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 2,286
Likes: 18
SonicManagement is right, we should eliminate all burdensome regulations in the aviation sector. Let’s start with the one that dictates single engine climb performance for 121 aircraft. And let’s turn up those 5G cell towers to full blast too. Just think how much money Boeing and Airbus could save if they didn’t have to deal with all that. I’m sure Capitalism will keep me safe.
08-23-2022 | 05:16 AM
#58
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2017
Posts: 660
Likes: 0
Regardless of whether or not someone believes the 1500 hour rule is correlated to safety or not. One thing I believe is the 1500 hour rule has improved is pilot pay, especially at the regionals. People want to come onboard with the ink still wet on their commercial cert and make $50+ an hour to fly a jet. Do away with that and you could bet on it regionals are going to try and start racing to the basement on pay rates. Gotta pay to attract pilots right now, flood the market with inexperienced pilots and we’ll be on the road back to $19/hr first year.
08-23-2022 | 12:56 PM
#59
Thread Starter
Banned
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 4,208
Likes: 7
we should eliminate all burdensome regulations in the aviation sector. Let’s start with the one that dictates single engine climb performance for 121 aircraft. And let’s turn up those 5G cell towers to full blast too. Just think how much money Boeing and Airbus could save if they didn’t have to deal with all that. I’m sure Capitalism will keep me safe.
08-23-2022 | 04:29 PM
#60
Line Holder
Joined: Oct 2017
Posts: 969
Likes: 17
This has been explained multiple times, the 1500 hour rule had nothing to do with safety, it had to do with Obama giving a political favor to the unions. The Part 117 rest rules and training emphasis on stall prevention and recovery that came out of Colgan were absolutely 100% safety related and a good thing. But the 1500 hour rule had nothing to do with safety. Anyone who can think their way out of a wet paper sack can understand this.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
