I agree with that in principle provided one can understand that there are always exceptions to the rule.

why does every thread practically on this website somehow end up in a "my d*cks bigger than yours" argument? I agree that nothing outweighs experience but what good does the old "when I got hired I had to walk 2 miles to work uphill in snow" really do. Just makes you seem old and bitter

<shrug> The topic was out there. I felt justified responding to it. As a former Bluestreaker (even if just for six months ) I thought I might respond.

I don't work for the airlines anymore, so it makes no difference to me. Just thought from a professional perspective you might be interested to know why I (a paying customer now) will not book my family on segments flown by regional jets.

Point:
Counterpoint:

fair enough. Re-reading the post now, the "you" was more collective than it was directed at your post, sorry if it came off that way. Just thinking about the whole picture here, we have livery cab drivers that cant speak english, train drivers that text while working and greyhound drivers that are drunk - so on the "low time rj logic" you apply its a wonder if you let your family get on anything except roller blades.

So by your argument I should ignore my better judgement and put my family in what I feel is a potentially unsafe operation since other methods of transportation (most of which I will never use) are equally unsafe?

Interesting.

All things being equal -- and airfares generally are -- why would I not choose to put my family on an aircraft flown by two crewmembers who at the very LEAST have a few thousand hours and an ATP (even at the expense of a little schedule flexibility)?

Sorry if this comes off as antagonizing as it's not meant that way but your position is a little ridiculous. You're only...hmmm somewhere in the vicinity of 90% safer flying hundreds of miles on a regional aircraft piloted by a low-time crew then you are driving your family vehicle, wife and kids in tow, 1 mile to the corner store for a gallon of milk and a few scoops of ice creme. But you don't think twice about that do you? Quite frankly, considering the level and reliability of modern aircraft design, systems, and automation that kind of attitude is bordering on paranoia dude...Now if you said you don't book flights on regional segments because regional aircraft are just fracking plain uncomfortable and the service sucks....I'm with ya bro.

lol. That's a good point I suppose. Never thought about it.

I wouldn't let these low timers drive my car either. ;)

I kid I kid!

I have friends dropping bombs and flying supersonic with less than 300 hours so what is your point about low time. Be specific, because I have flown with some horrible thousand hour ATP pilots that scare me silly.

"I have friends dropping bombs and flying supersonic with less than 300 hours so what is your point about low time."

Point is, it's an apples to oranges comparasion. The military spends what, 2 mil?, to train a 300 hour guy to "drop bombs and fly supersonic". At allATP's, you spend 70K, and you take out the loan to cover it. Apples and oranges....

"I have flown with some horrible thousand hour ATP pilots that scare me silly."

"You can't fix stupid". I think you said that in another thread....

But you do not mention or discount the weakest link: the human.

Check pg 110

HaH!! You nearly got beer nose on that one....

@ Deadstick...I get the weakest link point...but I also realize the statistical likelihood of an incident severe enough to lead to a passenger fatality or injury is astronomically low. A list of things a mile long would all have to go wrong at the same time to lead to the remote chance of a pilot error significant enough to cause a crash that would not have happened with high time pilots at the controls instead. I got no issue with low time guys/gals flying me or my loved ones...my issue is when they do it for $19 an hour...now that's an accident waiting to happen...

I was wondering how long it would take for the military card to be played. de727ups got it right. If ERAU or AllATPs scrutinized their students at the same level as the US military, then they would have 5% of the students that they do now, and the cost would be much more than the $70-whatever grand. Just because you can write the check, it doesn't mean you can fly the plane. Those schools make more money off the substandard students. The substandard students fly a desk in the military. As a tax payer, I expect to get my money's worth.

FWIW, the truck driving school brochures were at the door of our tactics training room. That was motivation.

If they met you in a dark alley -- it would be a shame if they had an "accident"?

That kind of accident?

So how many crashes have their been with low time inexperienced RJ crews? Just curious?

You must work for the FAA. Wait until there is blood to correct bad policy huh?

I do agree that complacency with experience can be just as dangerous as plain ol' inexperience. But at least there is a base of knowledge there that CAN be tapped.

Who do we point the finger at? The traveling public looking to save $1 on travelocity? The majors for requiring 1000TPIC and, therefore, making regional time a necessity? The Regionals for trying to get a warm body in the seat for as little $$ as possible? The insurance companies willing to let carriers fly low time pilots or risk losing the business? Or the pilot for willing to take the low pay for a shot at a JET. I'd say the pilots deserve the least. I mean if you take an alcoholic to a bar and offer to buy a round-- that is just not nice.

Congrats, this thread has gone from simple q & a to bashing ERAU and ALL ATPS and the like...well done yet again guys

I dunno but I want some more Dr.Horrible quotes....

More pilots need to start texting while taxiing across active runways after 12 hours of duty time. Not really, but this train thing and the duty rules that came out of it really rubbed me the wrong way. Reactionary policy changes are the only way to go unless you want to take a chance that you might never see the results that justify the change. F-ing bureaucrats.

They are two large-scale, non-military flight schools that were used as examples. You are welcome to substitute any other name you wish.

No, not yet, Academy in February. No I just want to know why low time pilots are getting bashed when theyre not the cause of any major crashes? I mean if the most recent crash was that of a regional RJ with a low time FO at the controls who started flipping out and didnt know what to do when there was some sort of problem causing the plane to go down and kill all onboard then I think we could possibly discuss this but I dont think any low time FO's have been the reason behind anyone dying yet. Im not saying theyre perfect, every pilot has an occasional screw up.

It's mitigating the risk.

I wish I still had a copy of the form, and it's been a few years so I might not get this 100% right. Our unit had a risk assessment matrix that was completed before every flight. Aside from the amount of crew rest, flight conditions, and recency of experience, one of the factors was flight crew experience. All of the factors were scored 1-4 or 5. I think it was like golf: the lower score is better. If the score was too high, you had to get special approval to conduct the flight. That higher authority had to review the details and sign-off on it. It might seem like a paper chase, but it got another set of eyes on the mission. The point is that the experience level of the crew members was a contributing factor to the level of risk.

"No, not yet, Academy in February."

Which speaks volumes...

You'll get it when you make the left seat in a jet and have a 300 hour F/O next to you. I don't expect you to support the "there is no substitute for experience" theory until then.

Not to feed fuel to the fire, but I've always wondered what type of "experience" is it that a 5000TT pilot has vs. a 2000TT pilot. For all practical purposes, both pilots have seen and worked the same system. Unless, of course, EVERY 5000TT guy is guaranteed to have experienced an in-flight emergency, whereas a 2000TT guy is guaranteed to have NEVER seen an in-flight emergency.

I think people fixate a LOT on numbers. (e.g. My penis is .5" longer than yours.)

I will however, agree, that there's an ideal place for learning. I think, if anything, the so called "experience" is more of a confidence factor. Those with higher time can confidently make decisions. The truth is, however, that this confidence comes from time in the aircraft itself, IMO, and not so much TT.

Ya we had the same form at the flight school I used to teach at. A pretty neat system. THe lower the ceiling and vis, the higher your weather number, the more youve flown that day vs the amount of sleep you had the night before the higher your number. Neat system

We're not talking about the difference between 5000TT and 2000TT.

We're talking about 38 hours of multi-engine experience. 38.

In another post 9 hours of multi-engine experience. 9.

9 hours in an apache doing VMC demo's and suddenly we're way qualified to (I can't believe i'm going to use this analogy) be a heartbeat away from command of a 50,000 pound jetliner with 50+ passengers and crew aboard.

Look, bottom line is this. A first officer is not an apprentice sitting to in the right seat waiting to be blessed with any kernels of aviation knowledge the Captain chooses to impart upon them. They are a valued flight crewmember who is there to back-up the Captain and to insure that safety is not compromised. In order to do that job effectively, one has to pull knowledge and experience from their bags of tricks. That experience can come from several places. Sure, it's not ideal if that 2000TT was gained in the traffic pattern in a 172. But if that 2000TT came from a pilot who was a CFI for a bit... maybe a multi-engine instructor who was scared a time or two... maybe that person went on to become a CFII who was scared a time or two....then that person went and flew freight for a few hundred hours and was scared a time or ten.

Those experiences build confidence in ones-self. They also open the eyes of most pilots to look at the operation critically and to learn to use a pilot's most valuable word -- "No". Generally speaking the low-time SJS crowd will go along with whatever the Captain says. Whereas the former freight dog, or CFI, or charter pilot has had at least a FEW runins with the Chief Pilot where he had to say, "No. The airplane is not moving."

I spent 11 years+ in the right seat and if there is one thing that I learned from that experience it is that the right seat is NOT a passenger seat. It is not an observer's seat. It is a crewmember's seat.

Now, I agree with Deadstick. I don't blame the pilots for 9 hour or 38 hour pilots. I blame the FAA for not requiring at LEAST part 135 minimums for an SIC in part 121 -- and I blame the insurance companies for not requiring higher minimums.

If you had a corporate CRJ...Challenger or Global Express, do you think you would be able to insure a copilot with 38 hours of multi-engine time? If you were it would certainly not be cheap! Those of you who are finding offense in this line of discussion need to step back and look at this critically. It is not an attack on you. It is an attack on a system that has degraded to the point that it is now prepostrous. 250 TT and 9 ME? This person has no business in the right seat of a transport category jet -- and it's only a matter of time before that becomes the last link in the chain of errors leading to disaster.

Like I said, i'm a former Bluestreaker so this isn't personal.

What does all this have to do with PSA hiring? Which by the way are not as we have 79 on furlough.:(

Sex and Airplanes it's kinda the same thing...

When your 17 and doing Betty you think you are the bomb. 3 min later your happy she's bored.
Then you turn 30 and you look back and think WOW i didn't know crap. If i knew then what i know now....

Same thing with flight experience. You don't know what's it all about till you get some time...

Damn. Now THAT is funny!

Not much. This is just a tangent.

Any rumor on when they will be called back?

They only know our block hours from mainline through Dec 15. Unless we get a lot more flying, which is highly unlikely, staffing will stay at current levels or less. Reserves right now are sitting around and not flying. Until all reserves are flying up to guarantee or over, I wouldn't get hopes up.

My guess would be no recalls until well into next year.

Nope your guess is good as mine. I am back to school and teaching on the side. I don't have my hopes to high for now, as the markets are crap for all industries. My old man is out a job soon from a place he has been for 29 years! That just shows how bad it is right now for all industries. I am at least fortunate that I am a carrier changer and have allot of other options if need be. I can afford to wait things out for awhile. I just feel sorry for everyone else that were just getting started.

sorry for double post... whoops:)!

I'm sure the fact that they're building 90+hour lines isn't helping to get people back on property.

Double post!

Yeah *** is up with that!?!?! Does ALPA do anything for us???

lol at W T F being censored!!! hahahaha

They've always built 90 hr lines. You also have to realize that the company is going to do anything they can to reduce costs. It sucks, but it is a reality. PSA management has always been this way and will never change.

As far as ALPA goes, what can they do?

Do any of you guys know anything about Flight Express? Thinking about going to fly for them while I wait this one out.