Notices
Regional Regional Airlines

Commuter Hell

Old 02-26-2009, 10:40 AM
  #11  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Pilotpip's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jun 2005
Position: Retired
Posts: 2,934
Default

Originally Posted by thepaxman View Post
i'm not sure what the article's point was but up until the last couple of paragraphs i think it's a pretty fair assessment that the general flying public have of flying on a regional - rightly or wrongly.

i fly on rj's because i have to. i'd prefer not too but that's me. the rj's are smaller. they are a little noisier (except for when you sit at the back of an md-80 ). and to be honest i too have noticed, that on a couple of occasions, the co-pilots have been young. this is not a knock on them but just what i have noticed. most don't realize the training that these guys go through and just see the 22 yr old guy programming the autopilot when boarding the plane. hence the public perception.
1) Embraer has never had one of their jets written off. They currently have the safest record in commercial aviation.

2) Where are the "22 year olds programming the autopilot" going to get experience? At what point is it safe? Would you feel safer with a 40 year old who's only been flying for a year? or a 22 year old that has been flying for 5? Would you pay the high costs associated with flying a larger aircraft piloted by a mainline pilot into a larger airport? Where would this major airline pilot come from? Would you rather have one flight a day to your destination aboard a 737 or three aboard a 50 seater?

3) I'm sure if people had died in the Continental runoff at DEN or in the Hudson this would still come up, yet out of the last three commercial aviation accidents, 2 have involved major airlines with those "bigger, safer aircraft"

4) How many people have died on planes and trains in the three years where there were no fatalities aboard 121 aircraft?

5) Are you aware that United and others hired very low time pilots during the 60s and 70s as well?

Perception often does not follow reality.
Pilotpip is offline  
Old 02-26-2009, 10:42 AM
  #12  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Aug 2008
Position: waiting for furlough notice
Posts: 50
Default

Never mind that a person has a better chance of being elected president of the USA than dieing in an airplane crash.
LavChange is offline  
Old 02-26-2009, 10:52 AM
  #13  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Position: Satan's Camaro
Posts: 397
Default

Originally Posted by Pilotpip View Post
1) Embraer has never had one of their jets written off. They currently have the safest record in commercial aviation.

2) Where are the "22 year olds programming the autopilot" going to get experience? At what point is it safe? Would you feel safer with a 40 year old who's only been flying for a year? or a 22 year old that has been flying for 5? Would you pay the high costs associated with flying a larger aircraft piloted by a mainline pilot into a larger airport? Where would this major airline pilot come from? Would you rather have one flight a day to your destination aboard a 737 or three aboard a 50 seater?

3) I'm sure if people had died in the Continental runoff at DEN or in the Hudson this would still come up, yet out of the last three commercial aviation accidents, 2 have involved major airlines with those "bigger, safer aircraft"

4) How many people have died on planes and trains in the three years where there were no fatalities aboard 121 aircraft?

5) Are you aware that United and others hired very low time pilots during the 60s and 70s as well?

Perception often does not follow reality.
Careful bashing thepaxman. Even ignoring his other posts (which show a level of understanding and appreciation far above that of the rest of the populous), his post was to explain the passengers' points of view. He said it himself "most don't realize the level of training these guys go through".

Justified or not, that IS the public perception.
boilerpilot is offline  
Old 02-26-2009, 10:55 AM
  #14  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Pilotpip's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jun 2005
Position: Retired
Posts: 2,934
Default

Not bashing at all. Just responding to his comments. I have read the other posts, and I agree wholeheartedly with them as well as what you're saying.

I look a lot younger than I am. I usually bear the brunt of those "are you old enough to fly this?" questions. It gets a little old.

I've always wondered if people readily question their doctor if they are my age.
Pilotpip is offline  
Old 02-26-2009, 11:05 AM
  #15  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: A-320
Posts: 6,929
Default

What do you guys expect? Comair takes off on the wrong runway, this potentially has Pilot error written all over it.............Sully lands safely in the Hudson, you want them to praise us?

I think the pay, the lifestyle, the type of flying DRAINS us psychically and emotionally, but the public doesn't give a rats A$$.

Maybe we wouldn't be so tired if we didn't have to worry about paying our bills on 30 bucks an hour, or worrying about flying being shifted from carrier to carrier, or not being home more than 7 days a month........

Bush simply did'nt allow AIRLINE PILOTS to strike, this administration may be different but enough is enough. I wonder if the media ever thought for a minute this type of lifestyle leads to TIRED, UNFOCUSED PILOTS.
JoeyMeatballs is offline  
Old 02-26-2009, 11:13 AM
  #16  
Gets Weekends Off
 
theaviator's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: E145 FO
Posts: 377
Default

Originally Posted by Purpleanga View Post
Yep, the lady at the end, who wouldn't fly the prop because of children in the cockpit, was the icing on the cake.
If the pay is equivalent to what a 15 year old makes, then what do they expect?
theaviator is offline  
Old 02-26-2009, 11:14 AM
  #17  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Posts: 112
Default

"By contrast, commuter airlines pay new co-pilots as little as $25,000 a year."

As little as $25,000 a year huh? I am sure that those making $14,500 would love at $10,500 a raise. Maybe this guy can help make it a reality.
Tiger2Flying is offline  
Old 02-26-2009, 11:16 AM
  #18  
Gets Weekends Off
 
bryris's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2008
Position: Hotel
Posts: 714
Default

The public wants cheap fares. They get what they pay for.

We all go out there and do the job to the best of our ability, but the professional totem pole and associated pay dictate that the regionals act as a stepping stone (at least they used to be).

Prices go down, airplanes get smaller, and more plentiful requiring more pilots to staff them. The supply of ultra experienced pilots wasn't there and hence in come the 400 hour pilots. Furthermore, experience aside, most pilots with 10,000 plus hours are older and have more overhead than a single 22 year old who lives at a crashpad for 150/month. Thus the wages paid just will not work. Again, the airplanes need to be staffed.

This industry needs a huge cash infusion if there is any chance. Ticket prices must go up. And the family wearing wife beaters and fuzzy slippers onto the plane may not be able to go anymore.
bryris is offline  
Old 02-26-2009, 11:18 AM
  #19  
Gets Weekends Off
 
USMCFLYR's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: FAA 'Flight Check'
Posts: 13,835
Default

I thought the beginning of the article was actually fairly good. I thought the reporter was trying to get the reader to understand that the perception of the people he was quoting was wrong - like when he clarified the size and age of the Q400.

The lady at the end who said:
"It's the combination of things that worry me," a business traveler based in Santa Barbara, California, told me last week. "I see children going into the cockpit of small planes run by airlines I've never heard of and I say to myself, 'Do I really want to be on this flight?'"

Her answer, at least for the moment, is no. She's stopped booking the regional jets operated by Skywest Airlines under the United Express banner for the 262-mile flight to San Francisco. Now she pilots her 2007 Honda SUV up the freeway to meet with her Bay Area clients.
Well....congrats. She just put herself in a whole lot more danger drinving on the CA highway system than she would have ever faced in the air.

I guess I am actually in the minority when it comes to CRJs/ERJs. I like them. I think they look like sleek airplanes. I love the fancy looking cockpits. I don't mind seeing fairly young pilots sitting in the cockpit because I know the training that they have been through and I know that it is a crew up front looking out for each other. I've also been flying long enough to know what can happen and I am aware, I listen to the safety briefing and refresh my memory on the materials (twice recently I've have had the F/As replace the safety info card because there was gum stuck between the pages. When were they last looked at I wonder?). I would like to FLY them and the shorter routes with more aprroaches, takeoffs and landings; but the business side just kills the buzz to tell the truth. It is a disappointment.

USMCFLYR
USMCFLYR is offline  
Old 02-26-2009, 11:38 AM
  #20  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Feb 2009
Posts: 30
Default

Originally Posted by Pilotpip View Post
1) Embraer has never had one of their jets written off. They currently have the safest record in commercial aviation.

2) Where are the "22 year olds programming the autopilot" going to get experience? At what point is it safe? Would you feel safer with a 40 year old who's only been flying for a year? or a 22 year old that has been flying for 5? Would you pay the high costs associated with flying a larger aircraft piloted by a mainline pilot into a larger airport? Where would this major airline pilot come from? Would you rather have one flight a day to your destination aboard a 737 or three aboard a 50 seater?

3) I'm sure if people had died in the Continental runoff at DEN or in the Hudson this would still come up, yet out of the last three commercial aviation accidents, 2 have involved major airlines with those "bigger, safer aircraft"

4) How many people have died on planes and trains in the three years where there were no fatalities aboard 121 aircraft?

5) Are you aware that United and others hired very low time pilots during the 60s and 70s as well?

Perception often does not follow reality.
i agree with you. perception does not follow reality. that was what i was trying to get across.

BTW, if i really felt unsafe with the 22 yr old co pilot i wouldn't have got on the plane. but i think he did land the plane with those damned "square tires" though
thepaxman is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
creativewebz
Major
7
01-01-2016 03:02 AM
LOW FUEL
Major
1
01-13-2009 02:17 PM
CTPILOT
Part 135
9
12-21-2008 12:59 PM
vagabond
Hangar Talk
3
12-03-2008 11:43 AM
bryris
Regional
44
08-19-2008 03:01 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices