Ask the Pilot-Colgan 3407
 

This is a link to the latest column from Patrick Smith. In this column he writes about the Colgan crash in Buffalo.

Ask the pilot: Did an inexplicable mistake cause the crash near Buffalo? | Salon Technology

Hmm..an article about flying that I don't hate...

Interesting....

He states many already known points,..but they're all good ones. Unfortunately nothing will change :-\

great article, more of that needs to be published in National newspapers

Nice job to the writer(pilot) of the articles.

Nice to see someone in the media without their head up their .....

Once again: All commercial jets operate with a minimum of two pilots, a captain and a first officer. The latter is known colloquially as the copilot, but he or she is not an apprentice or a helping hand. First officers perform just as many takeoffs and landings as captains do, and are fully qualified to operate the plane in all regimes of flight.

The best paragraph in the articles.

Great Article! I Did the airline thing for 4 years. I am now lucky enough to fly on the the corporate side where I am treated like a valuable commodity. This treatment makes me want to go the extra mile everytime I go to work. It also reminds me of what a valuable commodity an experienced pilot really is. The billionaire I fly for says, "I only personally hire my pilots and my doctors". Isnt this how it should be? We arent just some dime a dozen sandwich artists. Just think! Everybody got into flying so they could fly airplanes like they used to dream about. This is all well and good, but there is so much more once you get to this level. There comes a point when you get tired of being treated like a circus chimp and have to move to greener pastures. Airline execs are geniuses! It can be debated all day on how and why but, they have taken a highly skilled proffesion and created a barren environment with more dogs than there are scraps. just read the bashing on this board and picture wolves fighting over a rabbit.

I still relish the day I was junior manned on my in-range call on the last leg of my last day at my old airline. The nerve right? Needless to say, I did not go the extra mile.

I read the entire series. Thanks for posting the link. He sums up the feelings here on APC rather wel on a multitude of issues. Some of the articles ought to be required reading in the flight schols and ready rooms around the country.

USMCFLYR

Nicely written, Ovrtake!

"Pilots, especially at the regional level, are constantly reminded to uphold the tenets of "professionalism" -- a word thrown around with rather intense and gratuitous frequency. This would be easier to take if they were actually treated as professionals in the first place.

Even the most worker-unfriendly, cost-cutting regional is a long way from unsafe, but there is a long-term problem here -- one that will, I feel, require a culture shift: vast changes in the way these companies train, and treat, their pilots."

Very good summary.

Ok, that was a good article. But I just have to ask, besides being a CFI and teaching students to fly, then getting enough hours. The next step is Regional airlines. That's the way it's been going right? The aircraft have been getting alot better from let's say the 70's or 80's but we all start somewhere so I don't really understand why someone has to talk about how us as pilots aren't qualified enough, we all start somewhere. I just wish we didn't have to keep talking about the accident. Yeah he might of messed up which took the lives of everybody on the plane and one on the ground but WE weren't there so just give it a rest and just wait until we find out exactly what happened. Let's try not to make it harder for his family. All the families. Sorry I just didn't get where this was going.

Not making a value judgment, but it seems to me that the norm through much of the 90's was close to 500 hours to get a good full-time flight instructor job, and 1500-2000 hours+ to get in with a regional (some exceptions exist such as GLA). In many cases it took several thousand hours to get a "good" regional job (decent pay & no Pay For Training). There was never an expectation to fly a jet aircraft right out of school. Many of those hired by the regional airlines already had some PIC experience in a 135 environment, in all weather flying.

I actually really liked his article. I thought it was well written, to the point, and easy for someone not in the airline industry to comprehend.

Good job on the part of Mr. Smith!

Great article!! Very good read.

Yes, We all start somewhere. I have flown with some very very low time new hires at PSA and overall they were very good pilots.

The problem is that these guys want to upgrade ASAP in order to get a livable wage.

When I had 3000 hrs I was right where Captain Renslow was; Flying an ice laden aircraft into Buffalo at night. Only I was doing it in a 310R loaded with bank checks.

I cringe when I see advertisements for flight schools asking; Why fly a trainer when you can learn in a CRJ?

The left seat of a Q400 or CRJ is a pretty lofty perch for a pilot with 3000 hrs.

And not a place to learn to fly. No experience leads to bad decisions at crucial times.

Bingo! Could not have said it better myself!

True.

When I was hired by my regional carrier in the mid 1980's, their minimums were 2000 hours total and 500 multiengine. There were plenty of applicants and many of those were not hired and a certain percentage didn't pass training.

The left seat of an RJ is no different then the left seat of a 767 responsibility wise. Friends who fly International say that their former regional and RJ flying was more work, more tiring and effort intensive, then riding over to Glasgow 4 times a month with an autopilot, an international officer (typed F/O) also known as "movie critic" to share the duties. Many F/O's have to go to the sim every few months to get landing qualified.

It's a pretty easy gig compared to slogging around domestically for 90 hours a month, shooting a lot of approaches, windy landings and dodging TRW's. Most of those pilots deserve the higher paying gig and are thankful they don't have to bang around in RJ's 90 hours/month.

It's intersting that aircraft size has so many fooled (even a a lot of pilots !). Many would be shocked if they heard of U.S. domestic 757 captains with 3000 total hours and F/O's with 500, but for some reason with RJ's, it's not so surprising. Many are just as suprised to hear of pilots with 10-15,000 hours flying RJ's (I have 16,000) as they now many assume they're all inexperienced kids.

Crazy.

My first captain position was the CRJ 900. I had 1589 TT(495 of that 121 FO time) when I finished OE. My first trip off OE was with a new hire FO that had 300 TT and it was his first trip off IOE as well. I had just turned 24 and my FO was 20 years of age.

Wow. Just wow.

The trip was uneventful, however, it just points out where our industry was/is at different points in time. I.E. If I were flying this plane at mainline, I wouldn't be the captain of it, not until many years down the road.

Oh, and on an ironic note; when I got of HMC status, since I was bottom reserve, they were pulling other HMC off of trips and putting me on them. One in particular flight had a captain with 15,000 TT but was still high mins; The conditions dispatch wanted to send us in were not legal to dispatch a HMC.......

Yeah, but in the 60's MAJORS were hiring people with nothing more than a private pilot license.... "Experience" Seems to be based upon hiring demands. Some of the scariest pilots that I have ever flown with in my 10 years of flying were at the top of our seniority list, with buckets of time. Although I feel that experience is important, I believe that good decision making, quality leadership, and a centralized focus upon SAFETY is far better. I would personally rather fly with a 250 hour pilot who exhibits these traits and strives to meet them, than ANY of the 10k hour pilots that dont. Just my 2 cents.

Well put, the problem with this industry is too much emphasis is placed on TT. It is just a number. A person with basic decision making skills, a safety first period attitude ( or lack there of ) is built into their personality. You can not fix a lack of decision making or leadership skills with 10000 hrs of experience. Mabye we (as an industry) should spend some time testing candidates on Physch, and decision making, and leadership skills rather than how much TT do you have. Many jobs require this kind of testing, mabye its a direction we should be looking....JMO

I believe that some airlines attempted this, if memory serves it was called cognative interviewing. The problem lies in that it opens the airlines up to litigation because of claims of discrimination. I would much rather see it go to this method personally.

I'm pretty sure that was common practice years ago, back when the In-Flight department had some hiring standards as well. None of that can last long in this Jess Jackson/Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity/Litigious society.

I didn't see what the big deal was about the Mesa dormroom flyer?

They company didn't want any beer, sex, or damage to their property.

Reference my other post, post #36 in "It might be time to come to terms...", I think we agree...

"There were several exceptional low time pilots who I would gladly fly with. My point experience is good, but it isn't everything."

WJI

And customer service skills...

We're adults, aren't we? I for one don't appreciate being treated as a child. After all, they are trusting those guys with multi-million dollar equipment...and then found it necessary to post a flyer like that? Silly...

Thanks for the link. Interesting read.

Holly sh*t, that's insane......................No wonder aviation will no longer be the safest form of travel.
Don't take it personally.........
You could be the best "stick" within a 500 mile radius, but with 1600 hours that is plain scarey. I will take experience over skill any day. Pilots skills are set early on. That said.....if you suck at 300 hrs you will most likely suck at 10,300 hours. At least the higher time guy will have enough experience to know his/her limitations.
I think it is safe to say we all have flown with lousy regional pilots and lousy Mainline guys. The only difference is the chances of two Lousy Mainline guys paired together is very slim. More hoops to jump through.The chances of two lousy Regional guys paired together is alot higher.
Yes, I have flown at the regional level. The minimum qualifications at that time were much higher. Heck I couldn't get an interview at 1589 TT. I guess things have changed............for the better?? I doubt it. I agree with many that the regional's are a place to gain experience. They are not a place to "learn to fly".
In response to the 60's the majors hired many with low time. It showed look at the past accident rates in the 70's-80's. The saving grace at the major's is most likely you will sit 5+ years in the right seat prior to upgrading.
We don't always have that luxury at the regional level.

My statements should fire up a few of you........Sorry!

I would have taken the left-seat at 1500 hours without hesitating at Trans States. The system was small enough that I was very comfortable in just a few months. Fast forward a couple of years to SkyWest and I still find myself learning too many new things every day (everything from non-radar in the mountains to SFO, LAX, ORD, and DEN in a single trip) to say I'd be completely comfortable (capable, howver, I am sure) to do the same.

I would just change the word "want" to "have". You MUST upgrade to pay the bills.

Well said!

Don't you have to have 75 hours to be paired with someone that doesn't. Or does the right seat time you had count?

Either way, scary :eek:

each airline is different, but at RAH we can't fly "green on green" unless the FAA approves it (like when you add a new aircraft type to the fleet).

We had a green on green waiver that has now expired.

Mesabah,

I am curious. Much has been said on this forum about experience levels. How did you feel as a min time Captain with a new hire low time FO. Do you feel any differently now than you did then?

Speaking for myself (xx,xxx hours) I am still learning.

BTW, sorry for the thread drift...

I know this is going to sound strange, but since I'm so junior, I generally fly only the pop up trips with the most junior FO's. Usually this is the first trips these guys have off IOE. I rarely fly with a senior FO, so I find myself giving dual instruction some of the time. It's not an insult to the guys I fly with, it just they are so new to the job. I have learned so much by doing this.

This is the exact problem with hiring with too low experience. A regional pilot should never need "dual instruction". Dual is given in a Cessna C-172, not a CRJ,EMB,Saab,Dash etc. When you arrive at a regional you may be green, but you should NEVER need dual. Explain that to your paying passengers in the back. I 'm sure they would rather take the train.

They need it in airline operations, which is understandable, only a very few need actual flying help. However, it is hard to tell because the CRJ hides a pilots lack of instrument skills pretty well. In fact, I doubt a pilot would need an instrument rating to fly this thing.

Except when something goes wrong