Hudson Crash FO's Letter to USA Today
05-20-2009, 05:32 PM
#61
Day puke
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: Out.
Posts: 3,865
Originally Posted by JetJock16
Quote: "When I was hired at my airline 23 years ago, I had nearly the flying time of both the captain and the first officer of the Buffalo flight combined. That was the norm then. Because of dramatic reductions in compensation over the past 10 years, airline careers are no longer attractive to the best and the brightest."
I agree with almost everything he said but the above statement isn’t comparing apples to apples. 99.9% of the pilot’s hired both during his time 23 years ago and even today (or 2 years ago) at mainline have more flying time than both Colgan pilots when hired. Remember that he’s comparing the hiring practices of US Air to regional airlines. Look at the hiring practices of regional 23 years ago and you’ll see flight times comparable to the FO’s.
I completely agree that an ATP should be a min requirement to obtain an airline pilot job.
I’m also sick of being calling "not the best and brightest" or “untalented” or “not the cream of the crop.” I have 2 degrees, graduated college magna cum laude while playing division I college tennis, I have a very successful business history, this is a second career for me, I started flying long before I turned 10 and I grew up in aviation with both my father and uncle being former MIL and Mainline pilots plus I have NEVER failed a check ride or stage check. I think I and many other “regional” pilots deserve more.
I agree with almost everything he said but the above statement isn’t comparing apples to apples. 99.9% of the pilot’s hired both during his time 23 years ago and even today (or 2 years ago) at mainline have more flying time than both Colgan pilots when hired. Remember that he’s comparing the hiring practices of US Air to regional airlines. Look at the hiring practices of regional 23 years ago and you’ll see flight times comparable to the FO’s.
I completely agree that an ATP should be a min requirement to obtain an airline pilot job.
I’m also sick of being calling "not the best and brightest" or “untalented” or “not the cream of the crop.” I have 2 degrees, graduated college magna cum laude while playing division I college tennis, I have a very successful business history, this is a second career for me, I started flying long before I turned 10 and I grew up in aviation with both my father and uncle being former MIL and Mainline pilots plus I have NEVER failed a check ride or stage check. I think I and many other “regional” pilots deserve more.
05-20-2009, 05:45 PM
#62
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2008
Posts: 314
Originally Posted by andy171773
Let me know when you can rent a CRJ to go up with a DPE. Hence why the industry currently allows airlines to hire commercial pilots into the right seat, and the company gives you your ATP when you upgrade in the airplane you're flying.
I think too many people are reading too deep into this. This crash was the result of DOZENS of different inputs, the worst being (for whatever reason, we'll never know), the Captains improper response to a shaker.
We need to stop trying to re-invent the wheel here. Just like in contract negotiations, we need to take one of the most important issues and run with it. If QOL changed in the regionals, I for one would be ecstatic.
Pay, schedules, duty limitations, commuter clauses, sick leave...all these things need to change..and they all fall in the QOL category.
Fix that, and we have a VERY different regional airline industry.
I think too many people are reading too deep into this. This crash was the result of DOZENS of different inputs, the worst being (for whatever reason, we'll never know), the Captains improper response to a shaker.
We need to stop trying to re-invent the wheel here. Just like in contract negotiations, we need to take one of the most important issues and run with it. If QOL changed in the regionals, I for one would be ecstatic.
Pay, schedules, duty limitations, commuter clauses, sick leave...all these things need to change..and they all fall in the QOL category.
Fix that, and we have a VERY different regional airline industry.
05-20-2009, 05:58 PM
#63
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,530
Originally Posted by OldSF3Dude
In my experience a airline doesn't really care how cost is divided up between a crew once the total crew cost for all seats is agreed on. In other words, a cost of $100 per hour could be agreed on to pay a captain and a first officer. The union then decides that the captain will get $80 and the F.O. $20, or whatever. So, in a sense, the unions are to blame for the low starting pay as well. New hires, or those yet to be hired, don't get to vote on contracts, afterall.
But, that said, an across the board requirement for all new hires to have a 1500 hour ATP would definately force companies (and unions) to increase first officer wages once hiring kicks into gear again. It's simple supply and demand. During the hiring spurt a year or so ago I'd say that only about 10% of the new hires had ATPs. That means that the 1500 hour ATP requirement would take 90% of potential applicants out of contention for a year or two, and then I doubt half of those would ever make it to getting an ATP. Companies would have to pay more to compete for a smaller eligible group of pilots. Since every airline would have to do it they could all absorb it equally/raise fares roughly the same.
Am I wrong in this?
Plus, safety is a matter of degrees. I don't think anybody can argue that in general it's not better to have a 1500+ hour new hire pilot whos been around the block than a 250 hour pilot. I think any captain who has flown with 250 hour pilots can tell you that. I'm not saying they are un-safe. Just less safe and in need of more grooming. After a couple years on the job there really isn't much difference, but you still have that year or two interim.
But, that said, an across the board requirement for all new hires to have a 1500 hour ATP would definately force companies (and unions) to increase first officer wages once hiring kicks into gear again. It's simple supply and demand. During the hiring spurt a year or so ago I'd say that only about 10% of the new hires had ATPs. That means that the 1500 hour ATP requirement would take 90% of potential applicants out of contention for a year or two, and then I doubt half of those would ever make it to getting an ATP. Companies would have to pay more to compete for a smaller eligible group of pilots. Since every airline would have to do it they could all absorb it equally/raise fares roughly the same.
Am I wrong in this?
Plus, safety is a matter of degrees. I don't think anybody can argue that in general it's not better to have a 1500+ hour new hire pilot whos been around the block than a 250 hour pilot. I think any captain who has flown with 250 hour pilots can tell you that. I'm not saying they are un-safe. Just less safe and in need of more grooming. After a couple years on the job there really isn't much difference, but you still have that year or two interim.
05-20-2009, 06:00 PM
#64
Line Holder
Joined APC: Nov 2008
Posts: 74
if i may add my 2 cents....
in the usa commercial / cfi and sic at 250 hours.
in argentina (where i started flight training)
commercial at 240, cfi at 500 and commercial
first class at 900. the commercial first is required
to work as co-pilot in the air transport service.
besides the 900 hours it also requires 25
hours of multi time and passing the atp written.
the atp is a check ride at 1500 hours.
i like the sliding scale aspect.
they get their commercial and then do sound
or banner towing, skydivers etc until they get
500 hours and do the cfi course.....
in the usa commercial / cfi and sic at 250 hours.
in argentina (where i started flight training)
commercial at 240, cfi at 500 and commercial
first class at 900. the commercial first is required
to work as co-pilot in the air transport service.
besides the 900 hours it also requires 25
hours of multi time and passing the atp written.
the atp is a check ride at 1500 hours.
i like the sliding scale aspect.
they get their commercial and then do sound
or banner towing, skydivers etc until they get
500 hours and do the cfi course.....
05-20-2009, 06:11 PM
#65
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2009
Posts: 238
If you are enquiring as to what Sully and Skiles did before USair, I'll let you in on something.
Much like Bill Brasky, Sully and Skiles were both born with ATP certificates and Airbus type ratings. And of course, like Brasky, they built the homes that they were born in. They got into the majors because they both learned to fly 747's at age 6. I believe Skiles actually was the checkairman on the Wright flyer that signed off on the brothers solos. In fact, I think Skiles is actually the father of Martha King, and Sully is Johns father.
All not-seriousness aside, does anybody seriously not realize how much things have changed since then. Being an airline pilot used to be a good job. Pilots actually made money and were respected. When a pilot is skilled enough to fly a transport cateogry aircraft, that is when he should be allowed to go to the regionals. This is a different figure for all pilots!!! Flying pipeline patrol VFR or CFI'ing and doing 16,000 touch and goes with student pilots in a tampico for an extra 1,000 hours to get your regional airline 2,000 hour mins is hardly productive. How does that make you a better pilot?
Much like Bill Brasky, Sully and Skiles were both born with ATP certificates and Airbus type ratings. And of course, like Brasky, they built the homes that they were born in. They got into the majors because they both learned to fly 747's at age 6. I believe Skiles actually was the checkairman on the Wright flyer that signed off on the brothers solos. In fact, I think Skiles is actually the father of Martha King, and Sully is Johns father.
All not-seriousness aside, does anybody seriously not realize how much things have changed since then. Being an airline pilot used to be a good job. Pilots actually made money and were respected. When a pilot is skilled enough to fly a transport cateogry aircraft, that is when he should be allowed to go to the regionals. This is a different figure for all pilots!!! Flying pipeline patrol VFR or CFI'ing and doing 16,000 touch and goes with student pilots in a tampico for an extra 1,000 hours to get your regional airline 2,000 hour mins is hardly productive. How does that make you a better pilot?
05-20-2009, 06:24 PM
#66
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Position: B744 FO
Posts: 375
Originally Posted by KC10 FATboy
I think there should be some type of requirement for ensuring that captains meet a certain level of experience before being qualified.
Originally Posted by KC10 FATboy
it is no wonder that many ICAO countries WILL NOT accept an FAA ATP license because they're pretty much worthless.
Last edited by 727gm; 05-20-2009 at 07:58 PM. Reason: emphasis
05-20-2009, 06:40 PM
#67
Sitting on the sidelines
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Posts: 436
[quote=bryris;613960]It sounds like Sully pretty much threw CRM out the window, was flying AND talking on the radios and whatever else. Skiles basically rode down with the rest of them.
quote]
Sorry, bud, but the pre-departure brief with my company goes something like this: "In the event of an emergency, I will fly and talk, you will complete the memory items, then use the QRH to complete the appropriate checklist." I think the CRM on this flight was fine.
OBTW: FAA could change the rules about ATP's quickly. Grandfather in the people who are already at a 121 carrier, but require them to get an ATP at 1500 hours, and all new hires need to get it when they complete their initial checkride if not before. This rule would drive down the number of eligible pilots, thus driving up the salaries required to fill the vacancies.
And if you think this would "bankrupt the airlines", let's do math. Say you fly a 50 seater with an average load of 70%, and average four legs a day. That's 140 passengers a day. You do that 200 days a year: that's 28,000 passengers. Increase ticket prices by ONE DOLLAR and you can give both the captain and F/O an additional $14,000 a year. TWO DOLLARS and an F/O could make almost $50K.
Those numbers seem reasonable to anyone?
quote]
Sorry, bud, but the pre-departure brief with my company goes something like this: "In the event of an emergency, I will fly and talk, you will complete the memory items, then use the QRH to complete the appropriate checklist." I think the CRM on this flight was fine.
OBTW: FAA could change the rules about ATP's quickly. Grandfather in the people who are already at a 121 carrier, but require them to get an ATP at 1500 hours, and all new hires need to get it when they complete their initial checkride if not before. This rule would drive down the number of eligible pilots, thus driving up the salaries required to fill the vacancies.
And if you think this would "bankrupt the airlines", let's do math. Say you fly a 50 seater with an average load of 70%, and average four legs a day. That's 140 passengers a day. You do that 200 days a year: that's 28,000 passengers. Increase ticket prices by ONE DOLLAR and you can give both the captain and F/O an additional $14,000 a year. TWO DOLLARS and an F/O could make almost $50K.
Those numbers seem reasonable to anyone?
05-20-2009, 07:02 PM
#68
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: O-2 pilot
Posts: 123
"If you're saying that the gov should mandate ATP mins across the board at the regionals that's different but even then we won't truly know if an atp min would be wiling to sell their souls just as much for a jet job."
Yes, that's what I'm saying. The government should mandate that only 1500 hour or better ATPs can get hired at an airline.
I'm sure many ATPs would work for crap as well. They already do. But the point of this is supply and demand.
Let's say that next year there are 10,000 pilots with more than 250 hours and at least a commercial certificate who want to be new hire airline pilots.
Let's say that the regionals need 2,000 pilots next year. Obviously the airlines will find enough bodies to work at any price if 10,000 are available.
But, lets say that out of the 10,000 pilots seeking work only 1,000 have ATPs. If the airlines are required to hire only ATPs, but there are less ATPs available than pilots needed (2,000 in my example) then the airlines are going to have to compete for those ATPs. Pilots can go to the highest bidder. Airlines will be forced to raise pay to attract a limited body of pilots. Poach from one another, if you will.
Now, I'm just guessing on these figures. Who really knows how many pilots will be hired and when. Someone probably has a better sense on pilot numbers than I do. But I think it's a fairly good estimate that 9 out of 10 guys looking for regional work don't have ATPs now-a-days.
Supply and demand. Even politicians skeptical of interfering with the market will get behind that. (And no, I don't think requiring an ATP is interfering with the market any more than requireing a driver's license is).
Yes, that's what I'm saying. The government should mandate that only 1500 hour or better ATPs can get hired at an airline.
I'm sure many ATPs would work for crap as well. They already do. But the point of this is supply and demand.
Let's say that next year there are 10,000 pilots with more than 250 hours and at least a commercial certificate who want to be new hire airline pilots.
Let's say that the regionals need 2,000 pilots next year. Obviously the airlines will find enough bodies to work at any price if 10,000 are available.
But, lets say that out of the 10,000 pilots seeking work only 1,000 have ATPs. If the airlines are required to hire only ATPs, but there are less ATPs available than pilots needed (2,000 in my example) then the airlines are going to have to compete for those ATPs. Pilots can go to the highest bidder. Airlines will be forced to raise pay to attract a limited body of pilots. Poach from one another, if you will.
Now, I'm just guessing on these figures. Who really knows how many pilots will be hired and when. Someone probably has a better sense on pilot numbers than I do. But I think it's a fairly good estimate that 9 out of 10 guys looking for regional work don't have ATPs now-a-days.
Supply and demand. Even politicians skeptical of interfering with the market will get behind that. (And no, I don't think requiring an ATP is interfering with the market any more than requireing a driver's license is).
05-20-2009, 07:41 PM
#69
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Position: B744 FO
Posts: 375
Originally Posted by JetJock16
airline careers are no longer attractive to the best and the brightest."
Look at the hiring practices of regional 23 years ago and you’ll see flight times comparable to the FO’s.
Look at the hiring practices of regional 23 years ago and you’ll see flight times comparable to the FO’s.
Originally Posted by JetJock16
I completely agree that an ATP should be a min requirement to obtain an airline pilot job.
I would propose instead that the Congress or DOT/FAA pass rules/regulations requiring that ALL passenger flights by (for instance) Continental be operated by aircraft on the Continental Airlines FAR 121 Air Carrier Operating Certificate, and all pilots of said aircraft are full employees on the Continental Airlines seniority list, rather than the current practice of defrauding the public with look-alike "Continental" colors and paintjobs. That would require the same training, and non-whipsawed pay.
The flights would be more expensive, but the race to the bottom could stop. Requiring an ATP is simply a distracting ruse to "fix the problem", to get attention diverted from the central problem: regional airlines, with low pay and crappy work rules, posing as "part of" the major airlines, driving the profession down with what are really (in effect) "alter-ego" airlines.
Having an ATP wouldn't fix anything. It would just be eyewash, like the TSA song-and-dance at the terminal.
This is the very point of debate that should precipitate the change that is required to provide all those experienced pilots at the regionals with the good schedules and pay by requiring a passenger airline holding out to the public to fly only under their own name. If I buy a ticket from LAX to LRD on Continental, it should be flown by Continental pilots, If they want to use a Q400, fine, it should be flown by Continental pilots.
But the crash has drawn attention to the problem, and now is the time to straighten out what should never have happened in the first place, when pilots at the majors were too good to fly a CE-402. How and if any purchase and/or integration would happen is a whole other problem. But once the Federal rule is promulgated, movement and change would happen, and lots of opportunity would occur. This is not to say that ExpressJet, or SkyWest, or even Colgan is unsafe because they are regional airlines, but to disallow the "outsourcing" dodge ("loose" scope) the major airlines have been allowed (by unions!) to use for so long. Have Congress define scope and everything else will follow.
Last edited by 727gm; 05-20-2009 at 08:00 PM. Reason: content
05-20-2009, 07:56 PM
#70
Line Holder
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Posts: 47
I am guilty with all of you in the fact that i don't know why i continue reading these threads. This thread is more repetitive than the last rap song i tried listening too. alright jokes aside.
1. How many of you on this forum paid for your ATP?
2. This argument with paying higher wages and and attracting the cream of the crop is very weak. It is very basic. It would obviously attract more people. This would likely increase the crop. Not necessarily the cream of the crop. I don't think all of us came to the crossroads and thought, "hell i could go to McDonald's or go fly planes." For me it was between engineering and this. I don't really know many happy engineers. Go figure now i find out i don't know happy pilots. Wasn't planning on shooting for ditch digger until i came on here.
3. What is going to happen to these qualified candidates when gas prices go back through the roof again. That = bad news for barons and better news for light sports. Also how about user fees. Another barrier to entry into this profession. That definitely will not help. It seems to me the only way to get the multi time in the next few years will be go to a mill or at least instruct at one. Mom and Pop will continue to ditch the old multi's.
4. The number of delicious red beers i have had reading this post. If my grammar or ideas suck, so be it. I am not the cream.
1. How many of you on this forum paid for your ATP?
2. This argument with paying higher wages and and attracting the cream of the crop is very weak. It is very basic. It would obviously attract more people. This would likely increase the crop. Not necessarily the cream of the crop. I don't think all of us came to the crossroads and thought, "hell i could go to McDonald's or go fly planes." For me it was between engineering and this. I don't really know many happy engineers. Go figure now i find out i don't know happy pilots. Wasn't planning on shooting for ditch digger until i came on here.
3. What is going to happen to these qualified candidates when gas prices go back through the roof again. That = bad news for barons and better news for light sports. Also how about user fees. Another barrier to entry into this profession. That definitely will not help. It seems to me the only way to get the multi time in the next few years will be go to a mill or at least instruct at one. Mom and Pop will continue to ditch the old multi's.
4. The number of delicious red beers i have had reading this post. If my grammar or ideas suck, so be it. I am not the cream.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Freightpuppy
Major
32
01-28-2009 09:56 AM
