![]() |
1000hrs max for 121????
ok, some 121 carriers are allowed to operate at 1200hrs tt per year for 30 seat and below aircraft. I hear that friday the powers to be are recomending repealing this and all 121 ops limited to 1000 per year, regardless of seat size. Can anyone shed some light???
|
Who flys anything close to a 1000 hours a year anyway? sounds like hell to me.
|
I agree most guys right now cant break credit unless they are really senior, its just something Im hearing through the grapvine, but since I dont have a lot of solid info, I thought maybe someone else would have it if it exists
|
Originally Posted by xtreme
(Post 630623)
Who flys anything close to a 1000 hours a year anyway? sounds like hell to me.
lakers do .... |
Originally Posted by xtreme
(Post 630623)
Who flys anything close to a 1000 hours a year anyway? sounds like hell to me.
|
Originally Posted by rickB
(Post 630645)
lakers do ....
|
although I'm not a 121 pilot. I have logged almost 800hrs since jan.
|
Let's see... last year I flew something like 1350 hours part 121. And in the last 12 consecutive months I've flown 1150 hours 121/135.
I really don't see what limiting you to 1000 hours a year is going to do, hours I flew in July don't affect my flying performance in August. I'm not sitting in the plane going "man, if I only hadn't flown so much last month I would be more alert right now". |
That's nothing!
In Alaska most part 121 operators fly crews under two man 135 at 1400 hrs a year! (Part 121 reg, intra Alaska only). I flew 1355 hrs. in 07 and 1270 hrs. in 08. I was tired all the time but the money was nice. Its hard to cover a state this size with a 1000 hrs. per pilot. Is the government going to give my airline the money to train up the extra pilots we will need? I hope they think this over before they do it.
|
Originally Posted by aviatorhi
(Post 630722)
I really don't see what limiting you to 1000 hours a year is going to do, hours I flew in July don't affect my flying performance in August. I'm not sitting in the plane going "man, if I only hadn't flown so much last month I would be more alert right now".
However, on average I'm wiped out by day 4, usually only flying 18-20 hours but with long duty days, excessive sit time, and short "rest" periods. |
Originally Posted by 1900luxuryliner
(Post 630703)
I've heard a few of the old Air Midwest 1900 drivers used to time out in mid to late November, and would get a little over a month off. This is timing out at 1200!:eek:
Yep....I was one of them. Timed out at just a hair under 1200 each year for three straight years. Usually happened at the end of November. The Air Midwest Crew schedulers tried EVERYTHING to "change" the hour figures throughout the month of December since everyone was timing out. All the Junior Assignments that they rammed down my throat throughout the year came back to them as I sat in my living room each Christmas for 3 years straight. The bright side to all this crazy flying was that by the 4'th year, I had all the Turbine PIC I ever needed & made the jump to Southwest. Flew 970 hours last year at LUV with 14-16 days per month off and didn't even really pick up much. If I had not had a couple of sick calls, I would have timed out there as well. Go figure. |
Well, I haven't heard that, but it would be a welcome change. I never understood the double standard based on the size of airplane you flew. We should all be equal under part 121. That said, if such a rule passes, then those former 1200 hr guys need to get their pay rate changed to reflect the loss of 200 credit hours a year. For an average Beech captain, that would be nearly $7000 of lost income. The one positive might be that a few more jobs are created in the short term.
Of course, the 1200 hour rule had no bearing on the Colgan accident. Way to miss the point again, Mr. FAA. |
Right about the pay increase to cancel out the 200 hours of lost credit, but wrong about the FAA missing the point. Do they have to wait until something happens before changing a rule? I thought we always griped that they were "reactive" instead of "proactive." By changing the rule that means the company can't fly these guys 100 hours a month every single month. Of course the pilots might argue it will decrease their schedule efficiency though. Dunno.
|
Originally Posted by Rightseat Ballast
(Post 630739)
Well, I haven't heard that, but it would be a welcome change. I never understood the double standard based on the size of airplane you flew. We should all be equal under part 121. That said, if such a rule passes, then those former 1200 hr guys need to get their pay rate changed to reflect the loss of 200 credit hours a year. For an average Beech captain, that would be nearly $7000 of lost income. The one positive might be that a few more jobs are created in the short term.
Of course, the 1200 hour rule had no bearing on the Colgan accident. Way to miss the point again, Mr. FAA. |
Originally Posted by 1900luxuryliner
(Post 630703)
I've heard a few of the old Air Midwest 1900 drivers used to time out in mid to late November, and would get a little over a month off. This is timing out at 1200!:eek:
|
Personally I think the yearly max should be raised to 1400!
|
Originally Posted by powrful1
(Post 631279)
Personally I think the yearly max should be raised to 1400!
|
Originally Posted by FlyingPirate
(Post 630711)
although I'm not a 121 pilot. I have logged almost 800hrs since jan.
I logged 914 in 2008. |
Originally Posted by powrful1
(Post 631279)
Personally I think the yearly max should be raised to 1400!
|
Originally Posted by freezingflyboy
(Post 631117)
And doing 20-30 minutes legs!:eek: I would've gotten November and December off too under those conditions...cause I would've shot myself in the face sometime around October.
You guys are true warriors. I logged about 750 last year and I thought I worked too much. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:20 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands