So for all of the FO's that don't have ATPs, the airlines would have to provide them. Not just grandfather them in and say they are qualified.

 

I doubt there would be a provision that mandates an airline provide the ATP. But that being said if you are currently employed by an airline I would expect the airline to give an ATP during a PC because no doing so and having to terminate and employee gets expensive.

 

Well, I think we can definitely come to some common ground on this. I don't mean to say, and I don't think anyone else is saying that sitting right seat 121 is not valuable experience. I'm just trying to make the argument that it is not as good of an experience that actually making the decision. Its like playing armchair quarterback or questioning a baseball managers move to switch pitchers. Easy to make decisions when you're watching rather than playing.

I think my argument also coincides with other types of flying. I don't think that anyone would argue that night cargo jobs offer better experience that being a jump pilot or traffic watch pilot. This does not mean that you cannot learn from those experiences as well, and it is my opinion that ANY of those PIC experiences are better than a nice, cozy right seat.

 

In my previous comment, I mentioned the 1500 hour requirement could cause a pilot shortage for regional carriers. I was taken to task, but allow me to elaborate on my point just a bit more. Most won't find it persuasive, but here goes.

Eventually, the problems the age 60 rule was to create will happen with the age 65 rule. Now some will point to furloughs and say there are plenty of pilots ready for that moment, but that assumes no pilots will be recalled between now and the end of the world.

If you believe the economy will recover and natural attrition at the majors takes place, furloughed pilots are going to be recalled. Holes will have to be filled. As that occurs and some regional pilots move on to major carriers, spots are going to open at regional carriers.

At some point, simply recalling furloughed pilots won't be enough for regional carriers. For a time, there will probably be plenty of 1500 hour plus pilots available, but the well is going to run dry. Then what? Does the airline industry purposefully remain smaller due to a pilot shortage than the market desires?

In the relatively near future, and probably sooner than many think, airlines are going to find themselves in the hole they operated under in 2007. As bad as the economy has been, we're still at economic levels seen in the late 1990's. That was the supposed golden age for airlines, right? In fact, some believe this recession still won't be as bad as the one in 1982-1983.

After that long winded speech, here's my point. Fewer and fewer people are learning to fly and earn commerical liscences, or at least that has been the case. If the number of pilots is decreasing and the airlines industry begins to grow again, where are the pilots with 1500 hours going to come from then?

I'm not arguing against 1500 hours and an ATP. I'm just wondering what the unintended consequences could be. Some may prefer 2500 or even 3000 as was the norm in the 1980's, but how much larger in is the industry now as compared to then?

 

You are not the average 300 wonder with no life experience. What I have gathered as a CFI is that life experience can make up for lack of hours, but only in certain cases.

Experienced Military, LEO, or other professionals where operational risk management is a daily event can readily apply their survival lessons-learned to aviation.

Long-time 9-to-5 professionals such as bankers accountants, salesmen, etc are at a disadvantage...their learned survival skills are all about politics, ladder climbing, and what people think. It does not matter if they do the job right or not, as long as the right people THINK they do. These folks have to learn all the aviation lessons the hard way. They will do really stupid things because they think it will make ATC happy, while totally disregarding basic aeronautical principles and physical laws (ie gravity).

There are of course always exceptions.

 

Ok, I give you that point, I guess that why one time I was flying with a Captain I have some hours with, and as FP, I was suddenly faced with a quick decision, and I made it and executed. I'll never forget the Capt. looking at me with a smirk on his face and saying, "Look, I appriciate that your head is in the plane where it needs to be and that you arent afraid of decisions, but do me a favor." I said sure and he said "At least pretend that I am in charge, and at least tell me what you are going to do, for my input." I actually saw that as a valuable lesson, in both making decisions and the value of CRM. These are the real world lessons that can be learned in a 121 environment...agreed? I tell this story even though its embarasing for me, to point out that there is much value to being an SIC, not just lifting the flaps or flying the plane. Dont you think these are good things for a new Captain on the line to have experianced as an SIC?

 

excellent news.

i believe congress just stuck a knife in the heart of pay to play operations.

i can see pay changing there after. a huge gap between 250 hour wonders and 1500 hour FOs make the 121 guys much more valuable.

 

Yes for sure, I felt this whole conversation between us that we were siting in the same church just differant pews....

 

I don't really see anything with the exception of the background checks that can actually be implemented. As far as the 1500 total time and ATP, both pilots had it and at least had 1500 at the time of the crash. The FO was hired with around 1700 hours. They had about 6000 TT combined at the time of the crash. Nothing in these proposals will prevent another crash with the exception of harder training.

 

Who requires a doctor's note? I have never worked for a Chief Pilot who had a medical degree, so where do they get off judging whether or not a pilot is fit to fly? Two points, one being if an airline requires a doctors note it is because the pilot group lets that airline get away with that behavior. Secondly, I would be interested to know what the FAA says about an airline pressuring pilots to fly sick with this practice.