Here is what ALPA said about that (emphasis added by me):

Need for Stronger Academic Emphasis

The Joint Aviation Authority (JAA), now the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), and FAA pilot licensing requirements are both ICAO-compliant. The single biggest difference between EASA and FAA is knowledge requirements. The FAA theoretical knowledge is simply not as demanding as EASA, which has 14 written exams versus one by the FAA, which is a multiple-choice exam. The EASA exams require the student to be tested for 30-40 hours. By stark contrast, the FAA publishes its exam questions with answers provided so a student can purchase them, study the questions, and pass its single exam. Examination questions are not available for EASA exams in such a manner.

The least demanding Federal Aviation Regulations which govern commercial pilot license requirements (i.e., §61.125 and §61.155) specify the aeronautical knowledge requirements for commercial and airline transport pilot ratings. These rules were written decades ago, when there was no expectation that they would be used as minimum standards to train pilots to take jobs as airline first officers. The requirements emphasize weather and navigation, including interaction with air traffic control. There is some mention of aircraft aerodynamics and human factors, including aeronautical decision making and judgment as well as crew resource management. The regulations allow self-study and many such training courses emphasize passing the test rather than learning the material. We do not feel these requirements are adequate to prepare a professional airline pilot. The ground instruction of these subjects needs to be strengthened with required formal classroom academic instruction and more extensive testing and examination.

The EASA-approved training course for a commercial airline pilot tends to be rather structured and rigorous. FAA should develop and implement a corollary ground school and testing process in FAR Part 121 for all pilots who seek commercial airline careers. Testing akin to the quality of the Certified Public Accountant (CPA) exams or bar exam for attorneys would benefit aviation by serving as a screening tool to ensure that, in the future, only the most knowledgeable and dedicated pilots join the ranks of airline pilots.

 

Most places that require an ATP already like the fractionals and numerous Majors require your ATP to be a Multi-engine ATP.

 

TOTALLY AGREE!!!!!!!

 

Ok, but you do realize that there are no 300 hr wonders flying right now, most of them through the last boom, are up there in time. There are however plenty of 800-1200hr guys out here that got furloughed after 3,4,500 hours with a company. These are the one's I think any grandfathering would be for if it even happens. If im reading your posts correctly, you would be in this group also correct???

 

Right, I understand that they aren't 200 hour wonders anymore, however I still consider them that because of their lack of experience. I was hired with a little over 1000 TT and 250 Multi and then furloughed. But in a weird way I am glad I was furloughed because I was able to come back and instruct and gain many new experiences that I would not have had, like a near catastrophic engine failure and being able to do my Masters. It's those experiences that these low time pilots have never experienced which therefore makes them more dangerous. I know and am friends with several of the "200 hour wonderboys" but I would never trust them to fly my wife, 2 children, and I around knowing how much experience they lack. The rule needs to be written so that those that lack the needed experience to fly 25 - 75+ human beings around are forced to gain that experience. The only way that can be done is by flying as the PIC where they are the ones that make the desicions.

I understand your frustrations and I would feel the same way if I were in your shoes. However I would never trade the experiences I have had as a CFI for a quick airline job (and trust me if you knew me you would know how BAD and how long (since I was 5) I've wanted to fly for the airlines ). More experience brings more safety and I would rather be safe than dead along with 50 other people.

By the way I highly recommend the CFI route! I have learned so much as a Flight Instructor and I can't tell you how rewarding it feels to know that you have done everything you can to teach a student how to fly an airplane and then see them do it on their own. Then I've heard as you look back after you airline career is over, seeing all you did to pay your dues and ultimately progress to that 777 Captain slot is a reward that can not be measured!!! Again I highly recommend the CFI route! Good Luck and Take Care in all you do! Cheers!

 

Because back in '96-'97 time frame, the FAA mandated all of the commuter to go 121 ops. I don't remember the specs but depending on how many seats in an a/c (i think up to 30) a company could still operate under 135 duty times.

 

Just in reading various posts...I would like to respond to the idea that..."A guy may have had 300 hours when he was hired but he now has 3,000. So Low time had nothing to do with it."

That is just plain stupid. The foundation is still VERY WEAK. And for those of you that dont think it matters its because you dont have the experience or insight to know.

 

If you get an ATP in a single, you are only able to use your ATP priviledges in a single, which makes it basically a worthless rating. I am not aware of a single engine aircraft out there that requires an ATP.

If you get an ATP in a multi, you are only able to use your ATP privledges in a multi.

Your certificate says: ATP AMEL. Commercial Priviledges ASEL.

 

Exactly. That is hard for a lot of people to understand.

You can spend your first couple thousand hours sitting in the right seat of an automated jet watching some other guy fly an airplane....

You can spend your fist couple thousand hours flying around single pilot IFR at night in a minimally equipped light twin through all kinds of weather and live to tell about it....

Which of these guys, assuming they hit 3000 hours at the same time, do you want flying your family around?

 

Let me also say that making the mins 1500 hours will do more that what most people are giving it credit. If someone instructs to 1500 hours that is going to give them A LOT of time to think about the airline pay.

As a student pilot I just assumed I would go to an airline like EVERYONE else. After I got my CFI I realized the airlines were not the most talented pilots as I saw some of the stupid CFIs they hired around me. As I got to 600 hours as a CFI I began asking what if I didnt go to the airlines? And that was the day I was determined to instruct to 1500 hours and get my ATP and then see what my options were. As I moved up in hours and earned my comma (1,000 hours tt), I realized I had learned A LOT MORE than those that ran off early. As I reached 1200 hours I realized 135 was an option but why not instruct another 3-5 months and get the ATP. It turned out my first 135 job required 1500 hours. I was only there for 6 months due to the economy, but it allowed me to gain 135 experience which made me more desirable in the tough economic times which allowed me to get my 2nd 135 job. My first 135 job had me on pace to make around 35-40k my first year. At my current job I make 30k, with a schedule, and I can flight instruct on the side. Best decision I have made yet in this career.

So, as far as raising the mins to 1500 hours, the airlines will need to be more attractive...thus higher pay. Otherwise the smarter guys will realize they can make more doing 135 flying or other 91 stuff. I could be wrong as far as the amount of positive but making the mins 1500 hours will ONLY do good things.