Airline Pilot Central Forums - Anyone heard anything about the new bill?

I took notes on the whole thing. All the areas with quotes are direct quotes of the speaker. All the non-quotes are my summary of what they said, and all the areas in []'s are my own personal comments, not what the speakers said.

I'm sorry it's 3 parts long, but I thought paraphrasing too much would potentially detract from the actual substance of what was said. It takes about 15 minutes to read my summary, vs. hours to watch the hearing, so, I figured 3 parts is ok.

Pay particular attention to Dr. Brady's study and testimony. His study (the lynchpin of his entire argument) shows that 500 hour pilots fly better than civilians with ATP's and military pilots. I think the summary's worth a read just to see Dr. Brady's testimony.
----

Mr. Costello, the Chairman of the Sub-Committee, opens the hearing, examining “pilot training, and rest requirements, and the oversight needed to ensure compliance, with a particular focus on regional airlines”.
The FAA “Call to Action” asked, but did not impose, a timeline to complete a response to the recommended ‘action items’. 105 airlines and 8 unions were asked to respond. Less than ½ have responded 3 months later. “A response of less than 50% to the FAA is exactly why we can not rely on voluntary compliance.”
The bill will increase the minimum flight time – 250 hours is not enough. All airlines should have ATP’s in the flight deck, not just the PIC.
Petri: 3 of the last 5 regional airlines accidents involved pilot performance, according to the NTSB. Co-sponsored the bill.
Randy Babbit (FAA): Contacted all 121 carriers and unions. Requested comments on pilot records, requirements of programs to monitor safety (ASAP and FOQA), development of professional standards and ethics committees by labor organizations. Responses have been willingness, prepared to make those who haven’t responded known to the public “by the end of September”. Plans to institute new flight and rest rules “based on fatigue science”, work is complete on committee. Directed FAA inspectors to turn up the heat on pilot training too. Over 3000 pages of comments to FAA proposed changes to airlines safety and pilot training. Original intent was to develop guidance by July. FAA has extended deadline till December 2009, hopes to prioritize quality over timeline through this extension. Individual professionalism should be a point of pride, and people should be comfortable speaking out about weaknesses in the system.
John Loftus (CO 3407 family rep, former XJet ALPA): Training, fatigue, and investment in safety @ the regional level is needed. Stall recovery and winter operations are clearly a deficiency as revealed by the Colgan accident. Former pilot and family member, appalled to see the usual negative comments on FAA rulemaking by industry, “too great of an economic burden and, a complacent attitude, what we are currently doing is sufficient. That mindset is exactly what got us into this predicament that we find ourselves in today.” New rest requirements are needed – commuting must be addressed too. Regionals do not train like mainline, and mainline shifts blame, as Continental now shifts blame to Colgan and the FAA. Congress must move forward with 3 items, b/c FAA ‘requests’ clearly don’t work : pilot data records, mandatory safety programs “with privacy protections the pilots are asking for” like FOQA, ASAP, and LOSA – “we cannot leave the regional carriers with any temptations to save $ at the expense of safety”. All commercial pilots must have an ATP before being hired. Let’s not let this happen again.
John Prater (ALPA): Codeshare and fee for departure exert pressure to do it on the cheap, a “race to the bottom”. Pilot pushing, short staffing, inexperience – all are a result of this. ALPA has professional standards, but management often does not support these committees. ALPA supports ASAP and FOQA, but they “will fail if they are used as discipline measures, rather than to promote safety.” Voluntary must be made mandatory. Example – recent news reports on pilot fatigue, after the Colgan hearings. Example: 1/3 of one ALPA carrier’s pilots are reprimanded for fatigue or sick leave abuse annually. This # speaks for itself. Mainline management often refuses to intervene, but is not held responsible, b/c they meet FAA standards. The standards must be changed. ALPA urges the passing of HR 3371 into law.
Roger Cohen (RAA): RAA “is doing everything possible to make sure an accident like that never happens again”. “Virtually all” RAA airlines have or have committed to FOQA or ASAP. All RAA airlines responded to the FAA. Every 7 RAA airlines invited to meetings went, 6 sent CEO’s. RAA is committed to adopting House Rulemaking. RAA will voluntarily commit to 3 things: 1)“review” all safety issues brought up by NTSB recommendations, 2)“study“ the fatigue risks associated with regional pilot operations, 3)“working with the Flight Safety Foundation to study the feasibility and practicality of developing an industry fatigue risk management system” [I quoted that last one for a reason. ‘Work to study if fatigue risk is feasible and practical to develop’ - what commitment is that?]. “We look forward to working with Congress and the FAA to identify [not implement] these needed safety tools”: 1) “establish a single database of pilot records”, 2) “extend the background timeframe to 10 years” [as if this couldn’t be done voluntarily currently], 3) “Improve the tracking an analysis of check rides”, 4) “explore the use of random fatigue tests for pilots” [explore it, not do it, and only for pilots, and test them – so now the company can accuse you of flying fatigued, and perhaps discipline you for it? I wouldn’t put it past some carriers] 5) “Considering the use of cockpit voice recorders for accident prevention [aka, listen to them whenever they feel the urge ‘for safety reasons’, something the NTSB is on record as not supporting, and of course, ALPA too]. “Commuting must be conducted in a responsible manner. Each of our member carriers has a non-punitive policy in place, and reserve crews on call, to allow a pilot to drop a trip, if that pilot feels incapable of flying alertly.” [Yes, he did say “non-punitive”].
James May (ATA): ATA is taking action. Emphasis on 3 points first: 1) NTSB is not done with Colgan investigation, so we can’t have a complete understanding of it, 2) safety of civil aviation results from careful study of the past, civil aviation “has an empirical and disciplined approach to safety”, 3) Airline or pilot with FAA license to operate that screws up is “ultimately and solely responsible” for their accidents [don’t blame mainline for regional safety issues, FAA issued them a certificate, not mainline], and “that responsibility can’t be delegated or assumed by others”. [I got the sense in the first two issues while listening that ATA is trying to encourage a slowing of the process] Here’s what ATA is doing: 1) commit to develop rest requirements based in science, 2) commit to best practices – “I can assure you that every single ATA carrier has replied, in depth, to the Administrator” [so, if every ATA and RAA member replied, clearly at least 50% of 121 carriers are not in the ATA or RAA, or someone just lied to Congress], 3) asking pilots to disclose issues, all ATA carriers have ASAP and FOQA, 4) working with unions to develop professional standards, ASAP and FOQA, “I certainly agree with Captain Prater, they can’t be used in a punitive way”, 5) ATA looks forward to review of FAA oversight of regional carriers will yield good info 6) looking to creation of increased pilot background database.
Dr. Tim Brady (University people, Embry Riddle guy): “Quality, not quantity” [aka, ATP requirement for 121 FO’s will destroy us!]. ATP requirement concerns us. None of our students are 23 or have anywhere near 1500 TT. Quality is key. We did a study, and pilots with 500 hours or less did best in new-hire FO training. If bill is not changed, potential students won’t go to college, they’ll go to FBO’s and fly cheap 30 year planes “the same flying hour 1000 times over”. “These are the type of pilots who scored the worst on the pilot yield study” [naturally]. “This ATP-only provision will fill the cockpits of air carriers with poor quality first officers, and decimate the robust, high quality, flight education programs found @ universities all across the country”.
Mr. Skiles (Miracle on the Hudson FO, representing CAPA): The Colgan crew screwed up, but were just as much victims of the industry as the passenger were of Continental Airlines [not Colgan], b/c they weren’t experienced enough, nor properly trained to do the job they were asked to. Majors require ATP’s, and it shows. Regionals don’t, and it shows. “Experience matters.” Pilot fatigue is an issue that needs to be addressed too. “The current discussion @ the ARC is trending towards INCREASING the # of hours a pilot can fly in a duty period. We need prompt action to LOWER, not increase, the amount of time a pilot can fly, and a reduction to the 16 hour work day currently permitted by FAA regulations. We don’t fix the pilot fatigue problem by allowing airlines to schedule more flight hours in a day, nor do we fix the pilot experience problem by allowing any inexperienced pilots in our nations cockpits.” History shows the FAA is not an agent for change, the house bill must be passed. ALPA, CAPA, and the IBT, representing 90,000 pilots all support HR 3371.
Costello: HR 3371’s goal is to, among other things, raise the minimum standard, so that the FO is as experienced as a Captain. Dr. Brady’s testimony, what do you think of it, Captain Prater, are the institutions he represents @ a disadvantage?
ALPA: No. I agree with him, they’re “producing good pilots that can go out and become airline pilots”, but airlines have become an introductory spot. The airline used to be the final stop. A first job flying 50, 70 or even 90 passengers – “that’s unacceptable”, and why we support the ATP for getting hired. We can work with the colleges, “but I agree with all the pilots @ the table that you can not replace time in the air, that’s what earns you experience.” “We can’t take these young pilots with just 250 hours and turn them into airline pilots UNLESS the airlines are willing to give the amount of training that say the military gives. Look @ the vast difference. Military = 1 year, airlines = 6 weeks.
Brady: I’m a pilot, with an ATP, I don’t agree with Prater. Quality is the issue. All of the universities are turning out pilots that are better than military pilots, according to the study [just to erase any doubt that the study is flawed, we’ve got a claim that 500 hour university pilots are out-flying not only other civilians with ATP’s, but military pilots that not only made it through UPT, but then flew in the unit too. Space Shuttle commanders, you’re next!].
Skiles: I saw the submission – first off, it’s not independent - the study was done by Embry Riddle. Second, it’s not a complete transcript of the study, but rather “carefully culled conclusions”. “The leap in logic that they came to illustrate the ATP pilots require extra training is particularly disturbing.” I’m VERY experienced, never failed a ride, never required extra training – that used to be the norm. The study says “30% of these AABI pilots require extra right out of the box, right out of school, @ their first initial @ their new airline – and they’re bragging about that fact in the study.” The AOPA Nall report says ATP’s are 3 times as safe.
FAA: There is a need for an additional rating, one to become an FO. I agree with Dr. Brady that quantity is not always quality. Air Florida had 2 VERY experienced former military pilots, yet the FO “had never seen an airplane de-iced before”. A meld of quantity and quality is the answer.
Loftus: “I’ll state it one more time: there’s no substitute for experience in the air.” Riddle pilots will turn into good pilots, eventually. “The airlines are not an entry level position”.
Costello: Did all the RAA airlines respond to FAA, as RAA claims?
FAA: FAA wasn’t clear about how and where to respond to, so . . .
Costello: But the results will be clear and you’ll publish them @ the end of September?
FAA: Yes. We’ll know if they have FOQA, ASAP, every program they have, their willingness to adopt, or if they didn’t respond.
Costello: RAA claims more than twice as many RAA FA’s have ASAP as ATA carriers – true?
ATA: don’t know FA specifics, ATA has 171 active ASAP programs. Vast majority, all passenger carriers in ATA have ASAP, many for rampers, dispatchers, mechanics.
RAA: We 7 FA ASAP’s, ATA has 3.
Costello: Punitive actions, Prater says they exist. Are you aware of any actions of an RAA carrier that does this?
RAA: Nope.
ALPA: I hate to go down this path, naming names, but . . . Pinnacle, Colgan, Trans States – do I need to go further? “I’ve got a big book.” I’ve been asking pilots for examples, and I’ve got plenty.

Petri: Dr. Brady – quantity vs. quality, more comments?
Brady: classroom experience is good experience. Better than FBO, way beyond. Many of us @ the table are military pilots, I was a aircraft commander @ 1000 hrs, flying combat.
Petri: pressure on wages – is this affecting college programs? Why would they pay all this $ to get paid nothing?
Brady: passion to fly. I wish FO’s would make $40K a year. They have debts, wages are way too low. Pilots in colleges understand, college instructors take a pay cut to go to the regionals, they know the higher paying jobs are there.
Petri: Skiles, you’re experienced, and say it’s not a good career?
Skiles: Airline pilot position is now an entry level. Corporate and fractional, or leaving the industry are the norm. Fix the retention issue, fix the problem.
Carnahan: experience, fatigue, standards matter. Babbitt, mentoring programs, comment?
FAA: feedback shows scenario based training, we need experience transfer from our senior pilots to our junior pilots. Perhaps a system wide forum, where mainline unions get together with their codeshare regionals
ALPA: agree with Babbitt. Want to add: Pilot seniority list @ each mainline carrier ensures that no pilot @ that carrier is an inexperienced CA. But when a mainline farms the flying out to the cheapest regional, it essentially ensures that the least qualified of pilots, new FO’s @ a cheap regional, will upgrade to CA, b/c nobody w/ experience would work for the cheapest carrier. We’ve got to address that issue, moving the flying back and forth.
Duncan: not seeing consistent professionalism, according to FAA
FAA: yeah, I said it. Not always pilots. Controllers are an issue too. We can’t tolerate ANY gap. Classic chain, we’ve got to find the weak links
Duncan: are you hiring, and who? Do you think fatigue rules now are sufficient, 30 in 7?
RAA: not hiring now, most of our carriers are hiring 500 or more hours, minimum. Qualifications are an issue @ times
ATA: our pilots are VERY qualified, mostly ATP qualified, we have great mentoring and development programs.
Duncan: fatigue issues?
ATA: we participated actively in the ARC, ATA and ALPA usually agreed, key is science based.
Costello: On fatigue, Cohen says in written remarks ‘commuting is a lifestyle choice, not an economic necessity’. “That’s kind of an incredible statement to me, a lifestyle choice”. FO Shaw’s commute, 24 hours after she started her commute, she started her flight. “Ummm, it’s hard for me to believe that that’s a lifestyle choice, and its not driven by economics.”
Johnson: met with 50 pilots, concerned about their priorities. Overseas travel, “they desire to have marshals, but there has not been any change in the funding, so, therefore, many times, if they want them, the pilot has to pay for them himself, from personal funds, and, um, they feel that they having to use vacation time for their training because they are not given time off for that, ah, time to train.” [I quoted it b/c I don’t have any idea what she’s talking about – FFDO’s having to do their training on vacation, ok, but pilots paying for Air Marshals out of pocket?]. She addresses 8 hour flight time regs, and deadhead. Can you comment?
FAA: FFDO is voluntary, Prater should speak to that. Explains duty time and flight time – ARC has addressed this. Deadhead time will be included in duty time, and science based flight and duty time limits will be put in place. Currently, no difference in flight time or duty time, whether one flight or many to weather minimums. Currently no difference in duty time, no matter what time you start your duty period. That’s going to change. New rules will recognize circadian rhythms, essential consensus @ the ARC with few exceptions.
Ehlers: Dr. Brady, how many students wash out of training in your schools, don’t make the cut to commercial pilot?
Brady: 40%.
Ehlers: is that # typical for the other universities?
Brady: yes
Ehlers? Why do they wash out? Lack of conceptual abilities, unable to manipulate the controls properly?
Brady: the student will say ‘a personal issue’, but usually they “don’t have the funds” – flying is expensive. They wash themselves out. We have students who can’t master the program too.
Ehlers: what about physical ability?
Brady: all students have to pass a Class II medical before entering, so, not really an issue for washout.
Ehlers: I would have loved to attend your university. I got my training @ FBO’s. I’m struck by the variety of instructor ability. “Frankly, I’d feel rather uncomfortable hiring pilots who don’t experience a good curriculum” . . . Mr. Babbitt, can the FAA set standards to ensure capable pilots? Do you have the any way to ensure pilots who get their ratings at various places are qualified? “Do you have standards that are easily quantified, beyond argument?” [this guy’s a licensed pilot, from what I gathered]
FAA: yes, we do. We’re focusing on a tragedy now, but we have 70,000 operations today, and will carry 800 mil. people. We went 29 months without a tragedy. Standards are good now, We’re trying to find the best way to make it even better. We have good standards, particularly for professional airline pilots, they’re constantly checked by their peers, their company, and the FAA. “No other profession – I literally would defy you to find another profession that has professionals that are as well checked as the airline pilots that fly the passengers of this country.” That’s why we have “an incredible safety record”.
Ehlers: I listened to CVR. “I was appalled.” Are the standards able to catch this stuff?
FAA: “You’re observation is a good one.” @ a recent aviation forum I told every pilot in the room, 600 of them, “If any of them listened to that transcript and didn’t just hang their head, ah, they didn’t deserve to be professional pilots.”
Ehlers: before 9/11, members of this committee were allowed to fly in the flightdeck. I saw some amazing pilots. That’s what we’re looking for. I was impressed.
Bocceieri [current ANG pilot]: Experience does matter. Mr. Brady suggested “time doesn’t constitute quality . . . How do you obtain that quality?” I’m a military pilot. The most intensive learning usually happens before flight, in the sim and in ground training. “What is missing from this discussion . . . we’re not talking about the training [the Colgan pilots] received, b/c the combination of suspect training and low hours leads to tragic consequences.” Reads from the NTSB report, notes the sequence of events. The NTSB report notes Colgan pilots say they were trained in the Q400 stick pusher, “but demonstration or instruction of the aircraft pusher system is not part of the training syllabus or recurrent training on the Q400!” Pilots are not trained to recover from a full stall. The most qualified pilot can’t do the job if not properly trained. The NTSB wants stall recovery procedures, not just stall recognition. The FAA refuses. The Colgan crew didn’t know how to recover from a full stall. Babbitt, commit to me that you’re going to listen to NTSB and incorporate that in this discussion.
FAA: Every pilot, private pilot on up, must do stall recognition and recovery. Commercial requires a “complicated recovery from a complicated stall” [is he referring to a departure stall with the turn or landing stall here?] Colgan “failed to recovery from the warning of a stall”. The shortcoming was sim training, we need to revise the simulation requirements, and are addressing them.
Bocceieri: Ok, there were a couple things here: they flew almost 34 knots too slow in iceing, that could have been due to inexperience, but Colgan doesn’t train stall recovery. Once they crossed over the stick shaker, “they were in uncharted air”.
FAA: “I don’t disagree.” Bad SA. Lapse of professionalism. “ . . . When the shaker went off, I can tell you the only thing that would have stopped those throttles for me was the firewall.” Why they didn’t do that is a question we all have.
Bocceieri: There were 5623 flying hours on that plane, an experienced crew. But without proper training, it doesn’t matter how many hours you have.
Costello: In HR 3371, many of these issues have been addressed. We thank you for your help putting the bill together.
Bozeman: Sterile cockpit was an issue in Commair and now Colgan. How’s the FAA going to step up enforcement of that rule?
FAA: Sterile is hard to enforce. We currently don’t monitor, but we have line checks, spot checks, FAA line rides. We can’t legislate this. Professionalism is key. The other pilot must speak up and say, ‘we’re in sterile’ when there’s a violation.
Bozeman: Prater, would ALPA “support an audit system for pilot professionalism on the flightdeck?”
ALPA: What are you proposing? We have a system, but the human failure of two people @ the same time can occur. Both pilots passed their FAA and company checks, the result was theirs, but they had a lapse of professionalism. Break the chain, that’s the key.
Skiles: Echo Praters comments. Addition, professionalism is key. If we get professionals back in the cockpit, things will change.
Bozeman: I agree. Professionals play sports, they break the rules on occasion, but you have a referee. We need to work together to get similar results.
Richardson: ATA, RAA lay out recommendations. Are you familiar with them?
FAA: Yes, don’t have them in front of me.
Richardson :Ok, what are you going to do to implement them?
FAA: Can you be specific about the recommendations?
Richardson :Voluntary pilot disclosure of records, etc. Please take these recommendations into account and respond back to this committee.
FAA: We will do that. FAA has already suggested to all carriers that they ask pilots to disclose all records, and “give a raised eyebrow” to any pilot who refuses. You can’t demand record release, though, according to PRIA.
Richardson: We have recommendations from RAA and ATA. Do we have your commitment to follow up on them?
FAA: Yes.
Richardson: RAA says they work closely with mainline to ‘set a safety agenda’. Are you familiar with that agenda?
FAA: Yes.
Richardson : Can you give it to this committee?
FAA: We did a Call to Action, started ARC for FT/DT, “in the Olympics of regulations, we just set a 3 minute mile”. We will get the rule out as quick as any in the FAA. We welcome your input.
Richardson: My input is “we need things to be done now”, not impressed with fastest FAA ever, traveling is happening today, won’t wait for FAA.
FAA: I can’t make rules instantaneously, regulation and procedures of government slow me down.
Richardson: So you can’t expedite this any more than you have to save lives?
FAA: we took every step we could, but we don’t have the ability to override a rule.
Richardson: “Could you supply to this Congress what those constraints are?”
FAA: “Surely.”
Richardson: Prater, we have ASAP and FOQA programs. What can we do to encourage greater participation?
ALPA: the focus of this committee and FAA is doing just this. ALPA will make it work.