Airline Pilot Central Forums

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)
-   Regional (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/regional/)
-   -   Why were minimums so low? (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/regional/44094-why-were-minimums-so-low.html)

Blueskies21 09-20-2009 06:03 PM

I thought Mason32 worked for American Eagle.. maybe I got it wrong and he works for mainline American... if not someone needs to explain to me how Eagle isn't a regional?

RJSAviator76 09-20-2009 06:14 PM


Originally Posted by Blueskies21 (Post 681591)
I thought Mason32 worked for American Eagle.. maybe I got it wrong and he works for mainline American... if not someone needs to explain to me how Eagle isn't a regional?

DOT defines an airline with over a billion in revenues as a major airline which different from how the pilots define major and regional airlines.

People with smaller... umm... things usually need to make up for their inadequacies by making themselves bigger and more important than they really are.

Joachim 09-20-2009 06:31 PM


Originally Posted by Mason32 (Post 681462)
Sorry, not trying to offend anybody. If the traveling public was truly aware of what is, or what can be, in the cockpits at regionals they would probably chose to travel by alternate means as well. I'll take two mainline flights to avoid even a direct regional flight every single day of the week.

In fact, when I commute to work I could easilly take one of our regional affiliates and arrive right at my own terminal, instead I will fly on a mainline carrier and do the airport shuffle to my terminal. The few people on here who know me, will attest to the validity of the fact that I don't ride regionals unless absolutely mandatory to do so.... or unless I know the crew personally. When I get on those things and the FO hasn't even started shaving daily yet, I typically will turn around and get off.

Now, that is not meant as a low blow, it's simply a statement of fact.

No, you lie.

You do what you do because it allows you higher Jumpseat Priority.

benairguitar23 09-20-2009 06:40 PM


Originally Posted by ERJF15 (Post 681272)
Yes. You haven't been hiding under a rock the past couple years have you?

We couldn't get enough folks with higher times so mins were lowered. IMHO, mins won't be that low no time soon. If you're looking to get in, get your times up.

Actually WHEN the congress bill passes, they will never be that low again.

Purpleanga 09-21-2009 07:26 AM


Originally Posted by Mason32 (Post 681482)
. The evidence has been there for years and years that experince counts, and putting folks with 250/50 into jet airliners was/is a bad idea.

First of all there hasn't been a wet commercial hire in probably 2 years at a regional, so that means that they could possibly have 2000 hours by today. And second, those guys were in the minority. It's become the norm now, the 200 hour wonders this and 200 wonder that. But the reality, was VERY hard to get some kind of advanced flying with a wet commercial. The people that did are a small percentage that went to advanced training, that were really trained only to fly the CRJ or ERJ. Yes I wouldn't get near them if they're flying a 172 solo but as far as airline procedures they were certainly more prepered for their job than a street guy flying laps in the pattern. Yes there were many of us that didn't get a CFI but it didn't mean that we were 200 hour wonders.

I've seen 500 hour guys with no CFI that were excellent in training because all they did was fly IFR XC and I've seen 1500 VFR CFIs that were afraid to hand fly an airplane with no FD, and a bunch of other examples. It all depends on the individual and also the training they've had. 1500 hour is just a number, it doesn't mean anything.


Colgan crash FO had a 2200 hours and was hired with 1700. The CA had 3500. So 5700 combined.

Comair crash they had thousands.

Show us an accident that was caused by a 200 hour wonder.

CANAM 09-21-2009 07:43 AM

You get what you pay for.

Flyby1206 09-21-2009 08:02 AM


Originally Posted by CANAM (Post 681780)
You get what you pay for.

So true, and sometimes people dont want to pay our asking price.

CANAM 09-21-2009 08:26 AM


Originally Posted by Flyby1206 (Post 681795)
So true, and sometimes people dont want to pay our asking price.

Passengers only care about flying down to Orlando for $49.00. They demand cheap airfares and then whine when there's no service.

Comedians made careers out of complaining about airline food, then were upset when the airlines stopped serving said meals.

But these same people want to fly for the cheapest possible price available. They have demanded Greyhound prices and seem surprised by the Greyhound services.

People want to enjoy the finest things in life - best car, desiner jeans, huge house, big screen TV. They then DEMAND "Sully" when something goes wrong up there on their $49.00 flight, flown by a guy making $17,000/year (and hasn't seen his wife in 10 days).

Remember after the Colgan crash - there was all that talk about airline pilot pay. Hell, even Congress was concerned. Ahh, that was a good week.

Mason32 09-21-2009 08:34 AM


Originally Posted by RJSAviator76 (Post 681596)
DOT defines an airline with over a billion in revenues as a major airline which different from how the pilots define major and regional airlines.

People with smaller... umm... things usually need to make up for their inadequacies by making themselves bigger and more important than they really are.


Sorry, I'm not at Eagle. Doesn't mean I never ever was either. Take it for what it is.

Mason32 09-21-2009 08:38 AM


Originally Posted by Purpleanga (Post 681772)

Colgan crash FO had a 2200 hours and was hired with 1700. The CA had 3500. So 5700 combined.

Show us an accident that was caused by a 200 hour wonder.


Didn't the CA have just barely over 100 in type? and didn't both of them admit to having very little experience in icing weather....

There is your accident caused by low experience, and poor training.

ugflyer 09-21-2009 09:51 AM

What's the point of this thread? I thought the real reasons minimums were so low a couple years ago are well known by everyone? Obviously not though!

Purpleanga 09-21-2009 10:24 AM


Originally Posted by Mason32 (Post 681821)
Didn't the CA have just barely over 100 in type? and didn't both of them admit to having very little experience in icing weather....

There is your accident caused by low experience, and poor training.
.

Exactly and the 100 in type is an airline training problem, not a pilot problem. Both of them admit to having very little experience in icing doesn't really matter anyways since this was not an ice issue. Most of the time you start seeing real ice when you start flying advanced planes, not as a VFR CFI. And there are thousands of cases where pilots are forced to fly in unsafe situations. It's nothing new.

Low experience does not mean low time. Poor training? YES As did the AA pilots that went into the mountain in South America. Again, you haven't shown an accident that was caused by 200 wonders.

DeltaPaySoon 09-21-2009 12:38 PM


Originally Posted by ugflyer (Post 681864)
What's the point of this thread? I thought the real reasons minimums were so low a couple years ago are well known by everyone? Obviously not though!

I did too but not one person has mentioned it yet.

Management doesn't have personal legal ramifications for their practices and insurance companies somehow seem to think that a 300 hr. pilot is acceptable with 80 passengers but a 1200 hr. pilot can't get a job flying a Falcon......hmmmm, I wonder who pays more on insurance premiums.

80ktsClamp 09-21-2009 01:20 PM


Originally Posted by Purpleanga (Post 681877)
Exactly and the 100 in type is an airline training problem, not a pilot problem. Both of them admit to having very little experience in icing doesn't really matter anyways since this was not an ice issue. Most of the time you start seeing real ice when you start flying advanced planes, not as a VFR CFI. And there are thousands of cases where pilots are forced to fly in unsafe situations. It's nothing new.

Low experience does not mean low time. Poor training? YES As did the AA pilots that went into the mountain in South America. Again, you haven't shown an accident that was caused by 200 wonders.

Training is another reason I'm antsy about riding on regionals. The training departments do basically enough to cover within the shadow of the law. This is especially true at the "lower end" regionals.

The majors have made many mistakes over the years which have resulted in fatalities but many improvements to training and equipment. However it looks like the regionals are trying to redo them and learn the same lessons over again. Never compromise savings, right?

the AA pilots that went in simply line selected the wrong NDB lat/long... for some reason the FMC prompted a far away ndb of the same name as L1.

Combine that with high workload/task saturation, an unfamiliar area, and very high hills...

dojetdriver 09-21-2009 02:24 PM


Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp (Post 681976)
the AA pilots that went in simply line selected the wrong NDB lat/long... for some reason the FMC prompted a far away ndb of the same name as L1.

Combine that with high workload/task saturation, an unfamiliar area, and very high hills...

Combined with poor SA, failure to crosscheck, poor execution of SOP's, not knowing the state/configuration of their aircraft, etc.

Said it before, say it again. A highly experienced/compensated crew is just as capable of bending metal/killing people as one that is not. It's proven time and time again.

80ktsClamp 09-21-2009 04:14 PM


Originally Posted by dojetdriver (Post 682004)
Combined with poor SA, failure to crosscheck, poor execution of SOP's, not knowing the state/configuration of their aircraft, etc.

Said it before, say it again. A highly experienced/compensated crew is just as capable of bending metal/killing people as one that is not. It's proven time and time again.


Procedures have been put in place to mitigate that situation since then- in fact your FMS confirm/execute procedure as well as GPWS escape procedure on the CRJ is a direct result of what was developed after the Cali accident.

The regional and other low end company training departments are pushing the limit on the low end constantly just to maintain the illusion of following the regs.

Unfortunately, there will be plenty more accidents like colgan to come. The culture has not changed.

dojetdriver 09-21-2009 04:22 PM


Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp (Post 682039)
Procedures have been put in place to mitigate that situation since then- in fact your FMS confirm/execute procedure as well as GPWS escape procedure on the CRJ is a direct result of what was developed after the Cali accident.

Are you sure airlines didn't already have this, but in the case of AA it was nonexistent? When you say "your procedure on the CRJ", I've never flown it. But yes, I know what you're referring to.


Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp (Post 682039)
The regional and other low end company training departments are pushing the limit on the low end constantly just to maintain the illusion of following the regs.

Depends on who you're talking about. Both "regionals" I've worked for had good training. My last one had AQP, combined with a lot other things not required thrown in, and that was in 2000 when I got hired. The props had it before that. But lumping all regionals into one category is pretty shortsighted.

SilkySmooth 09-22-2009 08:52 PM


Originally Posted by dojetdriver (Post 681477)
I wonder if the traveling public that got on an MD going to LIT, or a 757 in Columbia was aware of what was in the cockpit?

Once, when I was jumpseating on a mainline carrier, the Captain (30 years with company) made a snide comment about the lack of experienced pilots being hired from my company by his airline. (Apparently, 7,000 hours was not enough experience.) As we approached 500 feet on landing, the FO put his hand on the spoiler lever, calmly looked at this Captain, and asked "Sir, would you like me to put these in?" Apparently experience doesn't cover all sins.:eek:


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:32 PM.


Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands