To be perfectly honest you kind come off a little stuck up. I totally understand what you are saying and completely agree up until the point where you put ALL the blame on these "newbies". We all know the standards of the industry and the current level in which they stand is a direct result of the WHOLE pilot group. You can't just blame one side of the pilot group. If that's the case, where were you when these guys were applying and going through training? Why weren't you there to give them a heads up on the situation? Why didn't you try to teach them the values of not selling one's self short? The major influence in the new pilots these days are the schools, and the student loan companies. They will tell you anything and go to all ends just to make a couple hundred thousand off a student. So there are a lot of factors that got these "newbies" into the industry which played a significant role in the demise of industry standards.

To sum it up, no one knows what they are doing to the industry when they take a low paying job that treats them like crap in trade for flying a jet without having to pay your dues. So ultimately it is on the more senior guys and ones that know better to have an influence on this group. Good job to you sir.

 

IMO, ATP as a minimum to fly 121 is a great idea. (And I only have 1000TT). Not only does it bolster the entry experience level of airline pilots across the board, it also help to re-luster the reputation of this profession.

The problem will be getting those wet ATPers to accept more than 25K a year for the illustrious regional FO job, ATP or not. Especially with a bear economy and thousands of furloughed guys on the street.

And even if the demand for pilots gets so great that the airlines raise pay to attract qualified guys, the kicker will be convincing the American public to pay for it in their tickets.

I love the idea of an ATP as the minimum for the airlines. But if congress and the american people want experience and added safety, they have to pay for it.

 

shoot, why not 5,000 hours and 1,000 PIC

 

How about 2500 hr's. That would be somewhere around 1000 hr's instructing plus maybe another 1.5 - 2 yr's real world experience flying boxes, pax, lab work,etc. I know not all people would would get out of instructing at 135 min's to build time, but I believe enough would to advance their careers. I am not bashing CFI's, just pointing out how very controled the environment is in which they work. Just a thought.


Living the dream, one nightmare at a time

 

Exactly. The 1500 idea came because of the captain from 3407. The fact that he had 3500 at the time of the crash, and the fact that he only had 100 hours in the plane doesn't come up much. I wouldn't throw low timers under the bus now that we got ours.

Anyways the real interest for everyone is not the experience level, because a 3000 hour cessna driver will not know much from a 800 hour cessna driver when you put him in an RJ. Yes they will be able to pull out of a stall at 800 hours, even at 500 hours. But they both start from 0 at an airline. This is where airline training comes in. Well actually the FO had more than atp mins as a CFI when she was hired and she still raised the flaps at 20 degre pitch up. 1500 is just a band aid.

The interest is money. Better QOL because someone spent an extra weekend around the pattern with a DE in a Seminole. And hopefully there will be people that won't take low paying jobs because they have 1500. That has worked really well the last 50 years hasn't it? What they should be doing is going after management and the numerous problems with training. I think airline training is lacking.

 

SO... what you are saying is, those who were hired at less than xxxx hours SHOULD HAVE not even applied. And had a job opportunity came along that person(s) should have declined. Speaking to the recruiter "I appreciate the job offer, and I realize my declining of this position will only result in someone else of my = filling it. However, I am going to stick to my guns and wait it out for the sake of improving industry standards." That works great if all "newbies" have the same attitude. That would be like if I were offered a position right now in a Legacy Carrier 767. Granted I have fairly low time and only CL-65 sic.. don't think for a fraction of a second that I'm gonna decline that position. You can if you want.... but I'm going to align myself to be in a better position (experience) when things do turn around.

Some of you may say I have a bad attitude. That "why should I recycle when the rest of the folks on the block don't". Is my mere 3 plastic bottles going to make a difference?" NO. So until each and every pilot gets on board with making a change.... things ain't gonna change.


Don't blame the pilots. See above conversation with airline recruiter. Had you said "all the regionals have done is lowered... then I might not be so red in the face right now. Again I ask, what should the low timers have done? Decline job offers? We all know damn good and well that those positions will be filled, and if I decline it, someone else will take it and ... where does that leave me? "Great, all my peers are building jet time and I am here instructing in a 72 because I'm gonna stand strong and make a change" BS

What will I do? I don't really care. I meet ATP minimums and if need be I can go get one. So lets say I had not yet been hired by a regional. Lets say I met ATP mins and went down with all my 172, 152 and Seminole time and took the checkride at a flight school. How does an ATP ticket in a Piper really make me a more experienced passenger jet pilot? I think not.

 

ATP = Airline transport Pilot = license requiered to work as a pilot in an airline = Minimums. Kinda makes sense doesn't it?

 

This is well stated, Willie.

Another poster alluded to the fact that 800hrs vs 1500hrs in a 172 really makes no difference. I both agree and disagree with this point. True, raw hours in the logbook is not always an accurate reflection on a pilot's skill. It's quality of training and flight time that makes the difference, not quantity. I'd like to add by saying that the guy who spends 2 years instructing full time will have a higher capacity to think at a correlative level and have a deeper understanding of instrument procedures. However, the jump to CRJ systems will still be considerable for both the 800hr guy and the 1500hr guy who both flew 172s.

Second, the pilot who instructs for 2 years because his/her goal is to fly for an airline will probably be a better training product than the guy who has 200 hrs having no real appreciation for the hard work and responsibility involved in the path to become and being an airline pilot. I'm NOT saying that a 200hr FO doesn't appreciate his work. I'm just saying that there is something to be said for true devotion and the resulting attitude.

 

If I wanted the government's hand this tight around my throat I would move back to Europe.


-The Stig

 

Makes sense to me. The FAA forgot what the difference was... until now.