ANPRM: New 121 Pilot Certification Rqmts.
02-19-2010 | 01:49 PM
#61
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 267
Likes: 0
From: CR7
3. Legal Recidents working as pilot in US airlines have all security clearance and have to do it over and over again every year for recurrent training. I know. I am one of them. We are more security cleared than any US born pilot.
I don't need a lecture from an alien as to what is required for a security clearance. I held one one of the highest as an officer in the US military. You as a legal resident do not get the same level of clearance as a US citizen. I am not going to debate this point. It is what it is. To say you are more security cleared than a US citizen is nonsense. Try that logic at a job interview with the US government.
I don't need a lecture from an alien as to what is required for a security clearance. I held one one of the highest as an officer in the US military. You as a legal resident do not get the same level of clearance as a US citizen. I am not going to debate this point. It is what it is. To say you are more security cleared than a US citizen is nonsense. Try that logic at a job interview with the US government.
Yes Sir, You do (both the lecture form the Alien from out of space and yes you need the security clearance) if you are a legal Resident and (very important) a Pilot working for a US Airline. Every time a Legal Resident wants to work for a US Airline he has to open an account with Homeland Security and get a Security Clearance and that Clearance has to be renewed every year for recurrent. And that Legal resident pilot working at a US Airline has been checked more in FBI files, fingerprints and everything else than any US born pilot. That is what I ment with being cleared. I did not mean a Military clearance to read secret files woooho....
Another note, Many Legal Residents have American family. (American spouse and kids). What you are trying to do is discriminate family members of Americans. Shame on you.
I am sure that todays US militaries have better values, more connected to what build this great country. And yes I can say it because I am also becoming American and that very soon.
Most of my family are Americans and I kept my old nationality to give my American part of the family the opportunity to travel and live in Europe if they wanted. This country was built by immigrants. We are all created as equals like all immigrants that build this country wanted it to be.
You should go back and study your history and constitution. Yes I am doing it. At the same time read Mein kampf by a known fellow with Ideas simmilar to yours.
How are you going to chase me or discriminate the immigrants that become Americans like me...(you probably would think "darn another one escape by becoming American")....will you discriminate me for my religion or political views??
Last edited by HermannGraf; 02-19-2010 at 04:38 PM.
02-19-2010 | 02:20 PM
#62
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 4,218
Likes: 60
From: Legacy FO
The college degrees required for other professional, licensed jobs are professional degrees in their field. Lawyers need law degrees. Doctors need medical degrees. Engineers need engineering degrees. I'm unaware of any profession that requires a degree unrelated to the career field. If pilots are to be considered professionals in that way, a degree in political science, psychology, biology, or engineering (in which I have my degree) wouldn't make sense.
Now I think an airline having a requirement for a degree for their hiring minimums makes sense. It gives some indication about the general experience and abilities of the individual and could factor into whether they want them as an employee. However, a non-related degree has little bearing on your ability to safely and effectively practice a profession.
And as was mentioned by BoilerUP, the military requires a college degree to be an comissioned officer, not to be a pilot. Even if the vast majority of pilot warrant officers have degrees, it is not a requirement.
Just to be clear I am in favor of increasing mins for all 121 pilots to an ATP certificate (and don't think a four year college degree makes sense as an ATP requirement).
Now I think an airline having a requirement for a degree for their hiring minimums makes sense. It gives some indication about the general experience and abilities of the individual and could factor into whether they want them as an employee. However, a non-related degree has little bearing on your ability to safely and effectively practice a profession.
And as was mentioned by BoilerUP, the military requires a college degree to be an comissioned officer, not to be a pilot. Even if the vast majority of pilot warrant officers have degrees, it is not a requirement.
Just to be clear I am in favor of increasing mins for all 121 pilots to an ATP certificate (and don't think a four year college degree makes sense as an ATP requirement).
What we are saying is that a professional pilot must also have the basics; some type of college degree that emphasizes the math, physics, English, and possibly management. Then you go on and get your training in flight school.
Keep dumbing down the profession and keep watching your pay check dwindle. The more you devalue yourself, the less you are worth.
02-19-2010 | 02:32 PM
#63
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 267
Likes: 0
From: CR7
Your lack of understanding why a college degree shows. Doctors typically get a bachelors in some type of technical degree (chemistry, biology, maybe engineering). They then compete to get into medical school where they go through highly specialized training. But they must know the basics (calculus, chemistry, biology, physics, and be well spoken (English)) in order to be a doctor.
What we are saying is that a professional pilot must also have the basics; some type of college degree that emphasizes the math, physics, English, and possibly management. Then you go on and get your training in flight school.
Keep dumbing down the profession and keep watching your pay check dwindle. The more you devalue yourself, the less you are worth.
What we are saying is that a professional pilot must also have the basics; some type of college degree that emphasizes the math, physics, English, and possibly management. Then you go on and get your training in flight school.
Keep dumbing down the profession and keep watching your pay check dwindle. The more you devalue yourself, the less you are worth.
A solution is to make changes in what is required to be a pilot from the moment you start at a flight school.
In Europe the Commercial pilot certification is a College degree itself (2 year) that can be achieved at many Universities. I believe we have that also here in the US in Aviation college.
I am all for higher education demands for pilots but it has to be related. What is the point in having a 4 years degree in art or interior design if you are going to be an airline pilot?
If to be able to apply and start for your Private, instrument and then commercial pilot licence you would have to prove High school graduation, high scores and grades, pass a common knowledge test and a personality test and be security cleared by checking all you files crimminal records and fingerprints then all certificates up to ATP exam could be valuated as a 2 year degree like in Europe. It can then be build up with 2 years points in managements and other subjects to be a 4 years degree.
In Europe to start at an Aviation Academy you have to pass many knowledge, personality, medical test and have clean records.
maybe we should look at that here too.
Last edited by HermannGraf; 02-19-2010 at 04:41 PM.
02-19-2010 | 02:34 PM
#64
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
From: A320/A319/B737 Sys Acft Maint Controller
ATP-Total Time-Education
Having a degree will NOT make you a Better pilot or Make you more qualified BUT! Having obtained a degree puts you in the ballpark for a manager's profession and Being an ATP at a major or a Regional is about as much as Managing as it is flying. Having a Degree makes one more well rounded in the Overall scheme. My degree is in Aviation Maintenence Management. When I flew, my degree meant little except that I knew a little more about aircraft systems than some other guys. Now that I can no longer fly My degree is of an immense proportion because it IS my livelyhood, It didn't Make me a better Pilot but I Understand things Of Piloting to a FAR greater degree than I would Having Never Been a Pilot and I can explain things TO a pilot to a greatere degree. Though In truth I sometimes DO speak with pilots who's degrees appear to be a "plaque on the wall" as they seem to have very little sense of Expertise in what they're doing Or how they relate to those who assist them.. In dispatch OR Mantenence. Truth be told, a degree in Aviation isn't a Bad idea either.
But Who can you sell THAT Idea TO?!?! The 1500TT proposal is going to see a "Hard row to Hoe". . Especially from Airline Management, the ATA, Or the RAA because THEN they'd have to PAY you..
(GASP!) "get the rope! we gotta string this Owlhoot up on general principles of management!! Pay for education?? Next they'll want to Integrate TOO!!
02-19-2010 | 03:05 PM
#65
Line Holder
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
If you're going to be putting that into federal regulation, the mostly likely way would be to require an aviation degree. You could even make a professional, post-bachelor's degree, like most other professions have, a requirement for an ATP. I'm sure you could get all the aviation colleges to support that sort of regulation without any problem.
However, having received my training somewhere other than an aviation college, I don't see giving Embry Riddle a major boost in students as the best way to helping compensation for pilots and increasing competency of the people in airline cockpits.
Just as I don't think having someone get a BFA in Sculpture or a BA in French Poetry from the University of Montreal would really help either.
(with all due respect to the fine arts and french poetry)
Last edited by CaptFuzz; 02-19-2010 at 08:22 PM. Reason: respect for the fine arts and the French language
02-19-2010 | 03:42 PM
#66
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 711
Likes: 0
Plus, why should we have to compete with aliens for few pilot positions there are in the US? We can't go over to France, Italy or Germany and get an airline pilot job with Air France or Lufthansa unless we get French or German citizenship so why should some European pilot come over here and take our jobs?
Which means if you meet a nice German girl, get married, and apply for permanent residency in Germany, you too can work for Lufthansa. I hope you've learned something new.
I very much dislike whiners, especially uninformed whiners.
02-20-2010 | 02:18 PM
#67
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 691
Likes: 0
Selfishness you say? Try getting a flying job in Europe and then tell us how that will go without European citizenship. If they require it why shouldn't we require it in the US. We have the most liberal immigration and employment policy in the world. Either you have difficulty with your reading or just plain too lazy to read the entire post. Don't take it out of context and twist it to suit your agenda. Whatever they maybe.
Requiring citizenship for certain jobs is nothing new or a novelty. It is a fact for many jobs in the US, including the private sector.
Requiring citizenship for certain jobs is nothing new or a novelty. It is a fact for many jobs in the US, including the private sector.
02-20-2010 | 02:33 PM
#68
Day puke
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,865
Likes: 0
From: Out.
First, I'll admit I am someone that is low time, trying to come up the ranks and pay my dues but I see part of this proposal as a disaster.
I agree that more training always improves safety. But the 1,500 hour ATP minimums I disagree with. This is why: When Joe Pilot finishes his commercial single and multi training he could anywhere from 250 hours on up. So when he goes hunting for a job, 250 hours isn't enough. What's Joe Pilot going to do? Find the cheapest (lets admit it, we are all broke) way to gain the hours needed to meet the current hiring minimums to stay competitive. Joe Pilot is going to go a couple different ways to accomplish this. A) Earn a CFI/CFII/MEI rating and instruct until he is satisfied with his hours. During this he could be giving quality instruction or just be a yoke holder to log time. B) Buy time the cheapest way possible, either in C152's, J3 Cubs or a multi time building program. C) Fly banners, sky divers and other low time pilot positions, whenever insurance allows him to come on board. Or D) Military flight officer.
So out of those options which one most like 121 flying? A? Not in my mind. How does 2,000 hours in the pattern flying a 152, 172, Seminole, Dutchess transfer into flying a CRJ, ScareBus or Boeing? I don't see it. C? From I have read here and heard from other sources, banner towing and skydiving is still legal time, but not always accepted. D) I was enlisted, served my time and left with an honorable discharge and the GI Bill. Therefore I don't have first hand experience with the selection process, commissioning, and the going through flight school... So I couldn't fly, but as the saying goes "My parents couldn't afford to put me through college, but Uncle Sam can." Here I am, earned my ratings and going down path A. In my mind B is the closest to it. If you buy into a 'academy' type school. Isn't the the goal here, to "train like you fight" for that 121 dream job?
I agree with higher education, experience and ratings should be rewarded with better compensation. But if everyone should have an ATP before interviewing, how does that new standard become any better than the current? What's to say a first year FO with an ATP doesn't get paid minimum wage?
I agree that more training always improves safety. But the 1,500 hour ATP minimums I disagree with. This is why: When Joe Pilot finishes his commercial single and multi training he could anywhere from 250 hours on up. So when he goes hunting for a job, 250 hours isn't enough. What's Joe Pilot going to do? Find the cheapest (lets admit it, we are all broke) way to gain the hours needed to meet the current hiring minimums to stay competitive. Joe Pilot is going to go a couple different ways to accomplish this. A) Earn a CFI/CFII/MEI rating and instruct until he is satisfied with his hours. During this he could be giving quality instruction or just be a yoke holder to log time. B) Buy time the cheapest way possible, either in C152's, J3 Cubs or a multi time building program. C) Fly banners, sky divers and other low time pilot positions, whenever insurance allows him to come on board. Or D) Military flight officer.
So out of those options which one most like 121 flying? A? Not in my mind. How does 2,000 hours in the pattern flying a 152, 172, Seminole, Dutchess transfer into flying a CRJ, ScareBus or Boeing? I don't see it. C? From I have read here and heard from other sources, banner towing and skydiving is still legal time, but not always accepted. D) I was enlisted, served my time and left with an honorable discharge and the GI Bill. Therefore I don't have first hand experience with the selection process, commissioning, and the going through flight school... So I couldn't fly, but as the saying goes "My parents couldn't afford to put me through college, but Uncle Sam can." Here I am, earned my ratings and going down path A. In my mind B is the closest to it. If you buy into a 'academy' type school. Isn't the the goal here, to "train like you fight" for that 121 dream job?
I agree with higher education, experience and ratings should be rewarded with better compensation. But if everyone should have an ATP before interviewing, how does that new standard become any better than the current? What's to say a first year FO with an ATP doesn't get paid minimum wage?
All require positional/situational awareness and basic airman-ship skills. It is so easy to tell the guys who DIDN"T fly all those hours in the pattern: just ask them to fly an old fashioned, not backed-up-with-the-ILS-approach.... especially at night.
From I have read here and heard from other sources, banner towing and skydiving is still legal time, but not always accepted.
It counts toward that first job. I grant that the difference between 500 hours of banners is about the same as 5000, and it may not count as much as flying boxes.
If you buy into a 'academy' type school. Isn't the the goal here, to "train like you fight" for that 121 dream job?
They are selling a product: flight training. So, if I am selling the exact same product as the next guy and charging more, how can I generate customers? By selling this "We train you to be AIRLINE PILOTS!" All most do is make the instructors wear epaulets and ties and retype the checklists to "look just the same as the 121 airlines do."
But the best thing the ATP would do is eliminate those folks who have NO IDEA how to get 1500 hours. And the sweaty, grimy, UNGLAMOROUS jobs (aka. work) required to get those 1500 hours is below most people. Becoming an Airline Pilot will be just too darn hard
02-20-2010 | 04:41 PM
#69
Piper Commander
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 302
Likes: 0
WINNER
10 characters
02-20-2010 | 06:23 PM
#70
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 787
Likes: 0
Lots of folks on here are missing the point on the 4-year degree requirement, whether it's in French or Business or Aviation, a four year degree from a REAL school (i.e. not some UVSC/Online sham of an undergrad program) does two things:
1) Teaches you to think for yourself with reason, based evidence and not emotion
2) Raises a barrier to entry and also indirectly increases age and life experience of all pilots
Most of the people I see letting the company walk over them, accepting additional flying and crappy contract terms, and being unsafe are the same ones without four year degrees and/or little life experience prior to becoming a "professional" aviator. The reason? They can't see the big picture, they can't see through the propaganda and management tactics, and they have never been put through the pressure of expressing an original thought.
I think the piloting profession is at a crossroads with this bill--we will either continue on the course of becoming blue collar gear monkeys and bus drivers to society, or we will raise the barriers to entry and society will gradually begin to respect us as intelligent professionals who can think and talk--not operators, but aviators. Sorry if that sounded corny.
We have to hold ourselves to the same academic, experiential, and professional standards of doctors and lawyers if we ever expect society to pay us the same salaries.
1) Teaches you to think for yourself with reason, based evidence and not emotion
2) Raises a barrier to entry and also indirectly increases age and life experience of all pilots
Most of the people I see letting the company walk over them, accepting additional flying and crappy contract terms, and being unsafe are the same ones without four year degrees and/or little life experience prior to becoming a "professional" aviator. The reason? They can't see the big picture, they can't see through the propaganda and management tactics, and they have never been put through the pressure of expressing an original thought.
I think the piloting profession is at a crossroads with this bill--we will either continue on the course of becoming blue collar gear monkeys and bus drivers to society, or we will raise the barriers to entry and society will gradually begin to respect us as intelligent professionals who can think and talk--not operators, but aviators. Sorry if that sounded corny.
We have to hold ourselves to the same academic, experiential, and professional standards of doctors and lawyers if we ever expect society to pay us the same salaries.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
