Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Regional
Deal made on hours of training for co-pilots >

Deal made on hours of training for co-pilots

Notices
Regional Regional Airlines

Deal made on hours of training for co-pilots

Old 03-16-2010, 03:49 PM
  #81  
Gets Weekends Off
 
ysslah's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Position: 88 Gunner
Posts: 516
Default

Most people I know of built their hours by flight instructing before they went on to the regionals. In most airplanes used for flight instruction, you would be a bad pilot if you fly in known icing, no?

what a load of S.
ysslah is offline  
Old 03-16-2010, 08:06 PM
  #82  
Gets Weekends Off
 
afterburn81's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Position: A320
Posts: 1,306
Default

Originally Posted by ysslah View Post
Most people I know of built their hours by flight instructing before they went on to the regionals. In most airplanes used for flight instruction, you would be a bad pilot if you fly in known icing, no?

what a load of S.

Exactly....... If they are going to mandate specifics to the hours you need then you are going to have to find a way to get those specific hours. I'm sure there are many people here that can honestly say that they actually bridged the gap between flight instructing in a single engine basic aircraft and flying a high performance technologically advanced machine full of moms, dads, sisters, brothers, and children etc. I myself am one of them.

Call me an idiot but from the day I got my commercial license and thought maybe one day I would like to fly for a living I was under the impression that I needed an ATP before I could get hired by an air carrier. (I'm not sure where I got it but I remember someone telling me that was the case) Instructing in an arrow or seminole all day wasn't really going to expose me to much of what I would expect one day flying lots of people around. So I ventured outside the box and decided to get a variation of hours to include in the journey to 1500. I was living each day as if I needed to have all of the qualifications that this new bill proposes a pilot to have. I believed in not only quantity but quality. It really wasn't that hard when I think about it.

Did you honestly think this whole thing was going to be a cake walk? And everyone complains that the job isn't very rewarding anymore. Of course not. You only get as much out of something as you put in. I lived by my fathers saying "you gotta pay to play". Work hard and one day it will pay off. The problem is, not enough people want to pay their dues. The airlines know this and take full advantage of it.
afterburn81 is offline  
Old 03-17-2010, 08:27 PM
  #83  
Gets Weekends Off
 
NoBeta's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2009
Position: autopilot abuser
Posts: 166
Default

I (Function effectively) when I sit down on the toity so why can't our government when it comes down to their jobs How sad, a perfect opportunity to actually make a difference and they screw it up like everything else. They should have just stuck to thier guns with an ATP. Instead RAA and their goon-squad will be in DC lobbying for what they want.
NoBeta is offline  
Old 03-18-2010, 05:53 AM
  #84  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Position: B767
Posts: 1,899
Default

Originally Posted by Zapata View Post
How do you know?
Have you seen this video (NTSB FDR reconstruction of Colgan 3407)?

YouTube - Colgan Flight 3407 NTSB Animation of Buffalo Accident Q400

If you have, I cannot fathom how you think the CA was responding appropriately to a potential tail stall.
wrxpilot is offline  
Old 03-18-2010, 06:04 AM
  #85  
Prime Minister/Moderator
 
rickair7777's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,100
Default

Originally Posted by dudas3 View Post
So let me see if I'm reading this correctly. Congress is trying to pass a provision requiring the FAA to make a rule change for FO's by 12/31/2011 (End of next year). If the FAA does not do this within that time frame then the minimum requirement for FO's automatically goes to an ATP? What about the specifically-prescribed conditions stated in this article for an ATP? Are they referring to the already written requirements for obtaining an ATP or are they planning on coming up with something different?Next we come to the part of, "Demonstrate the ability to." What in the world does that mean? Does that mean that we are now going to have PTS's for these new requirements, more written tests, or will the fact that you have flown for a regional, even though you may be furloughed at this time, going to be enough to meet these requirements?Finally we come to the flight training in, "Difficult flying conditions." Once again, what are we talking about? Are we talking about icing, very busy Class B (i.e. JFK, EWR, LGA, ORD, LAX, etc.), IMC, emergency type training?

I agree with NoBeta that these statements are way too vague. There is no where to go to and get any information on these changes, and as far as I know there have been only two articles that I have found which even discuss the changes. Granted this bill sounds like it is a proposal of rulemaking to the FAA so specifics are probably not available yet, but some of these changes could affect quite a few pilots. My concern is for those of us who are furloughed, through no fault of our own in many cases, who meet the 800 hours, but who may now not technically be qualified to do the jobs we have already done because of these additional requirements. Will there be any type of Grandfather clause for those of us with 121 experience? This bill is just filled with way to many questions.
If the FAA fails to devise a new rule by 12/2011, FO's will need an ATP. The "specific conditions" just refer to the existing ATP requirements.

It would actually be easier on the airlines (and noob pilots) if they just go with the ATP...it will be cheaper and easier to get an ATP as a CFI/MEI than jump through some of the hoops implied in the 800 hour proposal.

The FAA will have to devise the details of the 800-hour rule. Congress did not attempt to get that far into the weeds...

It might just be logged time in specific conditions.

It might require dual-received and endorsement(s).

It might end up a whole new rating with it's own PTS, checkride, and maybe written (I suspect they will just require the ATP written)...TAA Commercial, 121 Commercial, or something like that.
rickair7777 is offline  
Old 03-18-2010, 06:51 AM
  #86  
Gets Weekends Off
 
TPROP4ever's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2008
Position: none ya...
Posts: 1,154
Default

Originally Posted by rickair7777 View Post
If the FAA fails to devise a new rule by 12/2011, FO's will need an ATP. The "specific conditions" just refer to the existing ATP requirements.

It would actually be easier on the airlines (and noob pilots) if they just go with the ATP...it will be cheaper and easier to get an ATP as a CFI/MEI than jump through some of the hoops implied in the 800 hour proposal.

The FAA will have to devise the details of the 800-hour rule. Congress did not attempt to get that far into the weeds...

It might just be logged time in specific conditions.

It might require dual-received and endorsement(s).

It might end up a whole new rating with it's own PTS, checkride, and maybe written (I suspect they will just require the ATP written)...TAA Commercial, 121 Commercial, or something like that.
Rick I agree with this. Sad, but I tried to caution people that trusting any government entity to regulate entry into a field they know little about could bite us all in the butt. Well I guess it has happened. It looks like the FAA will be required to make a new certification, call it a 121 commercial. What does this mean? The way I see it we could all (regardless if you are an 801 hr. FO, or a 20,000 hr, 18 year seatlocked major FO) have to go take a checkride for our nice shiney new certificate. We can hope we will be able to do it during PC in the sim, but if not then I wonder, will we have to pay for the DPE and plane for that new certificate? I know that based on the comments I've seen over the last year, that the majority of posters seemed a bit more concerned about whether you could use this movment to artificially raise your pay in the industry, rather than safety. Well it looks like YOU WON, so let me pat you on the back....sarcasm

Last edited by TPROP4ever; 03-18-2010 at 07:08 AM.
TPROP4ever is offline  
Old 03-18-2010, 10:31 AM
  #87  
Prime Minister/Moderator
 
rickair7777's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,100
Default

Originally Posted by TPROP4ever View Post
Rick I agree with this. Sad, but I tried to caution people that trusting any government entity to regulate entry into a field they know little about could bite us all in the butt. Well I guess it has happened. It looks like the FAA will be required to make a new certification, call it a 121 commercial. What does this mean? The way I see it we could all (regardless if you are an 801 hr. FO, or a 20,000 hr, 18 year seatlocked major FO) have to go take a checkride for our nice shiney new certificate. We can hope we will be able to do it during PC in the sim, but if not then I wonder, will we have to pay for the DPE and plane for that new certificate? I know that based on the comments I've seen over the last year, that the majority of posters seemed a bit more concerned about whether you could use this movment to artificially raise your pay in the industry, rather than safety. Well it looks like YOU WON, so let me pat you on the back....sarcasm
I think it will raise the bar, perhaps indirectly, by requiring higher levels of experience and more up-front effort. People with experience have more options in aviation, and may not be attracted by regional food stamp wages.

If current 121 pilots are not grandfathered, then the airlines will have to provide the new rating during a PC. They may just opt to give everybody an ATP, same cost and they were going to have to do that when you upgraded anyway. The tradition in 121 is that they pay for required training, especially after you are already employed.

Any airline which refuses to provide the new rating would probably end up liquidated on the day the new rule took effect...I doubt many FO's would rush to go buy another rating out in town. Most of us have been in the right seat for 3-10 years...not much SJS left.
rickair7777 is offline  
Old 03-18-2010, 08:21 PM
  #88  
Line Holder
 
Hot Rod Wannabe's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: Banker....UGH!
Posts: 75
Default

Originally Posted by rickair7777 View Post
I think it will raise the bar, perhaps indirectly, by requiring higher levels of experience and more up-front effort. People with experience have more options in aviation, and may not be attracted by regional food stamp wages.

If current 121 pilots are not grandfathered, then the airlines will have to provide the new rating during a PC. They may just opt to give everybody an ATP, same cost and they were going to have to do that when you upgraded anyway. The tradition in 121 is that they pay for required training, especially after you are already employed.

Any airline which refuses to provide the new rating would probably end up liquidated on the day the new rule took effect...I doubt many FO's would rush to go buy another rating out in town. Most of us have been in the right seat for 3-10 years...not much SJS left.
Rick, Again you miss the mark! it isn't about the hours. Is 800 going to make a pilot safe? How about 5000 hours? It isn't the hours, if that were the case explain Cali Colombia? so many case studies that show hours aren't the key factor. Sleep, better rest cycles, and giving the PIC actual athority to tell a dispatcher no way jose! The union didn't win and when this goes in to full bloom it will cripple an already crippled industry.
It is an ugly approach and you should have gone missed!
Hot Rod Wannabe is offline  
Old 03-18-2010, 08:53 PM
  #89  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: FAA
Posts: 59
Default

It sounds like they are raising the commercial pilot requirements to 800 hours. I hope I am reading this right?

AINalerts | March 18, 2010
152SIC is offline  
Old 03-18-2010, 08:55 PM
  #90  
Line Holder
 
imbroke's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Posts: 65
Default

How about making the sim portion of the interview not so freakin easy!! I interviewed at 2 airlines (got an offer at both) and both had the easiest sim evals ever. I mean what does having a instrument rated commercial pilot fly an ILS to minimums then describe what type of hold entry should be done during the missed tell you about that pilot? Absolutely nothing other than they can read a gouge and practice the standard sequence a few times before the interview. Switch it up so you can't just read the gouge and know exactly what you are going to do for the interview. You should have to do a few approaches, maybe via procedure turn on one, throw some single engine and partial panel in there as well. I know that's not what you will be doing 99.99% of the time at the airlines but at least you know for that .01% you'll have the right pilot for the job, and that's when it really counts. And if you think that is unfair or too hard for an interview then I certainly don't want to ride in the back of any plane your flying.

"Excellence is not a skill. It is an attitude."
imbroke is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Guard Dude
Delta
201720
04-06-2022 06:59 AM
DryMotorBoatin
Regional
22
07-06-2009 06:21 PM
Flyby1206
Regional
138
06-29-2009 09:59 AM
Maxclimb12
Major
1
03-18-2009 03:52 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices