FYI, both pilots had more than that when they were hired, and the FO did instruct for many hours doing stall after stall as you put it, yet she still raised flaps at the wrong time. It would probably do you some good to research what you are talking about before you say it. Like others have said in here, training and fatigue were the issue here, not hours when they were hired at Colgan. Now back to the issue at hand

 

I agree with everything you said except the EMB-120 is the aircraft you meant to referance.... LOL

 

I'm a pretty low-time pilot, but have gotten the chance to sit right seat in some turbo-props and gained some invaluable experience there. Its a whole different type of experience than I've gained through instructing in the 152 that I've been instructing in. Different weather like storms, icing, and approaches down to minimums; experience dealing with busier airports and airspace; more advanced aircraft and basic CRM.

IMO (and this is probably an unpopular opinion), just having 1500 hours in mostly 152/172/PA-28's in almost or all VFR is not going to necessarily a better airline pilot. There's got to be a point where instructing experience gained in trainer aircraft somewhat plateaus and doesn't not really transfer over to making a better airline pilot. There are going to be pilots that just don't get opportunities to fly in much other than basic training aircraft, and there's got to be a point where reaching a magical number of hours in the logbook does not suddenly make them ready to haul 50 pax around in a jet. That is where better training at the airline level comes in - training in the type that the pilot will be flying.

On one hand, it is ridiculous that there have been pilots hired with 300 to 500 hours or even less- I do believe pilots in that stage of their career are still in a learning phase. On the other hand, I personally think a 800-1000 hour minimum is more reasonable than 1500 hours and an ATP.

 

I'm no NTSB investigator, nor a 7000 hour pilot. But given the circumstances of the Colgan crash, it not only was a stall, but a tailplane stall. At least in my opinion. Yes, 800 hours of practice area/traffic pattern flying may teach you to lower the nose and increase power in a stall. But when in your training are you taught to raise the nose and decrease power in a tailplane stall. The symptoms are exactly the same, but recovery is completely opposite. Therefor you have to decide which kind of stall you are in with two seconds. Perhaps the captain picked the wrong recovery which lead to very fatal results. Could 2-3000 TT have prevented this? I think not...

 

I agree. And don't airlines in Europe have ab-initio programs where very low time pilots go through airline type training during their college studies, then go on to fly airliners with little or no issue? Not to say that experience gained through instructing is not valuable (that's the route I took) but if you have one guy with 1500 hours mostly spent teaching in a 152 and another guy with 500 hours who has gone through a four year aviation degree program and has had a curriculum covering CRM, advanced aircraft systems, high speed aerodynamics, etc. I would think that at the end of the day the 500 hour guy would be better prepared to be an airline pilot, and of course make it through airline training than the guy who did essentially the same flights a thousand times.

 

It wasn't a tailplane stall. It was quite obviously an everyday, regular ol' wing stall. He pulled and added about 3/4 full power, which is a wrong recovery no matter which type you think it is.

 

Wasn't a tailplane stall. They lost situational awareness, got too slow and found themselves in a good old fashioned wing stall. It is arguable, however, that because of the conditions, their training, and the immediate activation of the pusher that they may have thought they had a tail stall and reacted arrordingly. Opposite of what they should have done. There were many other factors involved as well, including the increase ref switch was on when they were using non-ice ref speeds. This would cause the shaker and pusher to activate sooner. A lot of the focus on training and rest rules comes from their conversation and their commute in.

 

I mean nothing personal, but as someone intimately familiar with the accident, your assessment of the situation is wrong. Yes, clearly the crew stalled the aircraft; however, there was no tailplane stall. Furthermore, I do not believe the crew thought (although none of us will ever truly know) there was a tailplane stall either.


Personally, I welcome the increased requirement for entry to the airlines.

 

That's precisely why there will be exceptions to the 1500 hour rule. I graduated at riddle with 300/45 but passed the crj course at riddle. It's not the 1 week ATP Crj course; at riddle it's the same training as regionals. Very small percentages of riddle guys actually go through airline concentration, worth it in my book.

 

I went to Riddle and didn't spend the extra cash for the CRJ course. Maybe be worth it in your book but not worth the extra payment in loans out of my checkbook each month. Am I a lesser pilot?