We need experienced guys in the flight deck......Experience is gained when you say "Oh Sh**...I won't do that again"...in the real flying world......when I hop into my Airbus I can tell right away from the Captain...if he or she is an ex cargo pilot or not.....just the way they fly...1500 Hours...won't solve that problem.....just my 2 cents

 

The 1900 pilot at 1000hrs was most likely not PIC and thus relied on someone else to make the tough calls and correct any errors.

The CFI was there assessing decisions of another pilot and making his decision and their was no one there to fix it if he made a poor one except himself.

 

Me too! Anyday and twice on Sundays. Some of the weakest FO's I ever flew with at my past regional were from a non CFI background. It's noticed in ability but more importantly, in attitude.

 

Yes, because if he's getting 'iced up' & in WX getting the snot beat out of him he has just proved to me that he doesnt make good decisions. If he's in TS's then he obviously doesn't know how to use a radar, or he makes poor decisions. Most likely because all of his time in the B1900 was SIC and he was just along for the ride. I don't want someone who only knows how to be along for the ride. I want someone who is PRO-active, & can make decisions.

 

Good points too guys. I agree with both of you.

 

I am going to throw in a couple of unconnected comments to points raised by others. But please let me start by pointing out that once upon a time I was also a 250 hour pilot. And then latter a 500 hour pilot. And so on. Been there. Have fond memories.

First there is the issue of the worth of a CFI. Every bit of experience is helpful, but we can not all do it all. Smart pilots understand this and try to learn from others with different sets of experiences (idiots stroke their ego by looking down on other backgrounds). In the case of the CFI in a C-150, he has learned to think for himself, to be wary of all things and most importantly to get inside the mind of the other pilot. The latter is no small skill, and as I work in a heavy jet with a lot of other old farts it is pretty easy to tell who has some instructing in their background and who does not.

Next I offer a set of thought experiments. Take a group of 10 pilots. We will give them certain scenarios to manage at different points in their career, using 500 hours, 1500 hours and 5,000 hours. Let’s put them in the right seat of a 121 operation in the United States.

The basic divert. ORD is heading down the tubes, there is only so much fuel to hold and the alternate is not that great. At what point are they going to better manage the situation and support the Captain? 500? 1500? 5000?

Approaching an outlying airport in winter weather. The runway is plowed full length and 50’ either side of centerline. The temperature is in the low 20s and the wind is across the runway at 15 knots. How many of the pilots are going to sense the trap at different points in their career? One thing is certain, the odds get better as the experience bucket gets filled.

And of course there is basic radar interpretation. Hint here -- if you just “avoid the red” you should seek some training. But moving on, who is going to be better able to pick the “kill me” from the rain showers? The 500 hour guy, the 1500 hour guy or the 5,000 hour guy? This is actually a very complicated subject, since the same radar return can mean very different things depending on geographical location, altitude and overall weather conditions.

Finally, anyone who does not think that some experience towing would have kept Renslow from doing the wrong thing in BUF has never towed. That is just a little vent that I needed to get off my chest.

 

For a while we were getting 300Hr F/O's where i work i have seen them progress a lot that past year or so, where they are up around 1000+ hrs and recently we have gotten a few 1000-1700 hr CFI's in and form my experience with that i would take one of our 300 hr guys. Yes they dont have much PIC but they have experience that i think works better in the situation.


"getting 'iced up' & in WX getting the snot beat out of him he has just proved to me that he doesnt make good decisions."


I said that cause we operate in a non radar environment. Not everyone can top the weather or in your CFI's case turn back/cancel the flight

 

(looking for my bow down, Im not worthy emoticon...)

maybe the captain can help me since us lowly FO's dont know how to make decisions on our own, much less fly a plane

I'm betting you teach CRM classes in your spare time....

 

Nah I don't get enough days off from my regional FO gig to do that.

 

http://regs.dot.gov/rulemakings/201107/report.htm#10

13.
Pilot Certification and Qualification Requirements (formerly First Officer Qualification Requirements) (HR 5900) Red
Popular Title: Pilot Certification and Qualification Requirements
RIN 2120-AJ67

Stage: NPRM [mod edit: not the Final Rule Making]

Previous Stage: ANPRM: Publication Date 02/08/2010; End of Comment Period 04/09/2010
Abstract: This rulemaking would amend the eligibility and qualification requirements for pilots engaged in part 121 air carrier operations. Additionally, it would modify the requirements for an airline transport pilot certificate. These actions are necessary because recent airline accidents and incidents have brought considerable attention to the experience level and training of air carrier flight crews.
Effects:
None
Prompting action: Statute
Legal Deadline: NPRM : 01/28/2011
Rulemaking Project Initiated: 10/20/2009

Docket Number: FAA-2010-0100
Dates for NPRM:

Milestone.................OriginallyScheduled..New ProjectedDate..ActualDate
To OST...........................12/08/2010..........01/26/2011.......01/26/2011
To OMB..........................12/21/2010..........05/20/2011.......06/23/2011
OMB Clearance ...............01/21/2011..........08/22/2011
Publication Date..............01/28/2011..........09/06/2011
End of Comment Period....04/28/2011..........12/06/2011

Explanation for any delay: Additional coordination necessary
Federal Register Citation for NPRM: None


Federal Aviation Administration