Nothing..... except it is usually cheaper for the company to keep the autopilot working than pay for a SIC. And many of the PFT 135 gigs have gone away as well.

While that is true, the point was requiring 1500 hours or an ATP will not mean every pilot who gets into 121 will have the skills, judgment, and airmanship that those in support of the law want. Just like there are people who buy the last 10 hours of multi time they need to break 100 hours or partner up with somebody for some “safety pilot” time to get to the minimums, there will be those who find somebody who lets them sit in the right seat in their King Air with no autopilot and watch the real pilot fly for 1250 hours.

The best part of the law is that 121 will no longer have the lowest entry requirement of 250 hours and a commercial certificate. Most flight schools don't like putting someone with that amount of time in command of a 172 with a student. New pilots will more than likely have had a few pilot jobs as CFIs or charter pilots, so they will at least have a good amount of experience working as a pilot.

I don't want to come across as painting everyone with the same brush. There are always exceptions. There will always be high time pilots who suck and there will also be low timers who rock. I just don't think that SIC'ing an RJ as soon as you hit 250 hours is a very beneficial way to acquire hours during those very early, formative hours of one's flying career. I really think that they are missing out on opportunities that will offer much more experience and knowledge that will benefit them down the road when they are competent to be PIC of an airliner.
It's nothing more than on-the-job training. Take a guy when he knows next to nothing, mold him to fit your company's pilot profile, throw him in the left seat and he's good to go. Take him out of that atmosphere though, and he might have no clue what to do. I just prefer more well rounded pilots.

There are only a certain number of hours in a week, you could not sleep all that much and fit everything into a week, but I think that wouldn't make sense if finding ways to improve safety is the whole point argument here. Seems like common sense.

I wouldn't be doing what I am doing now if I didn't think things worth having were worth working hard for.

For me as being on the 121 Captain chair. Having an F/O with ATP has 2 reasons:

1) Pay your dues buddy get to that ATP 1,500 hours finish line before flying 121. Any flying as Captain makes you a better pilot, because the decision was made by you no matter the scenario. You did not killed yourself or another. So flying 1,500 as CFI it shows me a better candidate to be on my side on an Engine Fire than a 450 hours jet jockey...
2) To my understanding ATP means AIRLINE Transport Pilot and both the PIC and SIC are AIRLINE pilots so why the difference of having an F/O without an ATP?

I flew with those 250 F/O's and the day is longer and more stressful. Is like being a training captain without being paid xtra for that...And Sorry if I am AGAINST this rich lowtimers that make my day more dangerous 95% of the time...

Let me know when the pilot puppy mills have the same standards as the Lufthansa Cadet Program. When the junior regional Captain has the same experience as the junior Lufthansa Captain. When the depth of the operations management at any American regional matches that of Lufthansa. And when the initial operating experience program at any American regional matches that used by Lufthansa.

In other words -- you can not cherry pick. Take all of the Lufthansa program or don't take any of it.

Most of the airlines in Europe hire with 250 hours, but the interview process, simulator training, line training is much different and much harder than any regional. FYI my company hires F/Os with 250 hours into the Airbus family and you have a percentage that doesn't make it past the 1st day of interviews.

I think all people who preach/demand the 1500hr ATP for a regional FO should put the number of hours they had at the time they were first hired to fly in their signature. I would bet that there are a lot that got hired with far less than 1500 hours and are now against the very conditions under which they got hired.

135 mins are pretty close to 1500 hours so getting PIC 135 time is out for most, traffic jobs are few and far between now that they have cameras everywhere, banner jobs aren't that easy to get in most places and jumpers are the same way. So now you are back to being a CFI if you can find a school/job. My memory may be slipping but I don't remember aircraft just falling out of the sky a few years ago when people were getting jobs with a wet COM. Oh and if you go to a 141 school they didn't have 250 hours either, it was much less.

I do believe that training should be harder, testing should be harder and more indepth. That goes both ways though and recurrent training probably needs to be a lot harder for captains as well. You should be tested to a point of weeding out the weak, whether that be a 250 hour wonder, a 1500 hour CFI or a 15000 hour captain. Hours don't make the pilot. The type of hours make the pilot.

I do think that if the 1500 hour "law" is implemented and firm on the hours, you will see a new round of PFT programs at frieght companies and others. Simple fact is that people are going to pay to get to the 1500 hours if that is what the limit is. Not everyone wants to / needs to / or can be a CFI so the people that think the only way to be a "real" pilot is to be a CFI need to come to terms with reality and move on. Becoming a pilot is a second career for many and frankly they don't have the time to work 2-3 years as a CFI. Regional pay is bad enough without prolonging the pain 2-3 more years. Right or wrong it is what it is.

Good thing the FAA and congress wasn't around back in the day. Orvil and Wilber would have had to have 1500 hours before heading down to kitty hawk, then where would we all be.

I think the industry as a whole would be better off with airline sponsored training programs, and rigorous assessment. Ensuring the best of the best make it through. That way the rule is awesome 250 hour pilots, not the exception. At Cathay, their 'cadets' sit as a one stripe cruise officer for 3 years minimum before they start doing take off's and landings, or anything below 10,000 feet.

Do you think there a way to change the our industry for the better? And really, unfortunately with the 'pilot shortage' coming, the ATP hour rule will not be the same as the 1500 hour rule...

Cheers!

Im just curious what you think is going to happen once demand increases and the airlines literally do not have enough applicants with an ATP. Park planes? Recruit directly from aviation universities with "jet bridge" courses and CRM classes? Eagle and others are already having trouble filling classes as it is. I just see this creating an equally large problem. Is it just me? Seems like there is no clear solution. Not to mention this will make the career path of a pilot seem even more arduous thus attracting less qualified people.

Incidentally lets remember both pilots in the Colgan crash (what started this campaign) had well above ATP minimums but still couldn't react to a stall properly...

On a complete tangent, I have a good friend that was suppose to be on that flight. His connection was late and he missed the flight. He still has his ticket. Talk about someone looking out for you.

And I can not help but think that a summer or two of banner towing, or a bit of flight instructing, might have kept that accident from happening.

And per Duksrule's request: 2300 hours into the right seat of a Twin Otter in 1982. I was considered, and considered myself to be, low time with a lot to learn.

Airlines will have to increase their compensation to attract those pilots holding ATPs who work in other segments of industry (expats, corporate/frax/charter, those employed outside aviation, etc.) or go out of business. Then those businesses will have to increase their compensation to retain or recruit new talent.

Its this nifty thing called the "free market".

There will never be a lack of well-qualified pilots wanting to work at quality operators that offer suitable compensation and quality of life. Those companies that offer industry-lagging pay & QOL, well....they'll go the way of the dodo due to a lack of talent. It'll be short-term pain for some, for the greater good of the entire industry.

Maybe because they now realize what little they knew back in the day of low time when they thought they knew everything too. I mean, in your many years of military service, don't you look back on certain things and realize how little you knew about what was going on when you first started and after many more years of living the dream you realize how many more factors were at play in the decisions being made?

Maybe it is that very experience that now colors their perceptions. Actually quite a few on this thread have even said [I didn't know what I didnt know].

That doesn't answer the question of how many times things might have gone wrong or nearly went wrong except for someone catching something. If you are only basing your argument on mishap statistics, and not what is REALLY going on in the cockpit which is being shared with you in stories and experiences ith CA flying with some of these people then not much can be siad to convince you otherwise.

A healthy combination of BOTH makes the pilot.

csh405:
That point has been well debated even in this thread.

USMCFLYR

USMC I completely understand your points and to some extent I agree just maybe not on the same fix. For the guys who got hired with low time and suddenly had the epiphany that "wow I don't know as much as I thought and I am not safe" I ask DID YOU QUIT or did you continue to work and learn? Now that they have seen the light they want it to be harder for everyone below them. It makes them sound like primadonnas that forgot where they came from and what it was like to grow. Now that they are in, screw the rest of the guys trying to make it. It would be like an officer saying now that I got my commision with just a BS degree, I want to fight for all that come after me to have to have a MS degree because I didn't feel I was educated enough before going to OCS. (I know over simplified but you get the point)

Also the examples you talk about in this thread go both ways. Captains correct FOs and FOs catch mistakes that the CA make. That is all part of being a team and working together. Many people talk about low time guys like they are sitting in the right seat in their booster chair just pushing buttons and licking the window. I am all about if EITHER pilot is doing something in the cockpit that is so bad that it puts the A/C or passengers at risk then steps need to be taken and have them fired. It is just that simple. But if it is just the learning curve of being a new FO well then I do feel that part of the CAs job is to mentor junior pilots. As a MC aviator did you ever mentor your JOs? Or did you say "screw you, you are a low time bad pilot and it isn't my job to teach you"? My guess is that you held training whether it was your "job" or not.

My only point is that 1500 isn't a magic number. It has been proven with statistics that mishaps involving pilot error happen more with an over 1500 hour pilot in the cockpit. While being a CFI may give you some insight and experience, sitting in the right seat not flying the A/C for 1500 hours doesn't make you a super pilot. Or how about the CFIs that are in FL or someplace that they really never see weather, fly nothing but new airplanes etc.... and how much planning/decision making is involved in taking a new airplane that is full of gas out for 1.2 in the practice area doing turns with a student? My wife gets more experience riding right seat in our cessna on a bad weather day.

I'm going to post this again, for what seems like the one billionth time. The CA had 263 hours when he entered the 121 world.

I laugh every time I read this. Stalls are something taught from day four or five...rehashed through every stage of training all the way through a type rating. There is no excuse for ignoring a shaker then overpowering a pusher. No amount of 'banner towing, or a bit of flight instructing' would prevent that.

For those who don't fly the -8, it's a learning scenario to see what they did in the sim. The -8 has very benign stall characteristics and easily recovers. Plenty of warning with the shaker and a good, quick pusher. It really does make you wonder what all was going on in that cockpit to cause the accident.

It seems to me that many highlighting the need for more experience in the cockpit are from the generation when you need thousands of hours and much more experience than currently required to even have a shot at FO in a JS or Saab. Your question would more likely be answered from the new CAs who were hired and upgraded within the last few years (maybe at the time of the last "hiring boom" - if they have even upgraded yet).
In the end - even if you are correct and they have forgotten where they came from - - - two wrongs don't make a right.

MENTORING and TEACHING are two different things. No one argues that new FOs don't need mentoring or even INSTRUCTION in the ways of the world regarding P121 operations. No matter your background growing up whether it be night dogging it or coming out of military heavy international experience - - those pilots still need mentoring and instruction in the ways of airline flying. THAT is what IOE CAs and training CAs are required to do. If you read carefully - many of these CAs who have answered this thread are saying that they have had to INSTRUCT in BASIC FLYING principles, not the details of their particular airlines OpSecs, FOMs, or finer details of airline flying. That is not good.

What did we do as MC aviators in the fleet? We complained to the training squadrons (Basic, Advanced and RAGs/FRSs) that some of the students they were sending us couldn't even rendezvous correctly or were still making what was considered basic mistakes and all concerned continued to tweak the training syllabus' to target those areas of most frequent complaints.
FLEET INSTRUCTION (think airline IOE) consisted of more advance flying and more indepth tactics (think P121 training) and FLEET IPs (think IOE CAs) didn't have time or opportunity to be training basic airmanship.

Nope - nothing magical about it at all except a lot of studies I presume, and a lot of smart people sitting around the table, trying to come up with some number and set amount of experience that proerly equated the the highest rating available in the US aviation system. I'm sure someone will always have a different idea - especially if it is viewed by that someone as inhibiting them in any way. What number of hours would YOU come up with Duks if you were tasked with providing a quality or quantity of hours/training? Could you sell it to the government and the public as the end all, be all answer? Could you defend it against the ants coming out of the woodwork who would cite study after study to discredit your 'arbitrary' minimums?

USMCFLYR

I wouldn't have a set time. It would be more of a practical training and testing issue. Of course you would have to have some set hours but the testing is where it's at. You have to come up with some sort of real world no BS test. Not hey were are going to simulate X, what would you do? Not sure how you would do that but it would weed out the weaker pilots. It has been proven that hours don't mean anything. I can go CFI for 1500 hours, safety pilot for 1500 hours, fly my own plane for 1500 hours, buy the SIC program from a PFT shop for 1500 hours, etc... in the end I get to ATP mins but it doesn't mean that I am qualified to have an ATP. It is the test that makes me qualified.

Funny that everyone is OK with a 250 hour pilot teaching people to fly airplanes from PVT to ATP all by themselves but just not riding in the right seat of a RJ under a CAs supervision.

1500 hours is not what is going to be required...... An Airline Transport Pilot license is what will be required.

Understood but you have to have the hours. I would bet my next paycheck that there are guys out there with less hours that can pass the checkride to get the ATP. It is all about building up those hours to get to the checkride and whether said hours some how make you a better pilot or not.

Your solutions have to be practical in the real world Duks. You know this.

They have set 1,500 hrs - along with that system of testing. Arbitrary? No more so than any other set numbers of hours that anyone would come up with.

I'm thinking that you should apply for a job at the FAA and work on this problem ;)

Yep - easier to dream about fixes than work within the constraints of reality. Would you feel the same about the quality of pilots flying your family around if YOU personally weren't looking to break into the profession? Are you for reduced training/education/testing requirements in say the legal or medical professions; or were you one of the many making fun of the future medical doctors rescued from the *school* down in Grenada (where they went to train when no school in the US would accept them - - so the story/exaggeration goes)

As opposed to what other metric? That people with more than 1500 can have mishaps? :rolleyes: Indy race car drivers can have an accident on the highway too - but I'm pretty sure that on an average day that they are better drivers than you or I.

On this you and I can agree completely. This is the major reason that I did not go on to complete my instructor ratings (and I wanted to move on from college). I didn't think that I had any business teaching other people to fly when I knew so little myself. I kept this opinion when I was in the military and I learned of the SerGrad/FAIP program. Personally I like to be instructed by people with some 'real world' experience. I know fine SerGrads and FAIPs - but it isn't for me and I'm glad that I didn't need to do it. After I gained experience, I spent two different tours in the instructor role and had great times!
In addition - at least those instructing are making the decisions themselves and learning how to delegate, multi-task, and BE IN COMMAND. You are correct in your statement - people are NOT ok with a person gaining a majority of their experience by "riding in the right seat of a RJ under a CAs supervision"

USMCFLYR

There is a huge difference that really cannot even be compared in a 250 hour CFI teaching someone to fly a 152 or seminole in very basic aerodynamics/meteorology in VFR pattern hops or the rare actual IMC instruction day or the 80 mile cross country $100 hamburger without even touching class A,B,or C and possibly even D airspace, compared to a high altitude swept wing jet flying in March on a 1000 mile leg from ATL surrounded by thunderstorms to BOS where it is 1/4 mile vis heavy snow and gusty winds under the time restraints/pressures/fatigue/nobody is there to hold my hand of the 121 world.

Guys that are bashing the rule have no idea what they are talking about..... Hours in an aircraft directly equate into a more experienced pilot! A 250 hour pilot just barely has the ink wet on his license and has no business flying families around that depend upon them for their well being. Granted having a training program that would weed out weak pilots and give practical instruction in high performance jet aircraft, human factors training, CRM, real weather/icing, would be great but reality is what it is.

If the FAA required this type of training how to you suppose the average guy would obtain/afford the training?

Perhaps a little less laughter would give you time to understand what was going on in their minds.

And yes, I do have a good bit of DHC-8 time.

Not necessarily.

Have you ever heard the phrase "1500 hours, or 1 hour 1500 times"?

The type of experience a pilot is MUCH more important for judging one's true experience, in my opinion, than simply the sum in the Total Time column of their logbook.

im for the 1500 rule, it will improve the quality of airline life since it will be harder to obtain (i.e. higher demand, higher wages) and it will also show who really wants to be 121 vs someone who just wants to try it out on a whim. (more experience...as a capt i like to have someone who is competent in the right seat in case fatigue, fixation, etc... blinds me and the other person corrects myself as I am not perfect all the time.

I sure hope your let you next instructor see all your posts. Just for fun, why not show him right before your next flight review. ;)

Do you know what an ATP checkride consists of? As an individual you are often faced with a series of situations that require quick, decisive decision making. It's not just some commercial checkride where you do some maneuvers and divert. It really is more complex then that.

I'd compare it to professional sports. When a serious prospect is drafted he usually doesn't go right to the big time. Why? Because even though he has the skills, he still needs EXPERIENCE to play in the big leagues. You learn things through experience that you CAN'T learn through training. Checkrides can become very 'canned' and very predictive. Most CFI's signing a student off for a checkride know exactly what the student will be encountering. The gouge is out, & that makes it much easier to pass a checkride.

Just because one has the skills to pass an ATP checkride does NOT mean one is ready to operate in an ATP level environment.

I have about 240 hours and am taking my commercial SEL checkride tomorrow, you mean to tell me that I am not the most experienced pilot in the world?:eek:

How dare you.

I know the experience I have gained in the last 100 hours compared to the first 100 is a giant difference. I think that another 1250 hours flying anything, anywhere is going to give me a vastly larger amount of experience than I have now.

Do I want to jump in the right seat of an RJ tomorrow? Sure, who wouldn't

Am I anywhere near ready for that kind of experience? Not even close.

Knowing that makes you ahead of the game. At least you are aware of how little you know at this stage of the game. It looks like the regional will be the training ground for most of you getting on with low time anyway.

I seriously doubt the 1500 rule will come out intact with all the lobbysts at the capitol hill trying to water it down. So you have nothing to worry about. Regionals will still hire pilots with less than 400 hours. They already are.

Well and I'm not willing to sign a contract just so I can get a job I'm not qualified for. I can wait a year or two until I have the right experience for the job. While I understand the desire to get in at the earliest time possible, I want to make sure I'm ready to fly through the training (no pun intended).

My outlook is a little different than some maybe because I'm not in my twenties.

You'd be surprised how many hours most of us had before we fly 121 jet aircraft.

Recently, now and back in 2006-2008, they were hiring low timers... Prior to that you'd have to go back to the 60's to find similar hiring.

Most all of us came to 121 with a 2-4 thousand hours and our ATP's.... And that was for the first job flying a 1900.

Now we have to listen to whiners cry about how hard it is to get 800-100....before they can go straight into a jet.

Give us a friggin break will ya.

There were thousands of sub-1000hr pilots hired by numerous regional airlines in the late 90s right up to September 10th, 2001.

You are closer than you realize. An open mind and a desire to learn are 90% of this business. And the lack of these things, along with a sense of entilement, are what alarms us old farts.

Airmanship is universal. Sharpen your skills and hone them. They transfer well. Like the tail dragger pilot taking a 747 into PIK. Dig deep, and be quick to learn from others. That is what this job is about.

There are a thousand pilots at Comair that would probably leave tomorrow if they didn't have to go back to $21,000 a year. All of them have ATP mins.

Make a better offer and the pilots will beat a path to your airline...

Absolutely. I will take a bet from anybody on this. There will be very few who can't slide through with one exemption or another. My post from another thread:

I expect any number of the following to continue bid-nes as usual:

1. College training exemptions, lead by ERAU, UND, et al.

2. Military trained exemptions

3. Airline sponsored training exemptions

4. Ab initio program exemptions

5. Multi-Pilot License exemptions

6. "Emergency" exemptions when airlines scream they have to cancel flights since they can't find any more kids who are qualified and want to work for $20k.

In 2008 Comair actually tried implementing a signing bonus. Delta had just awarded the Freedom planes to Comair and we couldn't get enough qualified applicants (this is right before Delta redirected the planes to other DCI carriers and Comair began to furlough).

I do not know the official story, but word on the street is that ALPA essentially said "no signing bonus unless current pilots get something too" so 2stage is right on the money.

I imagine all rates would have to get a bump for newhire pay to become attractive enough to lure pilots from other, stale regionals.

Maybe after 99', but not before - unlesss you wrote out a check for $8-12K. I worked at a large flight school in CA 98-2000'. The only ones that got hired below 1000tt, and there were only two out of 40 or so instructors, bought their jobs at COEX and ASA. One guy was at 900/300 and the other just at 1000/200. Out of the 40 or so instructors that were there, most didn't get hired until they had at least 1200tt, and we all had several hundred multi at that time.