I personally think that is just bad practice. I don't care if their program is the most intensive training program known to man, what if the person they hire is a total D-bag. Isn't part of the interview the HR portion used to see if they can stand to be with you for 4 days straight? The fact the bypass the entire interview process and get a job if they meet the requirements seems silly to me.

Some guys in the 141 university program I went through I wouldn't have trusted in a 150, much less an ERJ/ATR/CRJ (you can guess who they have a hookup with).

Fortunately most of them realized at some point that they didn't have the devotion to apply for food stamps and walked away. :rolleyes:

It doesn't matter what school you went to, at 250 hours you aren't anywhere near prepared to fly anything resembling an airliner.

Airlines should not be hiring 500TT pilots when there are 1000 hour pilots whose resumes are not even looked into.

Have those 1000 hrs guys put in their apps & also, do the 1000 hrs guys have the Multi time & meet all other requirements.......

If yes to all, then YES, I agree, the 1000 hrs guys should be picked before 500 hrs guys get looked at....

But, isn't it that Eagle was at 800/100 Hrs for a good 5 to 6 months, what could be the reason they dropped to 500/50 if there were tons of 1000 hrs guys applying ........

DirectTo

I presume you know that most foreign airlines do just that through their cadet programs. That the US Military does the same, putting 500-hour pilots in planes with bombs or with 200K of cargo on international routes with 3 air refuelings planned. It is the type of training, the discipline imposed and the willingness to can those that can't hack it that defines the graduates.

GF

I can draw few comparisons between any collegiate flight program in the US (or any school for that matter), and any of the airline cadet or military training programs. The difference in training and monitoring is night and day.

While I agree for the most part. Emirates and British Airways sent cadets to at least one university program I know of back in the late 90's early 2000's.

I'd say the screening of applicants is the biggest different.

DirectTo

Then, the question is why is it different? Because would be pilots keep ponying up the money and the schools keep training and passing them. Why is that? Because student pilots refuse to believe they should have been shoe salesman and the attraction of being a highly paid airline pilot blinds them to the obvious. Witness, Marvin Renslow.

Schools need to be monitored and held to standards similar to airline cadet programs and military training. I'll bet a lot BA's, Lufthansa's or Cathay Pacific's program is every bit as demanding as the RAF's or USAF's.

GF

I presume that you know that your comparison is OVERLY SIMPLISTIC.

From my experience, and other instructors and low-time friends I know in the idustry, I will say that very few people are getting hired without at least 800-1000TT/80-100multi unless they either have strong internal recs or graduate from one of these few bridge programs. I can guarantee that these sub-500 pilots are not the norm for CFI-timebuilding types to get hired at the airlines.