ATP Law Petition
03-05-2012 | 01:35 PM
#101
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,422
Likes: 0
From: the correct seat
To answer the previous question, I was a CFI before entering 121. I wasn't paying any dues though. I was learning.
03-05-2012 | 03:10 PM
#102
Day puke
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,865
Likes: 0
From: Out.
"Paying your dues" is that 1.95% deduction from my paycheck.
"Gaining experience" is what improves us as pilots.
Prior to going 121, my logbook included dual given, freight, air ambulance time, corporate time, with a dash of aerial photography and fish spotting. It also included international and significant turbine time. Total time 5000. And I still use Flight Watch, Flight Service Stations (even listening over a VOR
), and often cancel my own flight plans. Since nearly half of my landings in the past six months have been at non-towered airports (yes, really), I still find those skills pretty useful.
"Gaining experience" is what improves us as pilots.
Prior to going 121, my logbook included dual given, freight, air ambulance time, corporate time, with a dash of aerial photography and fish spotting. It also included international and significant turbine time. Total time 5000. And I still use Flight Watch, Flight Service Stations (even listening over a VOR
), and often cancel my own flight plans. Since nearly half of my landings in the past six months have been at non-towered airports (yes, really), I still find those skills pretty useful.
03-05-2012 | 04:50 PM
#103
New Hire
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
It would be interesting to see some statistics on the relationship between different type of experience and accidents/incidents.. Overseas its quite common to get into the right seat of A320/737, in asia even widebody, with 250+ hrs, or even less if the training is integrated. It works well over there. Maybe the training within the companies could make a difference? Im not against the 1500 rule, Im just not so sure it will play the intended role in the safety-picture?
03-05-2012 | 05:45 PM
#104
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 13,843
Likes: 1
From: FAA 'Flight Check'
It would be interesting to see some statistics on the relationship between different type of experience and accidents/incidents.. Overseas its quite common to get into the right seat of A320/737, in asia even widebody, with 250+ hrs, or even less if the training is integrated. It works well over there. Maybe the training within the companies could make a difference? Im not against the 1500 rule, Im just not so sure it will play the intended role in the safety-picture?
There are significant regional differences in the Western built jet hull loss accident rate:
North America (0.10), Europe (0.45), North Asia (0.34) and the Commonwealth of Independent States (0.0) performed better than the global average of 0.61
Asia-Pacific was higher than the global average at 0.80 in 2010 and about the same from the previous year (0.86)
The Middle East and North Africa region saw its accident rate fall significantly to 0.72 (compared to 3.32 in 2009) with only one accident involving a carrier from the region
Latin America & the Caribbean reported a higher accident rate of 1.87 with four airlines from the region involved in accidents, compared with a zero accident rate in 2009
Africa had an accident rate of 7.41, which was lower than the 2009 rate of 9.94. While showing improvement, Africa once again has the worst rate in the world. There were four Western-built jet hull losses with African carriers in 2010. African carriers are 2% of global traffic, but 23% of global western-built jet hull losses.
Safety in Africa
North America (0.10), Europe (0.45), North Asia (0.34) and the Commonwealth of Independent States (0.0) performed better than the global average of 0.61
Asia-Pacific was higher than the global average at 0.80 in 2010 and about the same from the previous year (0.86)
The Middle East and North Africa region saw its accident rate fall significantly to 0.72 (compared to 3.32 in 2009) with only one accident involving a carrier from the region
Latin America & the Caribbean reported a higher accident rate of 1.87 with four airlines from the region involved in accidents, compared with a zero accident rate in 2009
Africa had an accident rate of 7.41, which was lower than the 2009 rate of 9.94. While showing improvement, Africa once again has the worst rate in the world. There were four Western-built jet hull losses with African carriers in 2010. African carriers are 2% of global traffic, but 23% of global western-built jet hull losses.
Safety in Africa
Tokyo, 23 February 2011, The International Air Transport Association (IATA) announced the aviation safety performance for 2010 showing that the year’s accident rate for Western-built jet aircraft as the lowest in aviation history.
The 2010 global accident rate (measured in hull losses per million flights of Western-built jet aircraft) was 0.61. That is equal to one accident for every 1.6 million flights. This is a significant improvement of the 0.71 rate recorded in 2009 (one accident for 1.4 million flights). The 2010 rate was the lowest in aviation history, just below the 2006 rate of 0.65. Compared to 10 years ago, the accident rate has been cut 42% from the rate recorded in 2001. A hull loss is an accident in which the aircraft is destroyed or substantially damaged and is not subsequently repaired.
“Safety is the number one priority. Achieving the lowest accident rate in the history of aviation shows that this commitment is bearing results. Flying is safe. But every fatality is a human tragedy that reminds us of the ultimate goal of zero accidents and zero fatalities. We must remain focused and determined to move closer to this goal year by year,” said Giovanni Bisignani, IATA’s Director General and CEO.
In absolute numbers, 2010 saw the following results:
2.4 billion people flew safely on 36.8 million flights (28.4 million jet, 8.4 million turboprop)
17 hull loss accidents involving western-built jet aircraft compared to 19 in 2009
94 accidents (all aircraft types, Eastern and Western built) compared to 90 in 2009
The 2010 global accident rate (measured in hull losses per million flights of Western-built jet aircraft) was 0.61. That is equal to one accident for every 1.6 million flights. This is a significant improvement of the 0.71 rate recorded in 2009 (one accident for 1.4 million flights). The 2010 rate was the lowest in aviation history, just below the 2006 rate of 0.65. Compared to 10 years ago, the accident rate has been cut 42% from the rate recorded in 2001. A hull loss is an accident in which the aircraft is destroyed or substantially damaged and is not subsequently repaired.
“Safety is the number one priority. Achieving the lowest accident rate in the history of aviation shows that this commitment is bearing results. Flying is safe. But every fatality is a human tragedy that reminds us of the ultimate goal of zero accidents and zero fatalities. We must remain focused and determined to move closer to this goal year by year,” said Giovanni Bisignani, IATA’s Director General and CEO.
In absolute numbers, 2010 saw the following results:
2.4 billion people flew safely on 36.8 million flights (28.4 million jet, 8.4 million turboprop)
17 hull loss accidents involving western-built jet aircraft compared to 19 in 2009
94 accidents (all aircraft types, Eastern and Western built) compared to 90 in 2009
USMCFLYR
03-05-2012 | 05:50 PM
#105
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,149
Likes: 46
From: Volleyball Player
The 1500hr rule is a dumb rule, no doubt. I'm for it, but only because of the direction it moves in. Airlines will only do what economically benefits them, and anything else has to be forced. It's not going to "ensure safety", nothing will. It will wash out a few more people that aren't as serious or that need more experience before they can perform at the levels required, but it won't ensure anything.
The whole idea that you should come to an airline with all sorts of airline time already is faulty, but it's what airlines and virtually ALL businesses want. It keeps costs way down. As more baby boomers retire and die, it's going to be hard though...
03-05-2012 | 06:11 PM
#106
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 618
Likes: 0
It would be interesting to see some statistics on the relationship between different type of experience and accidents/incidents.. Overseas its quite common to get into the right seat of A320/737, in asia even widebody, with 250+ hrs, or even less if the training is integrated. It works well over there. Maybe the training within the companies could make a difference? Im not against the 1500 rule, Im just not so sure it will play the intended role in the safety-picture?
03-05-2012 | 06:26 PM
#107
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
From: Doing what you do, for less.
You can have pilots flying jets around at 1500 hours safely, provided they are trained extremely well and to great detail, and face a stringent selection and testing process. This is how it is done in the military and at some foreign carriers.
Sure, they may only have a few hundred hours, but they're the best of the best and trained by the best. That is not what happens in the regional airline industry. Anyone with $100k and some basic aptitude can currently become an airline pilot. Then they're provided training that meets the minimum required and is, sometimes, extremely low quality... and put in the right seat of a jet with a captain who has the same "upbringing" as a pilot.
These two situations are nothing like each other and it is downright laughable when someone says "The military and airlines in Europe have 300 hour pilots!" while trying to imply there is any sort of comparison.
Unless we go to the selection and training process found elsewhere (which would probably weed out a lot more people than the 1500 hour requirement will).... we need something to weed out those who aren't up to par. The 1500 hour requirement is a good step in that direction. It substitutes high quality training and selection with real world experience. A different way to hopefully obtain the same goal of having quality aviators flying 121.
Sure, they may only have a few hundred hours, but they're the best of the best and trained by the best. That is not what happens in the regional airline industry. Anyone with $100k and some basic aptitude can currently become an airline pilot. Then they're provided training that meets the minimum required and is, sometimes, extremely low quality... and put in the right seat of a jet with a captain who has the same "upbringing" as a pilot.
These two situations are nothing like each other and it is downright laughable when someone says "The military and airlines in Europe have 300 hour pilots!" while trying to imply there is any sort of comparison.
Unless we go to the selection and training process found elsewhere (which would probably weed out a lot more people than the 1500 hour requirement will).... we need something to weed out those who aren't up to par. The 1500 hour requirement is a good step in that direction. It substitutes high quality training and selection with real world experience. A different way to hopefully obtain the same goal of having quality aviators flying 121.
03-05-2012 | 06:37 PM
#108
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 337
Likes: 0
From: Toilet warmer.
More often than not, though proficient in flying, I would find that several very low timers would also tend to develop a sense of entitlement as a result of their accelerated progression..........unfortunately.
03-05-2012 | 06:43 PM
#109
Line Holder
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Just for Mr. know everything pilots out there who have been suffering lot till they got their dream 121 job after couple thousands hours and supporting the 1500 Hrs rule. Please be advised that all rest of world airlines do hire 250 wonders and give them great training. These guys fly 737's at these minimums and they upgrade to 777 FO when they reach 2000-2500. They can also do well when emergency happens. See link below and let's think what is wrong with our aviation training here in US. Sad but true neither training departments nor experienced captains wants to share experience and spend extra time training new pilots. Everyone shall set back and relax and new pilots shall suffer for few years paying dues till they hold a line at 121 carrier for freaking peanuts of pay scale. This is ridiculous. Working as CFI may help build some hours but doesn't help learning SOP, CRM, V1 Cuts, Pressurization and emergency descents, TCAS conflict, Dutch rolls, manual reversions, systems, Engine failures, separations, fire....etc
Transatlantic jet diverts to Shannon as engine fails | Irish Examiner
Transatlantic jet diverts to Shannon as engine fails | Irish Examiner
03-06-2012 | 12:00 AM
#110
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Just for Mr. know everything pilots out there who have been suffering lot till they got their dream 121 job after couple thousands hours and supporting the 1500 Hrs rule. Please be advised that all rest of world airlines do hire 250 wonders and give them great training. These guys fly 737's at these minimums and they upgrade to 777 FO when they reach 2000-2500. They can also do well when emergency happens. See link below and let's think what is wrong with our aviation training here in US. Sad but true neither training departments nor experienced captains wants to share experience and spend extra time training new pilots. Everyone shall set back and relax and new pilots shall suffer for few years paying dues till they hold a line at 121 carrier for freaking peanuts of pay scale. This is ridiculous. Working as CFI may help build some hours but doesn't help learning SOP, CRM, V1 Cuts, Pressurization and emergency descents, TCAS conflict, Dutch rolls, manual reversions, systems, Engine failures, separations, fire....etc
Transatlantic jet diverts to Shannon as engine fails | Irish Examiner
Transatlantic jet diverts to Shannon as engine fails | Irish Examiner
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
