My comments have nothing to do with the flying or crew member flying experience. It's everything about that crash outside of flying that concerns me.

-Pilots sleeping in crew rooms
-Pilots making so little money ($15,000 for the FO) can't afford a hotel
-Training and failed checkride culture at the company
-That it required incredible lobbying efforts on behalf of families to get regional airlines where they are at now, and who knows for how long

Outside of Colgan
-Who knows what the condition of regional airlines maintenance departments are in, we all just assume its sound. There will be a shortage of mechanics coming up too soon if not already.

Am I supposed to agree that everything is better now? No way. In the 90's the FAA mandated that all airlines would now be under the same safety umbrella by requiring regional airlines to move away from 135. Some airlines are heading back that way. I just cannot get on board with the notion that somehow there is one level of safety between regional and major airlines.

Major airlines will continue to draw the best candidates from the regionals. That can only mean the most experienced crews fly at the majors while less experienced crews fly for the regionals. I'm not suggesting a course of action or saying this is a problem, just an argument why major airlines are operating higher than the minimum standards. There is no getting around the fact that regional airlines are a training ground for major airlines. One has to be comfortable with that fact.

 

No worries...Semper Paratus!

 

You made some excellent points in your post. This one, in my opinion, is not one of them.
Members have been saying here that many regional FO's have been getting hired by majors while captains get passed over.
Couple that with the fact that due to the regional industry's erratic and arguably less stable nature you might find 25 year comair captains amongst the ranks and FO's waiting a decade to upgrade in some stagnated/furlough-prone companies. I don't think that supports your generalization.

 

They are hiring FOs, particularly if the major the FO is going to is the customer of that regional. They know if they take FOs, their regional supplier will only have to replace that FO. If they take a captain, their regional supplier will need to replace that captain AND an FO.

So, take a captain=need to find 2 more pilots. Just take and FO and only need to replace 1.

So, don't fool yourself that they're only taking the most experienced from regionals. It makes no math/staffing sense.

 

mesasbah,


Do you really think the majors just chose the "military style" CRM, then one day chose the current standard? You need to learn some aviation history before spouting off. Hint: it wasn't a choice; what you call "military style" CRM was the way cockpits were run for decades regardless of the crew background. As we're operating rooms, bridges on ships, civil and miltary and a host of other crew-based teams. TheY're all learning from years of research on human factors.

GF

 

The only places that seem to be picking up a lot of F/O's are the lower tier majors that are seeing new hires/guys on the bottom of the list leaving for the legacies (jetBlue, Spirit, Allegiant, Virgin America, etc). In a way they are picking guys up that don't mind getting "stuck" so to speak. Absolutely great opportunity for them.

In no way does your math make sense. If one CA leaves they upgrade one F/O, and hire an F/O. There is a "training" bubble" of sorts but it doesn't necessitate hiring another pilot, certainly not a 1:1 ratio.

If what you said is true, why did my new hire class have only CA's, and half were from their regional carriers? And that number doesn't include any flows.