Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Regional
FAA looks at revising tougher pilot training >

FAA looks at revising tougher pilot training

Search

Notices
Regional Regional Airlines

FAA looks at revising tougher pilot training

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 07-24-2014 | 01:21 PM
  #41  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jun 2014
Posts: 923
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Waitingformins
Also, if they do grow it would have to be new aircraft users. They might grow as pilots are harder to find, but it would be at the expense of a traditional 91 flight department. IE a CJ2 owner sells his jet lays-off pilots and buys a share of a Hawker 800. Total pilots required would not increase.
Indeed, it rather would decrease as the same Hawker 800 crew can service the needs of several former CJ2 owners.
Reply
Old 07-24-2014 | 01:40 PM
  #42  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Default

I'm sick of seeing articles that portray the airlines as victims of the 1500 hour rule. We need to change the talking points. Regional airline pilot is not an entry level job. Raising the barrier to get into this profession is one of the best steps foreword in safety that could have occurred. Compensation improvements are long overdue. If airline management can't adjust, then regional airlines deserve their fate.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply
Old 07-24-2014 | 01:43 PM
  #43  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 276
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Packrat
Easily said when you're 30. Let's see how you feel when someone orders you to give up something you love on an arbitrary date. Your perspective may change.
I'm well above thirty and been in the airlines over 15 yrs. I enjoy time at home, and I love my job. But I don't want to work until I die.

And no one orders anyone to give up something they love. Mandatory retirement has been here for the ages. We all knew it was there the first day we flew.

If I want to get my rocks of flying, I can do it on my own time in a J-3 or 8KAB. That's a heck of lot more fun than flying 180+ angry passengers around.
Reply
Old 07-24-2014 | 02:12 PM
  #44  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 425
Likes: 0
From: B737 F/O
Default

Originally Posted by Packrat
Easily said when you're 30. Let's see how you feel when someone orders you to give up something you love on an arbitrary date. Your perspective may change.
It's not as if an established retirement age for airline pilots is a new development.

As other posters suggested, maybe you should try some other GA flying if you haven't had the opportunity. Try sailplanes, ultralights, gyrocopters, floats, helicopters. There's so much more to aviation than 121. IMO, 121 flying is just a way to pay the bills while still getting to fly, the 'fun' stuff in aviation is done at a local airport.

If you need a jet fix, hopefully your retirement plan is good enough to afford an L-39!
Reply
Old 07-24-2014 | 02:15 PM
  #45  
Moderator
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,088
Likes: 0
From: B757/767
Default

Originally Posted by Packrat
How do they do it now? AS sent a query out to all its older Captains asking when they planned on retirement. Then the bond rate changed and guys realized they were going to take a HUGE hit on the lump sum payout. What happened? 60 pilots AS hadn't planned on losing pulled the plug in November and December.

Did they plan for that? No. However, this summer/fall's hiring will cover for the loss. Hasn't slowed AS down one bit, especially when they have enough pilots willing to pick up extra time and sell vacations.

That's how they do it.
Apples to oranges. Those retirees still had a deadline to meet. Airlines are able to staff now because they know when someone is REQUIRED to retire. If retirements are based purely on one's ability to hold a medical, airlines such as DAL, AA, Us Air, etc would have to carry a greater amount of pilots. Costs would increase.

Anyone flying for an airline today knew of the mandatory retirement age when they started. If you want to go fly more, get a job at a fractional or a corporate gig.
Reply
Old 07-24-2014 | 02:55 PM
  #46  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 492
Likes: 0
From: Cloud surfing
Default

Originally Posted by ClearRight
FAA looks at revising tougher pilot training rules implemented in wake of Flight 3407 - City & Region - The Buffalo News


WASHINGTON – The Federal Aviation Administration is thinking of revising the tougher pilot training rules that it implemented just last year, and the Families of Continental Flight 3407 – who won passage of a law calling for the new standards – aren’t very happy about it.

The agency set up a committee earlier this year that will “develop and recommend to the FAA new or updated guidance material, notices, handbooks and other related materials for air-carrier training and qualification,” according to the committee’s charter, which the Flight 3407 families obtained and released Tuesday.

The formation of the committee in April came amid loud complaints from the airline industry about the new FAA rule that requires new commercial pilots to have 1,500 hours of cockpit experience. The regional airlines – which generally employ younger, lower-paid pilots and which fly an increasing share of flights on behalf of the big-name airlines – say that new requirement is creating a pilot shortage.

But the families, who fought long and hard for that experience requirement, said the FAA’s move to set up that new pilot training committee could undercut their fight for aviation safety.

Leaders of the families group said they were particularly concerned that Donald R. Dillman, managing director of flight operations for Airlines for America, an industry group, is co-chairman of the committee along with an FAA official.

“This whole process just reeks of the old days of the FAA taking its marching orders from the airlines, which is exactly how the major safety gap between the regional and mainline carriers was allowed to develop in the first place,” said Scott Maurer of Moore, S.C., whose daughter, Lorin, was among the 50 people killed in the Feb. 12, 2009, crash in Clarence Center.

The 15-member committee does not include representatives of either the Coalition of Airline Pilots Associations or the National Air Disaster Alliance/Foundation, groups that fought for tougher pilot standards the last time the FAA addressed the issue.

“It is extremely disappointing to see the two parties who didn’t toe the company line on the previous pilot qualification rule-making committee, who stood up for the flying public and for putting safety first, not be included on this new, hush-hush panel,” Maurer said.

FAA spokeswoman Laura J. Brown did not respond to a detailed set of questions about the new committee.

In the committee’s charter, the FAA said that it set up the new panel because the aviation industry is constantly evolving.

“The FAA must continue to review existing air-carrier training and qualification regulations, policies, and guidance to ensure they are current and relevant,” the agency said. “In addition, there continues to be new challenges with changing technology and new research that may necessitate the development of new regulations, policies, and guidance.”

But the Flight 3407 families have insisted that the 2009 crash in Clarence, which federal investigators blamed on pilot error, proved that the tougher pilot training and experience rules implemented last year are necessary.

“These new qualification requirements provide an opportunity to elevate the profession of regional airline pilots by enhancing their entry-level preparation and credentials, and hopefully the FAA will recognize this and stand up for the safety of the flying public,” said Susan Bourque, of East Aurora, whose sister Beverly Eckert, a 9/11 activist, was killed in the crash.
Just reading the title, the FAA is questioning the 1500/700/1200/1000 hour rule? Sad sad sad.
Actually, let's simplify this rule: 1500h for everyone, 700 h for military pilots.
And, they should also add a 4 year degree requirement for everyone to raise the education level a little. Oh, there are no pilots? Raise entry level pay to 50k minimum and we shall see...
Reply
Old 07-24-2014 | 03:16 PM
  #47  
deltajuliet's Avatar
Living the Dream
 
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,795
Likes: 0
Default

Hell, let's just go back to Regulation. Bring back Pan Am and Braniff. $300,000 salaries for everyone.
Reply
Old 07-24-2014 | 04:00 PM
  #48  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 12,472
Likes: 1,030
Default

Originally Posted by deltajuliet
Hell, let's just go back to Regulation. Bring back Pan Am and Braniff. $300,000 salaries for everyone.
I can't tell if you're joking or being sarcastic to point out the ridiculousness for wanting more money.
Reply
Old 07-24-2014 | 04:30 PM
  #49  
deltajuliet's Avatar
Living the Dream
 
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,795
Likes: 0
Default

A little of both combined with wishful thinking.
Reply
Old 07-24-2014 | 04:54 PM
  #50  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jun 2013
Posts: 2,293
Likes: 0
Default

Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
MetalGear
Technical
8
01-24-2013 08:08 PM
jumppilot
Safety
27
07-18-2012 08:32 AM
USMC3197
Regional
66
11-12-2009 06:54 PM
Todzilla
Cargo
34
06-30-2009 11:29 AM
CRM1337
Major
1
10-02-2005 07:12 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices