Pilot Shortage (2015 Embry Riddle summit)
02-20-2015 | 09:51 AM
#321
Living the Dream
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,795
Likes: 0
Others have answered the question, but the way you ask it leads me to suspect that you're not familiar with how military pilots are hired and trainined...
The first available slots and the majority of all slots go to service academy and ROTC students, who are on full-ride scholarships, largely in technical/scientific fields and have had to maintain a certain GPA to keep the scholarship. The scholarships were competitive so we're talking about HS scholar/athletes as the starting point.
Remaining slots go to off-the-street hires, who must have a degree and are more competitive with a technical degree and good grades. This process is long and daunting and requires a lot of motivation just to jump through all the hurdles. At this point in time time there is essentially zero tolerance for any history of criminal activity or drug use (even very minor history, like D&D). It wasn't always that way, but seems to be the standard now.
Then you do OCS/OTS which isn't fun to put it mildly, followed by aviation indoc/ground school (also not really fun).
Once you start flying, you jump right into turbo-prop equipment and are typically expected to solo around ten hours IIRC. Every training flight is a graded event, and you are allowed a very limited number of repeats. Aerobatic and formation flying is part of the package...most civilians don't touch that until they have at least hundreds of hours (if ever). Once you complete that, you're off to another airframe type usually a jet trainer of some sort. Final step is you report to a training or operational squadron to qualify on your assigned airframe.
You can't buy more training if you need it and the typical instructors' bedside manner would get them fired from a civilian school. Washout rate is high, historically well over 50%.
The airlines could do something like this but it would cost them dearly...not just the training, they'd probably also have to pay higher entry-level wages to attract the kind of folks who could complete such a program. Might be financially feasible for the majors, but totally impractical for regionals.
The european/asian ab initio model falls far short of our military training...they hire kids who are good at taking tests, and train them to operate simulators and complex systems...their training/experience in actually flying airplanes is very limited and we've seen the results of that a few times.
The first available slots and the majority of all slots go to service academy and ROTC students, who are on full-ride scholarships, largely in technical/scientific fields and have had to maintain a certain GPA to keep the scholarship. The scholarships were competitive so we're talking about HS scholar/athletes as the starting point.
Remaining slots go to off-the-street hires, who must have a degree and are more competitive with a technical degree and good grades. This process is long and daunting and requires a lot of motivation just to jump through all the hurdles. At this point in time time there is essentially zero tolerance for any history of criminal activity or drug use (even very minor history, like D&D). It wasn't always that way, but seems to be the standard now.
Then you do OCS/OTS which isn't fun to put it mildly, followed by aviation indoc/ground school (also not really fun).
Once you start flying, you jump right into turbo-prop equipment and are typically expected to solo around ten hours IIRC. Every training flight is a graded event, and you are allowed a very limited number of repeats. Aerobatic and formation flying is part of the package...most civilians don't touch that until they have at least hundreds of hours (if ever). Once you complete that, you're off to another airframe type usually a jet trainer of some sort. Final step is you report to a training or operational squadron to qualify on your assigned airframe.
You can't buy more training if you need it and the typical instructors' bedside manner would get them fired from a civilian school. Washout rate is high, historically well over 50%.
The airlines could do something like this but it would cost them dearly...not just the training, they'd probably also have to pay higher entry-level wages to attract the kind of folks who could complete such a program. Might be financially feasible for the majors, but totally impractical for regionals.
The european/asian ab initio model falls far short of our military training...they hire kids who are good at taking tests, and train them to operate simulators and complex systems...their training/experience in actually flying airplanes is very limited and we've seen the results of that a few times.
However, your mention of a 50% washout rate is telling, and it clearly illustrates their filter for quality. Us pilots are pretty notorious for thinking we're all individually in the top percentile of our profession, and this could just be that, but I don't think a lot of civilian guys are given their due relative to their military counterparts.
All that said, some civilian pilots do suck.
02-20-2015 | 10:46 AM
#322
Moderator
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 6,056
Likes: 0
From: ATP, CFI etc.
Actually there are excellent civvies in the various domestic regionals, it breaks your heart to see one making $52k after fifteen years of hard sacrifice with no real hope of the payoff. Some eventually just run for the hills when the wage reset (Rick's phrase) comes along. We get a perverse satisfaction seeing the regionals squirm for people these days, but it's too late for the majority who already left.
02-20-2015 | 11:01 AM
#323
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
From: Captain - Retired
Another thing to add about military aviation. I am not one to believe that just because I was able to complete a task that another failed I am somehow superior.
As instructors we know that learning is not a perfectly linear process and that some students who may struggle in the early stages can excel down the road. We also know that "learning plateaus" are common and sometimes good students regress.
In a military training environment such scenarios are often written off as failures. It's a system that works well in a high surplus of talent which military aviation typically attracts but it is unforgiving. An individual's motivation for getting through military training is often very different then in a civilian environment.
I think it's feasible to train civilian pilots through high pressure training scenarios and they do in many foreign carriers. Those hundreds of Chinese kids that come over here to train in US flight schools are under enormous pressure and if they fail, they are not just sent home, they must work for the airline in another capacity to pay off the training they didn't even pass. Similar to the old days of military training...if you don't cut it in OCS, be prepared to join the ranks of the enlisted.
I don't think that would work under US law. It's much easier to get out of a long term training contract here. The airlines would be motivated to get everyone through. Also, if the airlines paid for your training and expected you to work in return, the contract would be forced to go both ways and they would have a difficult time throwing you on the street when the layoffs came around.
I digress....I still insist that getting rid of seniority at the regional level would solve the issue of low pay and simultaneously eliminate the "pilot shortage."
As instructors we know that learning is not a perfectly linear process and that some students who may struggle in the early stages can excel down the road. We also know that "learning plateaus" are common and sometimes good students regress.
In a military training environment such scenarios are often written off as failures. It's a system that works well in a high surplus of talent which military aviation typically attracts but it is unforgiving. An individual's motivation for getting through military training is often very different then in a civilian environment.
I think it's feasible to train civilian pilots through high pressure training scenarios and they do in many foreign carriers. Those hundreds of Chinese kids that come over here to train in US flight schools are under enormous pressure and if they fail, they are not just sent home, they must work for the airline in another capacity to pay off the training they didn't even pass. Similar to the old days of military training...if you don't cut it in OCS, be prepared to join the ranks of the enlisted.
I don't think that would work under US law. It's much easier to get out of a long term training contract here. The airlines would be motivated to get everyone through. Also, if the airlines paid for your training and expected you to work in return, the contract would be forced to go both ways and they would have a difficult time throwing you on the street when the layoffs came around.
I digress....I still insist that getting rid of seniority at the regional level would solve the issue of low pay and simultaneously eliminate the "pilot shortage."
02-20-2015 | 11:15 AM
#324
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,215
Likes: 0
From: Capt
if it gets bad enough foreign ownership followed immediately by cabotage
The largest pool of excess pilots currently available to fly is in the U.S. The largest training capacity for pilots is also the U.S.
Foreign countries, especially in Asia, and then Africa, are desperate to find more pilots. There will not be any African or Asian pilots available to fill slots at US carriers, even if the laws were changed to allow that.
As for foreign carriers taking over US routes? Where will they get the pilots? The only way for foreign carriers to fly between ORD and SFO is for them to hire U.S. pilots, because we have the only excess pilots.
Foreign pilots (with no green card or U.S. passport) or cabotage, are not going to happen, probably ever.
02-20-2015 | 12:13 PM
#325
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
I disagree, I think the two should be compared. They are both examples of students training to fly jets one day as a profession. That's not to say the example might be slightly unrealistic, but I think it has merits to the discussion.
02-20-2015 | 12:14 PM
#326
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Think the the selection process and failure rate in training too. Unlike the military, a flight school will accept any student who can get a loan and as long as they have enough money, they will eventually pass. The military screens applicants to get the best and then sets high training standards. If they can't meet those standards, they are dropped. By the end of it, you are left with a select group of pilots whose abilities are far ahead of their flight time.
02-21-2015 | 04:06 AM
#327
Line Holder
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,049
Likes: 7
They are different systems with different objectives and different methods. The point is that a 1000 hour military pilot has a different level of experience than a 1000 hour civilian pilot and that regulations should take that into consideration. It's not a shot at anyone's ego, just recognition of the fact that the selection and training of military pilots differs from that of civilians.
02-21-2015 | 08:11 AM
#328
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 45,137
Likes: 797
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
A better way of thinking about it would be to consider that the lowest common denominator is significantly lower for civilians. There's almost no practical limit for how bad a civilian pilot can be because general aviation training and checking is very poorly standardized across the US. You can shop for an examiner, fail as many times as you like, or do 141 training where pink slips may not even be issued.
121 training *should* set the bar higher than 91, but apparently that didn't happen at colgan.
02-21-2015 | 01:28 PM
#329
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 12,833
Likes: 172
From: window seat
This attitude encourages us as pilots to accept lower pay to prevent a "flood" of foreign pilots from "taking our jobs". It is not a good thing for us, and it is also completely wrong.
The largest pool of excess pilots currently available to fly is in the U.S. The largest training capacity for pilots is also the U.S.
Foreign countries, especially in Asia, and then Africa, are desperate to find more pilots. There will not be any African or Asian pilots available to fill slots at US carriers, even if the laws were changed to allow that.
As for foreign carriers taking over US routes? Where will they get the pilots? The only way for foreign carriers to fly between ORD and SFO is for them to hire U.S. pilots, because we have the only excess pilots.
Foreign pilots (with no green card or U.S. passport) or cabotage, are not going to happen, probably ever.
The largest pool of excess pilots currently available to fly is in the U.S. The largest training capacity for pilots is also the U.S.
Foreign countries, especially in Asia, and then Africa, are desperate to find more pilots. There will not be any African or Asian pilots available to fill slots at US carriers, even if the laws were changed to allow that.
As for foreign carriers taking over US routes? Where will they get the pilots? The only way for foreign carriers to fly between ORD and SFO is for them to hire U.S. pilots, because we have the only excess pilots.
Foreign pilots (with no green card or U.S. passport) or cabotage, are not going to happen, probably ever.
EK alone is dumping a 380 on MXP-JFK and that's just one of their many, many, many routes they want to do.
02-21-2015 | 02:36 PM
#330
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
From: Captain - Retired
While they don't (and may never) have the pilot capacity to flood high frequency short haul domestic with many thousands of pilots, they'd love to immediately go after the low hanging fruit of pond crossing and trans cons. Even without foreign ownership or cabotage the gulf airlines are gearing up to absolutely bury US airlines in a fare/yield war by dumping unreal amounts of capacity on any and every market they can poach from desperate cash strapped European airlines and then counting on us to look the other way pretending that is somehow part of EU open skies EK alone is dumping a 380 on MXP-JFK and that's just one of their many, many, many routes they want to do.
EK alone is dumping a 380 on MXP-JFK and that's just one of their many, many, many routes they want to do.As far as undercutting fares with government subsidies...this is a real concern and is constantly being addressed. Subsidies come in many forms and may even include subsidized training for pilots but this is well known and has been going on forever and will continue to go on. U.S. carriers do the same thing to foreign markets.
It's not really relevant to this thread. We are discussing the issue of the RAA and their continued attempts to derail what has come to be known as the "1500 hour rule." Last time I checked the Regional Airlines Association's carriers don't do much long haul international and as you just stated above, won't be affected by foreign competition.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Ryanthepilot
Flight Schools and Training
55
01-29-2015 05:09 PM
navymmw
Flight Schools and Training
23
07-11-2008 11:19 AM
