Is the ATP Rule Based on Fact?
#11
Prime Minister/Moderator

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 45,167
Likes: 803
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
You'd also have to look at FOQA data. I know at certain airlines unbelievably bonehead or incompetent moves were made some of which were very dangerous, but no loss of life occurred. Additionally, the low pay and poor treatment spawned a very troublesome IDGAS attitude, which DID impact safety. Strapped regional airlines didn't clean cockpits, which meant food and crap actually jammed buttons, even important one's like trim. In summary, relentless cost cutting is not good for safety. This is one way to put a floor on it.
#12
You point to the Colgan crew (the captain specifically) and state that he had well over 1500 hrs. He did - but a point to be made is where did he get his hours? Wasn't he one of these early to an airline cockpit guys (and wasn't the FO too?) Maybe one of many things that might have made a difference would have been would have been some real world experiences PRIOR to becoming an airline pilot.
Yes - you can point out mishaps at every level of the aviation industry - from the least to the most experienced. Often the details of safety aren't even presented without a mishap to bring them to light. MANY unsafe things may be happpening on a daily basis and you won't read about them in the papers.
Yes - you can point out mishaps at every level of the aviation industry - from the least to the most experienced. Often the details of safety aren't even presented without a mishap to bring them to light. MANY unsafe things may be happpening on a daily basis and you won't read about them in the papers.
As a side note, he did the exact program that at least one pilot in the cockpit of each regional accident from 2004-2008 did (Gulfstream).
#13
Works Every Weekend
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,210
Likes: 0
You point to the Colgan crew (the captain specifically) and state that he had well over 1500 hrs. He did - but a point to be made is where did he get his hours? Wasn't he one of these early to an airline cockpit guys (and wasn't the FO too?) Maybe one of many things that might have made a difference would have been would have been some real world experiences PRIOR to becoming an airline pilot.
I actually subscribe to this theory. People who were trained in a canned curriculum (some of which do not allow students or instructors to ever enter IMC) and then went directly to the right seat of an airliner never had the opportunity to kill or scare themselves in general (or military) aviation. They had essentially never had the opportunity to be fully responsible for a flight until they were released from IOE after upgrade...all or almost all of their previous flights were as SIC, dual received, or under the supervision of a CFI (even when doing student solos).
1500 hours means there's a high probability that airline new-hires will already have significant PIC experience.
1500 hours means there's a high probability that airline new-hires will already have significant PIC experience.
In any case, if you go through your flight training as quickly as possible, you'll arrive at about 250 hours with only a handful of solo cross-countries as actual time spent in command of the aircraft. If there's someone next to you to bail you out, you don't actually have to live with the decisions you make.
If you go straight to the right seat of a B1900, there's going to be a Captain to bail you out if you screw up too badly. Again, you still don't have to live with your own decisions.
If you quit and go work for Colgan and fly a Q400 from the right seat, you're in the same situation. And then you upgrade. You now have several thousand hours, none of it spent actually being in command of an airplane. You're the final authority, and you have no experience actually doing that.
If we force people to do CFI work, or banner towing, or aerial survey, or pipeline patrol, or whatever else for that time gap between 250 and 1500 hours... the experience they'll gain will be important. It's time spent having to fix your own problems and errors, or perhaps fixing both yours and your students errors.
#14
Yep!
Both pilots on FLG3701, and I believe it was both on the MKE accident a few months later- it might have been just one of them. No one was killed miraculously, but they bent the crap out of that airplane.
The FO on the CMR5191 and then the CA on CGC3407. Quite the trend...
Both pilots on FLG3701, and I believe it was both on the MKE accident a few months later- it might have been just one of them. No one was killed miraculously, but they bent the crap out of that airplane.
The FO on the CMR5191 and then the CA on CGC3407. Quite the trend...
#15
#16
Wow! That is a smoking gun! Not mention, wasn't Gulfstream caught putting auto a/c in their planes. Yet ALPA with all their resources in Herndon can't gather up a few of these facts to shutdown Roger "the spray tanman" Cohen and the rest of his PT Barnum circus as they "struggle" to find a solution to the "shortage".
Nobody really wants to pay for experience. The MPL proves that. I wonder how much PIC time the crew of Air France 447 got as well. From the data it doesn't seem like much. It's not just matter of learning how to operate an aircraft, it is having to rely on oneself, scare oneself, and make sole decisions which prepares you. Being a CFI helps a lot too, because you learn to communicate clearly, how NOT to micromanage, yet still stay in command, how to build cockpit rapport--in short CRM. These MPLs go straight into an AirBus having never even flown as PIC in actual. That is what the bottom feeders were doing; recruiting 250 hr pilots with inadequate experience.
#17
Nobody really wants to pay for experience. The MPL proves that. I wonder how much PIC time the crew of Air France 447 got as well. From the data it doesn't seem like much. It's not just matter of learning how to operate an aircraft, it is having to rely on oneself, scare oneself, and make sole decisions which prepares you. Being a CFI helps a lot too, because you learn to communicate clearly, how NOT to micromanage, yet still stay in command, how to build cockpit rapport--in short CRM. These MPLs go straight into an AirBus having never even flown as PIC in actual. That is what the bottom feeders were doing; recruiting 250 hr pilots with inadequate experience.
If we force people to do CFI work, or banner towing, or aerial survey, or pipeline patrol, or whatever else for that time gap between 250 and 1500 hours... the experience they'll gain will be important. It's time spent having to fix your own problems and errors, or perhaps fixing both yours and your students errors.
I actually subscribe to this theory. People who were trained in a canned curriculum (some of which do not allow students or instructors to ever enter IMC) and then went directly to the right seat of an airliner never had the opportunity to kill or scare themselves in general (or military) aviation. They had essentially never had the opportunity to be fully responsible for a flight until they were released from IOE after upgrade...all or almost all of their previous flights were as SIC, dual received, or under the supervision of a CFI (even when doing student solos).
1500 hours means there's a high probability that airline new-hires will already have significant PIC experience.
1500 hours means there's a high probability that airline new-hires will already have significant PIC experience.
I was one of those who had to wait a little longer to reach my 1500...whoop-de-doo. I was much better off for it, and so is everyone else. Nothing teaches like experience. NOTHING.
While some are naturally more skilled...from hand/foot/eye coordination, understanding the aerodynamics of flight, highly developed 'tactile feel' skills (at the primary level)...to division of attention, multitasking, being able to orient one's self in space, maintaining a high level of situational awareness (instruments)...and finally, decision making, being able to understanding things good enough to teach it well (commercial, cfi)....EXPERIENCE has NEVER hurt a pilot.
I got my initial training at a mom and pop school before transitioning to and instructing at one of the big corporate-type 'fast track
' program...but I absolutely REFUSED to sign off instrument students without AT LEAST a few hours of actual time....I think it's absolutely essential.The point is, 1500 hours like the guys above have said, all but forces you through either instructing, time building, towing banners, flying divers, building time on your own dime, etc....to gain some PIC time where YOU make the decisions, you're in charge, and scare yourself and learn from mistakes as well as non-mistakes. Things you should NOT be learning in the left seat of a part 121 operation.
#18
Additionally, and someone who's been in the game longer than I correct me if I misstep, a lot of the guys who might have gotten hired at regionals w/ a only few hundred hours in the '06-'07 range mostly spent a while as FO's before upgrading...so maybe the "incidents and accidents" figures were further reduced by the fact than they'd gain a lot of experience by the time they upgraded. But the point remains that experience should be gained BEFORE stepping into the flight deck of a turbine powered transport aircraft.
#19
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
From: Captain - Retired
I'm glad to see a lot of the seasoned pilots agree that airline new hires should have a little more than a wet commercial licence to start.
It's true that in the past airlines did occasionally hire low time pilots but it wasn't the norm.
There are plenty of jobs out there for low time pilots. I see all the large flight schools are advertising like crazy for CFIs and offering benefits and sign on bonuses. In fact, as a CFI you can generally earn 2-3 times the salary of a new hire airline FO so go do that and save some money.
In the old days, as you will see I've commented on repeatedly in other threads, pilots built time in smaller aircraft and then went to regional airlines with a couple thousand hours and flew a 19 seat turboprop with no autopilot for several years before going to the majors. The time from student pilot to major airline pilot was much faster back then than it is today and salaries at all levels were generally higher.
It takes very little actual flying skill to operate the controls of a large glass cockpit airliner successfully but it requires a great deal of aviation experience to do it safely as a captain and part of that experience is earned the hard way. 1000 hours flying hands on in a turboprop is going to make you a far better pilot than 1000 hours in a large automated jet. I've spent enough years as a captain, check airman, sim instructor, etc to know this is true.
It blows my mind when a pilot seems annoyed by this rule. I understand you're annoyed you missed the boat and were too late for the party etc... but you know what? this is better for you in the long run and for every other pilot out there. It will force the airlines to stop scraping the bottom of the barrel and force you as a pilot to get some real experience before you spend the rest of your career behind a bunch of electronics cruising on autopilot.
It's true that in the past airlines did occasionally hire low time pilots but it wasn't the norm.
There are plenty of jobs out there for low time pilots. I see all the large flight schools are advertising like crazy for CFIs and offering benefits and sign on bonuses. In fact, as a CFI you can generally earn 2-3 times the salary of a new hire airline FO so go do that and save some money.
In the old days, as you will see I've commented on repeatedly in other threads, pilots built time in smaller aircraft and then went to regional airlines with a couple thousand hours and flew a 19 seat turboprop with no autopilot for several years before going to the majors. The time from student pilot to major airline pilot was much faster back then than it is today and salaries at all levels were generally higher.
It takes very little actual flying skill to operate the controls of a large glass cockpit airliner successfully but it requires a great deal of aviation experience to do it safely as a captain and part of that experience is earned the hard way. 1000 hours flying hands on in a turboprop is going to make you a far better pilot than 1000 hours in a large automated jet. I've spent enough years as a captain, check airman, sim instructor, etc to know this is true.
It blows my mind when a pilot seems annoyed by this rule. I understand you're annoyed you missed the boat and were too late for the party etc... but you know what? this is better for you in the long run and for every other pilot out there. It will force the airlines to stop scraping the bottom of the barrel and force you as a pilot to get some real experience before you spend the rest of your career behind a bunch of electronics cruising on autopilot.
#20
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
From: Canadian Alluminum Tubing Assistant Transporter
I couldn't agree more! I'm about to hit 1500 hours, and will be in class at an airline in about a month. I still feel like I have a lot to experience, and I've gotten to experience quite a bit in my almost 1200 hours of dual given.
The tailwheel idea I agree with too. I'm a tailwheel instructor, and I agree it makes a better stick out of people, and it's an airplane where you can't just fake it til you make it with the rudder. You actually have to know how to use the rudder or you're gonna bend metal / tear fabric.
The tailwheel idea I agree with too. I'm a tailwheel instructor, and I agree it makes a better stick out of people, and it's an airplane where you can't just fake it til you make it with the rudder. You actually have to know how to use the rudder or you're gonna bend metal / tear fabric.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post



