FlyinCat

So, the headline from this is slightly deceptive. They are applying for permission to grant graduates of their training program a R-ATP with 750 hours because they are arguing it is equivalent to military training. I STRONGLY disagree with this premise, since there's no civilian program that's the equivalent of military training (I have experience in both). I would be willing to concede 1000 hour minimums, closer to a college 141 program. Regardless, if this were to pass Republic would get a ton of new applicants and this can only hurt the contract negotiations. Your thoughts?

https://www.flightglobal.com/safety/...EGYpG8--M6w-tY

Elevation

Today we are making about 2 new ATPs for every retiring airline pilot. Emerald Coast still has plenty of people paying to get a leg up in competitive interviews. Job fairs are still being attended by pilots trying to get some edge to gain consideration for their jobs. Companies are still getting people to pay money just to sit in the right seat of single pilot airplanes on freight flights.

There are qualified pilots out there. A particular job just has to be appealing enough to recruit and retain those pilots.

The 1500hr rule along with Pt.117 came about to increase safety of the flying public. We are measurably safer as a result. At my company, where corners were cut and processes evaded, we crashed a 767.

Standards get cut at our own peril. Say what people may about quality of training, ultimately what's being proposed is a reduction in standards.

SonicFlyer

False. The 1500 hour rule had nothing to do with safety, it was Obama's gift to the unions. Both pilots of Colgan had well over 1500 hours when they crashed. They were fatigued and not well trained, which was also addressed in the rule change, the part that actually had to do with safety.

sailingfun

The 1500 hour rule is there to build a foundation before you start flying for a airline. Neither pilot in the Colgan accident had 1500 hours when they started and neither had a proper foundation.

SonicFlyer

Perhaps, but that has to do with quality of hours, not quantity of hours.

Excargodog

Well, so does UPT. But this is the cost for aircraft time ALONE:


370k for T-6, 469k for T-1, 1.2M for T-38 per the latest RAND study. Not to mention it is a full time job for a year. And ~15% of each graduating class is sent on to instructor school to be instructors for the next three years classes.

No way in hell is the LIFT academy anything near the equivalent.

TaylorPilot

I would love to see the metric you used to conclude that we are safer due to the 1500 hour rule. I just don't see what else a cfi learns making their 5000th leg around the same pattern in the same airplane at the same airport that they didn't learn on the 4999th. It could be argued that a 2000 hour pilot with 1250 SIC time is much safer than a 2000 hour pilot with 500 SIC. I do agree though...500 is too little and 1500 is much. More than 400-600 dual given in a 172 is just going thru the motions...

Random Task

But having 1500 hours isn't just about doing laps in the pattern. It's aeronautical experience. It's decision making. It's exposing someone to more scenarios which in turn gains more experience. I didn't have an electrical issue in an airplane into nearly 1500 hours. That's an experience I got to take with me into my first airline job.

brewpilot

Ms Shaw had 1,470. While I agree the crash was tragic I still don’t think the 1,500 hour rule helps keep us safer. Someone gets hired with 700 hours and needs to get to 2,500 to upgrade. That 1,800 hours flying in the right seat with a qualified, experienced captain is more valuable imo before upgrade than a 1,500 hour pilot in a 172 etc with only 1,000 sic before upgrade. Thousands of pilots made it before the rule. I even feel the newer guys coming onboard are forgetting how to actually be pilots. Stick and rudder is fading. I witness it first hand. People either cut it or don’t when it comes to being a pilot. Just my opinion.

LoneStar32

The fact that you think that is what a CFI does causes me to think the ATP rule was targeted for people like you.