1500 rule, zero 121 accidents so far
04-09-2017, 06:41 AM
#11
Ich bin Pilot von Beruf
Joined APC: Aug 2016
Position: CRJ Kapitän
Posts: 616
Originally Posted by Bucknut
I would rather have the 1500 hour pilot at least they may have a chance to scare themselves a little and gain a little humility, It also gives them some IFR experience and at the level is exponential. I used to fly with the Mesa Development 300 hour pilots and for the most part were fairly sharp. It is just is scary when your FO tells you that was the first instrument approach in actual conditions that they have ever flown was with passengers on board. MEI time is actually more worthwhile.
04-09-2017, 06:46 AM
#12
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2016
Position: E175 FO
Posts: 186
As someone mentioned earlier; it's been spiking wages and effectively raising the minimum floor. Thank God. I hope it continues to drive them up.
Keep the 1500 hour rule but give guys a living wage. You ll attract talent that way. I want to know what the attrition rate is from people who gain their PPL and make it all the way to the ATP.
Keep the 1500 hour rule but give guys a living wage. You ll attract talent that way. I want to know what the attrition rate is from people who gain their PPL and make it all the way to the ATP.
04-09-2017, 06:51 AM
#14
Banned
Joined APC: Feb 2017
Posts: 2,275
Originally Posted by veewan
The other problem with lowering the TT requirement is, if we make it a wet commercial again the old TT for a part 61 issued commercial was 250 hours, part 141 was 190 hours and part 142 was 140 hours, where is the incentive to KEEP or increase pilot wages?
Let's say you have a wealthy ambitious person come in and they can get from zero to hero at a place like ATP. They'll have all the funds to go from zero to hero in 3 months and qualify for the regionals. I mean technically they'll qualify for the legacies etc, (but they'd be competing against guys with jet time, Captain time...) but the reason we have seen wages increase is to attract talent. If there was an abundance of pilots, or a quick path for someone to put down cash now (borrowed or not) then feel that they'll be at a legacy with a wage that can repay it, there would suddenly be a lot more people doing flight training. This isn't to say we should deter people from learning to fly but rather you want people who actually like airplanes flying. Everyone likes money but you don't want to attract people who just want money.
The ATP/R-ATP requirement was not a move made purely for safety. Do I think it's better to have a pilot with more valuable flight time of course, but if we drop back to wet commercial, you'll have guys in the right seat of a jet who flew circles in a 172 for 250 hours. You'll have guys that went through a structured program for under 200 hours. We'd all prefer the guys with structured training.
When I went through my first airline initial training there was a guy who failed out of 121 training claiming he'd never pinked a ride... but got all of his training from ATP, where from what I gather they pay off the DPE to pass everyone even if they haven't learned what is required in the PTS. He didn't know how to track a VOR. And this was in the days where we commercial was able to be hired, but guys in class had ATP mins as the average.
Let's say you have a wealthy ambitious person come in and they can get from zero to hero at a place like ATP. They'll have all the funds to go from zero to hero in 3 months and qualify for the regionals. I mean technically they'll qualify for the legacies etc, (but they'd be competing against guys with jet time, Captain time...) but the reason we have seen wages increase is to attract talent. If there was an abundance of pilots, or a quick path for someone to put down cash now (borrowed or not) then feel that they'll be at a legacy with a wage that can repay it, there would suddenly be a lot more people doing flight training. This isn't to say we should deter people from learning to fly but rather you want people who actually like airplanes flying. Everyone likes money but you don't want to attract people who just want money.
The ATP/R-ATP requirement was not a move made purely for safety. Do I think it's better to have a pilot with more valuable flight time of course, but if we drop back to wet commercial, you'll have guys in the right seat of a jet who flew circles in a 172 for 250 hours. You'll have guys that went through a structured program for under 200 hours. We'd all prefer the guys with structured training.
When I went through my first airline initial training there was a guy who failed out of 121 training claiming he'd never pinked a ride... but got all of his training from ATP, where from what I gather they pay off the DPE to pass everyone even if they haven't learned what is required in the PTS. He didn't know how to track a VOR. And this was in the days where we commercial was able to be hired, but guys in class had ATP mins as the average.
Zero to hero in three months? Closer to five months, and only then are they actually able to start to learn anything.
The 1500 hour rule gives them an opportunity to learn from their mistakes in the real world before going to an airline.
04-09-2017, 06:54 AM
#15
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2013
Posts: 10,061
Originally Posted by deltajuliet
Maybe, but we should all support it for economic reasons as has been stated.
04-09-2017, 06:59 AM
#16
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2016
Posts: 755
I have been told by those in recruiting and HR that less than half of the people that apply to PSA are called for an interview. Of those that interview, about 30% are not offered the job. And then once training starts, we have a low but healthy number of pilots that do not pass training.
There are many airlines that have the same percentages. I would not consider any of these a "fog the mirror" airlines.
The ones that have no real interview, hire anyone that applies, and then has a 95%+ pass rate are the regionals that scare me.
I think that the 1500 hour rule has helped, but the other parts of that plan have helped even more. The better sharing of pria and training records is a huge part of this.
There are many airlines that have the same percentages. I would not consider any of these a "fog the mirror" airlines.
The ones that have no real interview, hire anyone that applies, and then has a 95%+ pass rate are the regionals that scare me.
I think that the 1500 hour rule has helped, but the other parts of that plan have helped even more. The better sharing of pria and training records is a huge part of this.
04-09-2017, 07:01 AM
#17
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2015
Posts: 254
Originally Posted by veewan
When I went through my first airline initial training there was a guy who failed out of 121 training claiming he'd never pinked a ride... but got all of his training from ATP, where from what I gather they pay off the DPE to pass everyone even if they haven't learned what is required in the PTS. He didn't know how to track a VOR. And this was in the days where we commercial was able to be hired, but guys in class had ATP mins as the average.
04-09-2017, 07:03 AM
#18
Ich bin Pilot von Beruf
Joined APC: Aug 2016
Position: CRJ Kapitän
Posts: 616
How pray tell is perpetuating a flawed environment that favors slaving away for $20000 per year conducive to safety? Colgan 3407 happened due to factors which fostered sleep and stress-induced fatigue. The captain and first officer couldn't even afford a $40/night hotel.... If you reduce the hours required to sign up for a regional, you can bet that all the bonuses and improvements in pay will go away again if pilot supply again overruns the number of available positions at the regionals. The increased experience requirement is having the effect that its creators intended: it is causing wages to rise as the available pool of applicants dwindles because of the time and energy needed in reaching it.
04-09-2017, 07:09 AM
#19
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,099
04-09-2017, 08:10 AM
#20
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2016
Position: FO
Posts: 793
1500 rule, zero 121 accidents so far
Originally Posted by WhiskeyKilo
1500 hours of C172 time does not make you a good jet driver.
That is all.
That is all.
+1... Truth! Preach!
1500 PIC in 172 does not make one a good FO jet driver.... dumb law. Period. 4yr degree 2 yr degree exemptions/RATP (for certain school programs, uselessness, #ProfessionalPilotDegree 🤣
, the reduction in time for these programs lobbied by Riddle & UND was also a dumb inclusion into the rule. Period. But we'll take it. Increases pilot shortage, increases demand, increases PAY.
The Mgmt @ the majors & regionals did this to themselves. They should have seen this coming. They pushed the van / kicked the can down the road.
It's the # 1 strategy in resolving pilot related issues, from Fatigue to contract related improvements demanded by the pilots groups, simple QOL & pay improvements. Kicked down the road.
Stay alert to how they kick things down the road as long as possible. It's strategic and effective to their bottom line (this fiscal yr & forward guidance EPS estimates).
Last edited by SilentLurker; 04-09-2017 at 08:20 AM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
