It says he flew turboprops. He better have been making 6 figures and had thousands of hours of experience when he did that or he was endangering his passengers.

While I appreciate what this guy was trying to do, he did it incredibly poorly. Scaring people into action by claiming that their lives are in imminent danger is irresponsible, at best. His writing is full of half truths and poorly drawn conclusions. If I were not in the industry, I would take away the folowing from this article:

1) New First Officers are woefully unprepared to fly because their previous jobs had them flying inferior aircraft. They are dangerous. Look at Colgan.
2) Colgan happened because of a pilot shortage. If there are less pilots, more people will die.
3) "Studies" have shown young pilots are less experienced than older pilots and there are a lot of young pilots around right now making twice as likely that you will crash. So, if young people are flying your airplane, you're going to crash.
4) State-owned foreign carriers' pilots make "astronomically" more than the most experienced pilots in the US and therefore the most senior pilots at even Delta are leaving to go to the Middle East.
5) This is one of the dumbest things I've ever read "The most dangerous time at an airline is when they’re hiring new first officers and upgrading first officers to captains, and some airlines are perpetually locked in this cycle just trying to keep up with attrition."

I'm just going to stop. I give this article a D. His writing was full of hyperbole. He rambled and really made no point other than, "public be afraid of flying."

Also, there's a sweet link in the article to him saying TWA800 was shot down. Nothing like a little conspiracy to finish out this well thought-out exposé.

CBREEZY, you are forgetting the context of the article. It was published in the NY Post, a rag whose mission is to scare people with irresponsible half truths....very much like your job in these forums.

Actually, this article was far closer to the truth than what you typically read in this tabloid.

Again, the context of the rag it was published in...besides, I'm sure he didn't write it and was probably severely misquoted by those who did.

For the most part the facts are pretty accurate in this case, it's just the way the story is presented that makes it dramatic.

I'm guessing Bedford forgot to pay his monthly "pilot shortage" Press Release payment to the NYPost and this is their response.

Keep in mind, however, sometimes you need a little sensationalism when going up against the massive PR campaigns by guys who literally claim that increasing the minimum flight time requirements for airlines reduces safety because pilots spend too much time flying airplanes and forgetting what they learned in college before going to an airline...yes....this was said out loud by a regional airline CEO.

And in fact the crew of that Colgan Air flight was not highly experienced even though they had over 1500 hours each. The fact remains they crashed a perfectly good airplane on a routine flight due to a severe brain fart....a typical low time private pilot type of mistake.

I firmly believe to if it weren't for technology, we'd have a significantly higher number of accidents today. Most regional airline pilots are good and take their job seriously, and do the work necessary to become proficient. There are a minority, albeit a growing minority, of people who I think are fair weather seat fillers. This is due to some airlines lowering their hiring standards to find people that will do the job for 21K the first year. I've heard stories of Captains flying with FO's that don't know speeds or limitations, and demonstrate a serious lack of systems knowledge. The danger is we are re-entering a period where it's possible for you to have a week 100hr Captain that upgraded in just over a year, with a week newly hired FO.

Yes everyone takes the checkride, but I know of one guy at my last airline that took the checkride, and a month later was yanked off the trip during a line check for the captain.

The article was written by him. It says so in 3 different places.


The Colgan crash was tragic and has lead to leaps and bounds in regulation in favor of pilots. To say, however, that this is a regional airline problem is ignorant. What do you say about the Southwest flight that collapsed the nose gear when the Captain tried to force a landing? That's a private pilot mistake. What about the UPS airplane that flew a visual into a mountain? Or perhaps the Southwest flight that landed at the wrong airport? They were lucky that the runway wasn't shorter. Did the Colgan crew act poorly under the circumstances? Absolutely. Are there major airline crews that have made similar "rookie" mistakes and got lucky it didn't end in a fireball? Absolutely.

I know what Bedford said. I watched his testimony. How many people were incensed by what he said because it was ludacris? So, your reaction is, "well, we should say all of America's lives are in danger because we have inexperienced idiots flying their airplanes?" The only real problem brought up in the article that also was accompanied with a solution was pilot pay. So, flying a regional airline is still dangerous but if you pay themmore you should feel better about it and MAYBE that'll recruit better pilots? That's equally as ridiculous as "getting more experience makes you a worse pilot."

Ah, yes... the New York Daily News. A fine, reputable publication!

I really don't understand why so many of you are getting in a twist about this.

All of us slugging it out in the regionals know that the average experience level is much higher than being reported by some of these media outlets. Hell, when the Asiana SFO crash happened, the captain that I was working with and I had nearly twice the combined experience of the THREE pilots on that triple.

The political reality is that the RAA is lobbying hard for a repeal of the 1500 hour rule and a new quick path to the right seat; two things that will quickly stop the current push to increase pay and work rules.

If articles like this help to eliminate the political will to reduce training and aeronautical experience requirements and, by extension, making current 121 pilots more valuable, what do we care?

Yeah, sorry that's what I meant

Because airline pilots are still one of the most truisted professions in the US. When you have one using hyperbole and half truths to try and scare the public into giving us more money, we all come across as money hungry unions and not professionals deserving better wages for the responsibilty. If anything, telling people that even with the 1500 hour rule, there is enough inexperience in the cockpit that it could kill you will result in higher entrance barriers than already exist.

Back when the airlines flew 19 seat turboprops the washout rates were very high especially for dissimilar type upgrades. The regionals also wouldn't consider you without 1500 hours and 500 multi back then.

I thought you didn't believe everything you read? Just because his name is on the by line doesn't mean he wrote it. It probably got kicked back by the editor several times saying..."we need to make this more dramatic and scary sounding....say this instead."

I never said it's just a regional airline problem and in fact most of the pilot error stall accidents in recent years were on much larger aircraft...heavy jets even. Where do the majors get their pilots from? Regionals!

The main difference is that they were paid better and should have known better and their accidents are fewer. In the case of Colgan it was a failure of the system but had such an accident been caused by the highest time crew at Colgan the problem would have been a different one. In this case it's likely had that captain survived his career another ten years and many more thousands of hours he would still be weak and dangerous.

There are a great many very weak pilots out there flying around in all airlines with nothing but a seniority number and a charming personality to get them through check rides.

Yeah? Were you standing behind him?

First...don't try to quote me on something I never said.

Second...why is it ridiculous to say that if you pay more you'll get more experienced and better pilots? Of course you will! Sometimes I wonder if you are the one who writes Bedford's speeches.