Go Back   Airline Pilot Central Forums - Find your next job as a Pilot > >
Union Talk For macro-level discussion: legislation, national unions, organizing pilot groups, etc.For airline-specific discussion, use relevant forum above.
 

Welcome to Airline Pilot Forums - Connect and get the inside scoop on Airline Companies

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ. Join our community today and start interacting with existing members. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free.


User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 03-22-2017, 10:38 PM   #21  
New Hire
 
Joined APC: Jan 2017
Posts: 6
Default

There is something to be said about the quality of flight versus the quantity of flight hours. An unfortunate byproduct of the "1500 hour" rule has been the encouragement for students to obtain their CFI rating at 250 hours and "teach" students how to run around the pattern for 750-1250 hours.

Where 135 operations used to be a quality stepping stone for new commercially rated pilots to earn quality flight time, now the 135 minimums require 1200 hours to get started.

These high time rules and a lack of part 91 operations sufficient for time building opportunities is forcing pilots to become instructors whether they want to teach or not. This industry is particularly odd in that our instructors at the Private-commercial levels have some of the least experience in the industry. But we encourage this as a way to bridge the gap between 250 and 1500 hours in many cases.

I think the real solution is probably a mix of the comments here, but primarily a reduction of the part 135 minimums to allow lower risk operations to be conducted by pilots with around 350 hours. This would give some opportunities to build practical experience in the industry and allow pilots to progress towards the ATP minimums without the encouragement to log hundreds of laps around the pattern each month.

This would hopefully drive more industry professionals into the instructing world, and start a circulation of industry knowledge instead of this low level circulation of basic, and in many cases rote knowledge and experience. Encourage pilots to fly more routes instead of laps around the pattern.
SoaringSW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2017, 11:32 PM   #22  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Flyboyxc91's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2013
Position: CFIs / Right Seat
Posts: 267
Default

I've been instructing making $51K salary flying glass cockpits for the last 1.5 years and I'm now about about to be done... I HAVE LEARNED ALOT. I hated the 1500 hour rule but it hasn't been a deal breaker with me CHOOSING my career path. I have instructed two different places and this last one I would consider staying at longer if the industry was what it was 8 years ago, thankful and even partially from the 1500 hr rule it is better. I would say however to be fair, 1500 hours is a little excessive on the ruling in my humble opinion. I believe 1000 hours is plenty for ANY college major especially if you have a STEM degree (not just an aviation degree)... I have two BS degrees in chemical engineering, and Biology.. went to work for Boeing then to flight school. Flown with tons of guys out of "Aviation Degree" schools that COULDNT do partial Panel compass turns or knew the difference in LPV And LNAV minimums on a GPS RNAV IAP.... BTW I also flew a lot with the aviation grads that were great. Point is the R-ATP because of the aviation degreee is just a marketing money ploy congress passed for these schools to make more money and apease the public. It should be some form of FAA Inspector competency test if applicants go choose to take it or STEM degree graduates R-ATP with certain GPAs etc. I enjoyed my time instructing and will continue to do so even as an airline pilot.
Flyboyxc91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2017, 12:16 AM   #23  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2017
Posts: 1,744
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyboyxc91 View Post
I've been instructing making $51K salary flying glass cockpits for the last 1.5 years and I'm now about about to be done... I HAVE LEARNED ALOT. I hated the 1500 hour rule but it hasn't been a deal breaker with me CHOOSING my career path. I have instructed two different places and this last one I would consider staying at longer if the industry was what it was 8 years ago, thankful and even partially from the 1500 hr rule it is better. I would say however to be fair, 1500 hours is a little excessive on the ruling in my humble opinion. I believe 1000 hours is plenty for ANY college major especially if you have a STEM degree (not just an aviation degree)... I have two BS degrees in chemical engineering, and Biology.. went to work for Boeing then to flight school. Flown with tons of guys out of "Aviation Degree" schools that COULDNT do partial Panel compass turns or knew the difference in LPV And LNAV minimums on a GPS RNAV IAP.... BTW I also flew a lot with the aviation grads that were great. Point is the R-ATP because of the aviation degreee is just a marketing money ploy congress passed for these schools to make more money and apease the public. It should be some form of FAA Inspector competency test if applicants go choose to take it or STEM degree graduates R-ATP with certain GPAs etc. I enjoyed my time instructing and will continue to do so even as an airline pilot.
I too am college educated, with a crapload of pre-med college credits. With that said, college and a high gpa cannot replace quality time in seat. The Europeans seam to think so, but they also deep stall Airbuses over the Atlantic.
No Land 3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2017, 12:39 AM   #24  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Flyboyxc91's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2013
Position: CFIs / Right Seat
Posts: 267
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by No Land 3 View Post
I too am college educated, with a crapload of pre-med college credits. With that said, college and a high gpa cannot replace quality time in seat. The Europeans seam to think so, but they also deep stall Airbuses over the Atlantic.
I never said it could replace it but I'm saying the scope of screaming safety for a 1500 hr rule is slightly exaggerated for most cases of individuals. The airline and FAA easily understand what a pilot is capable of when they do airline training when a person has 1000+ quality hours after 2 years of instructing 135 etc... if it doesn't cut it then chances are 1500 definitely might not either.
Flyboyxc91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2017, 12:47 AM   #25  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2015
Position: CRJ
Posts: 324
Default

Well absolutely it's a marketing ploy, otherwise Universities would have a hard time selling their product. What would be the point to pay extra for training that could be worse than your local flight school?

In the grand scheme of things, 500 hours is not worth getting the 4 year degree and paying extra. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed my degree, loved college and would do it the exact same way again. People choosing the aviation college just for the R-ATP doesn't make sense though. It's not worth it if someone is going just for the hour reduction. Now if you're going to college anyways and want to actually study aviation, different story. That would be my selling point to someone getting started in aviation looking at a aviation degree. It's a really fun degree!
tcco94 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2017, 12:56 AM   #26  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2017
Posts: 1,744
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyboyxc91 View Post
I never said it could replace it but I'm saying the scope of screaming safety for a 1500 hr rule is slightly exaggerated for most cases of individuals. The airline and FAA easily understand what a pilot is capable of when they do airline training when a person has 1000+ quality hours after 2 years of instructing 135 etc... if it doesn't cut it then chances are 1500 definitely might not either.
When I was a 141 check pilot, I thought I was top gun, when I got right seat in a CRJ, I realized I didn't know anything, when I got left seat in a CRJ, I realized how crappy of an FO I was. When I got to Kalitta, I knew to be humble and learn from everyone else that I can't even hold a candle to, in terms of experience, type ratings, and story telling.
The point is, experience is everything.
No Land 3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2017, 03:43 AM   #27  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: 744 CA
Posts: 4,569
Default

First, we should ALL be learning EVERY time we fly. but I digress.....the reality is in general.... 250-300 hour pilots shouldn't be in the right seat of a commercial airliner. YES there are exceptions, life's not fair. I would be willing to give reduced our minimums to guys like the R-ATP that go thru stringent training programs.. I mean programs where at some point the instructors or staff have the balls to say... NO.. you just can't hack it a this level with your experience and fail them and wash them out. Problem is its a for profit system and guys are going to go to a program like that. I guess what I mean.. is..there HAS to be a chance of total failure because you can't perform at a certain level. I once was visiting a friend at a local airport who owned a flight school, one of his students was taxiing out for his Solo.....41 hours.. FORTY ONE freaking hours to solo a 172.... I dont want that guy flying commercial airliners. the system will find a balance pay is coming up... and will continue to do so most likely. The industry will adapt. CADET style programs like Lufthansa has used for decades are probably coming at some point.... run effectively ...with REAL threat of failure... and they will succeed.
HercDriver130 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2017, 04:21 AM   #28  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: May 2015
Position: LAV
Posts: 186
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aviatorpr View Post
1500 has helped create a shortage in the regional sector. That has led to compensation improvements. Let's not take another step backwards.
YES! I don't know why so many 121 guys are so against it.
jules11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2017, 07:19 AM   #29  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2016
Posts: 292
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tcco94 View Post
Yup, exactly! Some people aren't in a huge rush because they have an awesome job and probably location (like yourself) and take the hit building time. Also, probably better quality students and possibly more money.

I took a hit on my QOL and taught Chinese in AZ. Still had fun but worked A LOT and also got 1000 dual given in 1 year and I was off to the airlines. People just complain it can't be done. It can be done, but you have to out weigh the options. Do you want to have fun, good money, benefits, and an awesome experience (like you) or do you want to log hours the fastest way possible with 1 vacation in your year. Lol.

In some ways if I did it over I would have instructed back at my flight school or somewhere I could have a more relaxed and fun experience and enjoyed teaching....but I can't complain with getting done in the amount of time I had.

Just gotta follow what you want, but building 1500 hours really isn't that a big of deal like people set out to make it. I'm sure you agree with me, relatively it sounds like.
Yep! Some guys could get it within a year or so if they worked the schedule to get 8 flight hours a day. Yeah some weeks I worked my butt off and flew everyday. That, however, was normally a means to a trip I was taking the next week. Normally if I took a long weekend off I'd make it up to my students the week before or after.

Getting 8 flight hours a day was hard. It meant you normally scheduled 10+ hours. Something would always happen to ground you be it MX, weather, student, etc..

Before the 1500 rule my plan was to go to Cape Air to build time and get my ATP. Then at some point switch over to the regionals. After the 1500 rule it made no sense to go to Cape Air if I could start the regionals at 1000TT. I think I'd be a more experienced pilot if I had ended up going to Cape Air.
BizJet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2017, 07:39 AM   #30  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Oct 2014
Posts: 729
Default

Posted this in the 9E thread, figured this would help for those interested:

Go to ALPA.org
Login, and select 'Member' at the top. Look for the "Calls to Action" section and it's under there. Already has your congresspeople selected, and a standard form letter. Add your own comments or send as it. Takes a minute all in all.
Five93H is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
 

 
Reply
 



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Legal issues ccstemberg Aviation Law 19 10-27-2014 08:46 AM
"Compromised Safety Programs" APC225 United 11 09-23-2013 06:32 AM
WSJ article on Airline safety MD80 Major 1 12-04-2009 08:04 AM
Safety Experts interview with Roger Cohen HSLD Hangar Talk 0 08-03-2009 06:08 PM
To All UPS Flight Qualified Supervisors IPAMD11FO Cargo 53 02-12-2007 08:40 PM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:06 AM.


vBulletin® v3.9.3.5, Copyright ©2000-2019, MH Sub I, LLC dba vBulletin
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright 2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1