Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major > United
Bethune on pilot shortage >

Bethune on pilot shortage

Search

Notices

Bethune on pilot shortage

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 05-18-2018 | 07:17 PM
  #31  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 727
Likes: 0
From: It's still a Guppy, just a bit longer.
Default

Originally Posted by UAL seasoned
Exactly! 65 is just an arbitrary number...let's substitute in 67, that's the arbitrary number I prefer! (example only, I'm very happy with 65!)

But to the original discussion, is there any evidence that shows that 750 hours (or whatever lower number) is as good as or better than 1500 hours. If we're going to pick a number, I'd rather error on the conservative side. If you're arguing that there shouldn't be a number at all, I think you've staked out a losing position!
Uhh... No that's not at all what I'm arguing. If it were up to me ATP minimums for the purpose of 121 command would be significantly higher than they are today.

My point about the Buffalo crash still stands. Both pilots had well above the mins, especially (obviously) the Captain. The problem is the status quo regional model, period. It needs to go.
Reply
Old 05-18-2018 | 07:37 PM
  #32  
atpcliff's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,215
Likes: 0
From: Capt
Default

Originally Posted by Half wing
I saw a chart once that plotted accidents in incidents by age in some aviation publication. It showed accidents/incidents increasing rapidly between 60-65. I remember thinking that must be how they came up with the age 60 rule. Interesting there still needs to be someone under 60 with someone over 60 in the cockpit. The chart also showed the least accidents/incidents around age 35.
They got the Age 60 rule because that is what the CEO of AA told the head of the FAA to make the rule. They were friends. Before the Age 60 rule, there was no age limit. Canada, and several other countries, now have no age limit, and Japan just changed to age 67.

I read, several years ago, that the FAA did a study, and the age 60+ pilots had the least problems.
Reply
Old 05-18-2018 | 10:26 PM
  #33  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,213
Likes: 14
From: guppy CA
Default

Originally Posted by atpcliff
They got the Age 60 rule because that is what the CEO of AA told the head of the FAA to make the rule. They were friends. Before the Age 60 rule, there was no age limit. Canada, and several other countries, now have no age limit, and Japan just changed to age 67.

I read, several years ago, that the FAA did a study, and the age 60+ pilots had the least problems.
Actually, there were a lot of studies that went into the age 60 rule. It was originally going to be 55, but the board went with 60 based on studies. And there were going to be even tighter age restrictions on transitioning from piston to jet engine aircraft.
The friendship between CR Smith and Quesada was due to working together during WWII and Quesada did not make the decision on age 60; an independent board did AFTER evaluating quite a bit of data/studies. But a bunch of studies isn't as intriguing as a conspiracy theory.
Reply
Old 05-19-2018 | 03:38 AM
  #34  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 5,508
Likes: 109
Default

Originally Posted by atpcliff
They got the Age 60 rule because that is what the CEO of AA told the head of the FAA to make the rule. They were friends. Before the Age 60 rule, there was no age limit. Canada, and several other countries, now have no age limit, and Japan just changed to age 67.

I read, several years ago, that the FAA did a study, and the age 60+ pilots had the least problems.
Not a single fact in that whole post.

We are all dumber for having read it, I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
Reply
Old 05-19-2018 | 04:16 AM
  #35  
PowderFinger's Avatar
Number Last
 
Joined: Sep 2017
Posts: 442
Likes: 0
From: Boeing voice activated systems and ACARS commander
Default

Originally Posted by Half wing
I saw a chart once that plotted accidents in incidents by age in some aviation publication. It showed accidents/incidents increasing rapidly between 60-65. I remember thinking that must be how they came up with the age 60 rule. Interesting there still needs to be someone under 60 with someone over 60 in the cockpit. The chart also showed the least accidents/incidents around age 35.
I think I saw the same chart ... Air Facts? ... An issue from the late 50s or early 60s? Based on DC-4 and similar types? Lol
Reply
Old 05-19-2018 | 11:43 AM
  #36  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,213
Likes: 14
From: guppy CA
Default

Originally Posted by PowderFinger
I think I saw the same chart ... Air Facts? ... An issue from the late 50s or early 60s? Based on DC-4 and similar types? Lol
I think he's referring to a series of studies published by CAMI (in the 1970s or 80s). Over 60 data was based on pilots flying smaller regional aircraft ... this was back before the age 60 restriction applied to all 121 ops.
Reply
Old 05-19-2018 | 01:49 PM
  #37  
Banned
 
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,182
Likes: 0
From: Tom’s Whipping boy.
Default

I grew up in an airline household in the 60's and remember well what the captains who were approaching 60 years old looked like then.. most of them were rung out, whiskey drinking, Viceroy smoking, and could barely walk a mile without braking a sweat.

It was a much harder life, flying the line in the 40's, 50's when they all started. There were a few exceptions. A neighbor, who was a Delta pilot in '68 could be seen regularly jogging in the mornings in the neighborhood. People would actually ask, why is he running? Usually the reply was, "he was a Marine", and everyone would knowingly nod yes, as if that explained the oddity.

Remember, the average life expectancy of a male in 1960 was 66.
Reply
Old 05-19-2018 | 03:09 PM
  #38  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 692
Likes: 0
Default

The silly part about all those that want to dump the hours requirement is that it would just buy them some time. Go ahead and scoop up every willing pilot between 250 and 1500. There won't be anyone left after that. Nobody borrows a fortune with interest for training so they can have a regional career. Young folks these days have wised up to the scam.
Reply
Old 05-19-2018 | 03:41 PM
  #39  
Beaver Hunter's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Falcondrivr
Saw a 99 on the ramp last night at BFI and said to my FO: “They used to fly pax in those. I tried to get a $13,000 a year job in one as a 3000 hr ATP in 1990 and was grossly under qualified.”
That is hilarious. I was flying Twin Otters in 1990. Would have sold my sister into porn to fly a EMB-120. I actually flew to PDX and sat in the Chief Pilots waiting room all day to drop my resume of for a god at Horizon . Nothing for my efforts. Nothing for the 3 years I applied to SKW.
These kids don’t know how good they have it.
Reply
Old 05-19-2018 | 03:48 PM
  #40  
Beaver Hunter's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Default

The 1500 hundred rule is the best thing that ever happened to help with pilot wages. Limit the supply, drive up the demand, wages go up. Don’t rock the boat. And for god sakes. I don’t want to work till 67. Jeez!!!
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Opus
Major
46
04-04-2008 09:47 PM
Oldfreightdawg
Major
1
03-03-2008 06:43 PM
jelloy683
Major
9
08-03-2007 01:05 PM
jelloy683
Regional
3
08-02-2007 04:03 PM
aerospacepilot
Regional
59
07-01-2007 04:57 PM

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



Your Privacy Choices