NAFI opposed to 1500 hour rule

[Roger, Roger]

Re: NAFI apposed to 1500 hour rule

I dunno about this whole 1500 hour thing, but NAFI doesn't really have any expertise in airline ops.... so I'd be a bit more inclined to go with ALPA's opinion than NAFI's.

 

[Inverted]

Re: NAFI apposed to 1500 hour rule

Regardless of where you go, what you do, what you fly. More time almost always means more experience. The 1500 rule is a good thing.

No freaking way. You think bumbling around for 1500 hours in a small plane in one area of the country I'd going to prepare you for flying a much larger aircraft long distances?!

I know if I had 1500 hours teaching in the bay area and had to fly into real weather in the mid west in a much more complex aircraft I would be in a world of trouble. But if I had 600 hours and had 200 hours flying charter over multiple states I would be much better prepared.

Regardless of hours there needs to be better training. Total time doesn't mean a damn thing.

 

[Rocketman99]

Re: NAFI apposed to 1500 hour rule

No freaking way. You think bumbling around for 1500 hours in a small plane in one area of the country I'd going to prepare you for flying a much larger aircraft long distances?!

I know if I had 1500 hours teaching in the bay area and had to fly into real weather in the mid west in a much more complex aircraft I would be in a world of trouble. But if I had 600 hours and had 200 hours flying charter over multiple states I would be much better prepared.

Regardless of hours there needs to be better training. Total time doesn't mean a damn thing.

The point is not to prepare you to fly a bigger aircraft, we could probably train a monkey to do that and somewhat cheaply I'd bet. The point is being able to deal with situations that are not 100% plain vanilla flying. Even in 1500 hours of nothing but doing touch and goes chances are you'd run into some sort of situation that would require you to think and actually be a pilot in command.

If not, well you've spent enough time flying around the flagpole that just basic flying skills would be completely second nature to you. This way if a situation did arise you would be able to spare a few brain cells to deal with it. At 250 hours you just don't have that. Every time you fly you become a better pilot on some small level. Period. End of story. Infinity. Infinity +1.

 

[frog_flyer]

Opposed...holy cow only missed it by one letter!!!

CUT HIS HEAD OFF!!! :yar:

 

[derg]

1500 is not that much flight time, I don't understand the drama around requiring a pilot operating under 121 to have an ATP.

Besides, why is it OK that American might want 3000 hours to hire a guy to fly a Super-80 when we think it's hunky dory that American Eagle will throw a guy in a CRJ-700 seat with less than 500 hours?

 

[The Gardener]

Re: NAFI apposed to 1500 hour rule

Why is it assumed that everybody who has to build time for training does so by flying the shortest possible distance at the slowest possible speed, all the while focusing on learning nothing and while flying the simplest aircraft available?

When I had to build time for my commercial I had a few rules for myself.
Fly the plane as fast as it would go. I wasn't paying a 'wet' rate to go slow.
Never go to the same airport twice.
Go as far away from home over the most unfamiliar routes as possible.
Never fly out and back over the same route.

My only regret is that I didn't get to make it from coast to coast, but in combination I made it from California to Wisconsin.

 

[Rudabega]

Re: NAFI apposed to 1500 hour rule

No freaking way. You think bumbling around for 1500 hours in a small plane in one area of the country I'd going to prepare you for flying a much larger aircraft long distances?!

I know if I had 1500 hours teaching in the bay area and had to fly into real weather in the mid west in a much more complex aircraft I would be in a world of trouble. But if I had 600 hours and had 200 hours flying charter over multiple states I would be much better prepared.

Regardless of hours there needs to be better training. Total time doesn't mean a damn thing.

You don't need to be in a shiny jet to learn about weather. I have flown the country several times in 172's and 182's. First I read some books on what to expect for weather patterns down at the library (ghost town.) This is part of getting to those 1500 hours. Any flight instructor is going to have these opportunities arise.

Do you think that if you taught 1500 hours just in the Bay area you wouldn't learn anything? A good pilot looks for information everywhere and betters himself with it.

 

[vikingair]

Re: NAFI apposed to 1500 hour rule

Without question an hour is an hour and its the same quantity to everyone. Its up to YOU whether that hour spent in a small piston will have any quality.

 

[ZeroPapaGolf]

Re: NAFI apposed to 1500 hour rule

If you are ok with being that kind of pilot then go for it. I take pride in developing my skills and always looking for a fight that I can learn from or experience something new. Yes, you will have some who will always work the system but as a whole, people will come to the table with more experience. If you don't agree that means that you don't have the experience yet to know any better.

I just don't see it being any different than it is now. Those like us who care about being skilled, competent pilots will still be skilled & competent. Those going with the flow doing the bare minimum will still be just that, only with a few more hours.

 

[dasleben]

Re: NAFI apposed to 1500 hour rule

No freaking way. You think bumbling around for 1500 hours in a small plane in one area of the country I'd going to prepare you for flying a much larger aircraft long distances?!

Yes, I do think that. That belief comes from experience. I started off as a CFI, then in the hiring wave got swept up and got into the right seat of an ERJ with about 850 hours. I spent a little over a year there, got furloughed, and now I've spent about a year and a half flying 402s around with the general public in the back.

You'd think going from an ERJ to a 402 would be a huge change, right? Actually, I was surprised at how similar the jobs are. Airplanes still fly like airplanes, passengers are passengers. You're just doing 180 KTAS instead of 450 KTAS.

Jets aren't some other world. It's just the same crap, faster and higher.

 

[drunkenbeagle]

Re: NAFI apposed to 1500 hour rule

Why is it assumed that everybody who has to build time for training does so by flying the shortest possible distance at the slowest possible speed, all the while focusing on learning nothing and while flying the simplest aircraft available?

When I had to build time for my commercial I had a few rules for myself.

You know, the more I think about it, flying with the sole purpose of time building for commercial minimum time is a silly thing to do.

Getting other ratings and endorsements is a lot more fun, and you will learn more. Tailwheel, glider, towpilot, checkouts in a bunch of different planes. At least you are doing something useful.

For what it is worth, the "experts" at assessing and pricing risk have done a pretty god job. (the Insurance companies). Higher time = lower accident rate. The first 200 hours have always been the most dangerous.

 

[Hacker15e]

Re: NAFI apposed to 1500 hour rule

The first 200 hours have always been the most dangerous.

The stats I recall from my accident investigation course for the USAF said that pilots in the 300 to 1000 hour range were statistically the most dangerous. At under 300, most were still playing it cautious because they were 'new'. By 1000 they'd realized that they did not, in fact, know it all yet.

 

[vikingair]

Re: NAFI apposed to 1500 hour rule

I went "bumbling" around in a small plane last night. IFR departure untowered field, approaches at MOD, SCK, LVK and OAK. Got back in the valley and it was clear as a bell but did the NDB-A at Tracy. Then turned off all the cabin lights and showed my student he actually can do all the comm manuevers with outside references, went through some E drills and finished up with some blackout landings. Thats a fairly routine training flight around here but I admit that once in a while I'll make the straight line xc to get some pie. I may not be "experiencing" anything new on that flight but I can certainly use cruise time to teach something and to teach is to learn it twice. The point is I consciously choose NOT to just burn Avgas and plod along with my tongue hanging out letting drool run down the window.

But lets go beyond 60 minutes in the logbook. I can't speak for anyone else but a huge chunk of my learning came after I recieved those temp certificates. BS sessions with other pilots, a good book someone recommended, asking questions, an online refresher. How many times have you checked out the threads here on JC and ended up googling something for more info or asking your own question. Download a 430 or 1000 trainer and master it. Grab a chart..there is a good chance there is at least ONE thing on them that you do not know.

Surely you can be an excellent "stick" with the minimum hours. You can be an idiot with a full logbook. Its obvious why one of those doesn't belong in a 121 cockpit (or any airplane for that matter) Whats less obvious is that even the very best training program covers 30-40% of everything you should know and even less of what you could know. Any pilot who wants to apply the term "Professional" is going to have to put in the effort on thier own to fill in those known unknowns.

Its not that 1500 or any other arbitrary number of hours means someone is or isn't ready for a shiny fast jet with 49 people in the back. It means they've had time to "season " their knowledge, experience a few things never covered while under the protective eye of an instructor and 1500 hours goes a long way towards weeding out the idiots.

I'm sure tile setters, plumbers, dog catchers, strippers, lawyers, doctors, pro golfers and garbage men can learn something new everyday about their profession. According to some of the people here..its doubtful that pilots could do the same. Do you have the same position about flying for an airline..that after sims/IOE there wouldn't be anything else to learn? After all airlines strive to be the epitome of routine, don't they? That's their big selling point. "We do it like clockwork day in and day out on the same routes to the same airports at the same times following the exact same procedures to ensure there are no surprises."

We ALL know that isn't the case.

 

[skydog2]

Re: NAFI apposed to 1500 hour rule

Instead of requiring 1500 hours and an ATP to fly as a co-pilot, think about what requiring 1500 hours for the Flight Instructor certificate would do for both the industry and profession.

 

[Inverted]

Re: NAFI apposed to 1500 hour rule

You don't need to be in a shiny jet to learn about weather. I have flown the country several times in 172's and 182's. First I read some books on what to expect for weather patterns down at the library (ghost town.) This is part of getting to those 1500 hours. Any flight instructor is going to have these opportunities arise.

Do you think that if you taught 1500 hours just in the Bay area you wouldn't learn anything? A good pilot looks for information everywhere and betters himself with it.

I meant the usual associations of flyling larger aircraft would be going to efferent parts of the country or world and flying in differnt types of weather and a new enviornment. Hell I think flying across the country in a 172 is better training for the bigger gigs than staying in one area. That's what I meant. Flying the Pilatus it's self wasn't what was harder for me it was speading the wings across the country and being exposed to new things. I think if training was more specialized like that 1500 hours would be irrelevent. Any way you slice it a 1500 hour pilot will have more experience than a 600 hour pilot. But i think a focus should be on relevence to the job and not just based on a total time requirement.

I can't argue that total time for total time a 1500 hour pilot is going to have more experence. But I also feel like company's shouldn't put as much emphasis on total time. It's much more compicated than that.

 

[KSPILOT]

Re: NAFI apposed to 1500 hour rule

Why hasn't anybody talked about the other jobs in aviation? Charter, Part 135 Freight, Banner Towing, Pipeline, Sky Divers, Traffic, Forest patrol, there is more experience out there other than 121 and Flight instructing least we forget.

 

[WalterSobchak]

1500 is not that much flight time, I don't understand the drama around requiring a pilot operating under 121 to have an ATP.

Besides, why is it OK that American might want 3000 hours to hire a guy to fly a Super-80 when we think it's hunky dory that American Eagle will throw a guy in a CRJ-700 seat with less than 500 hours?

Exactly. It wasn't until recently that the standards were lowered. 1500/200 was always the bottom end of the hiring at regionals until about '06-'07.

In my experience the higher time FO's 1200+ are infinitely better than the <1000 hrs. That's talking about the big picture. You can teach a monkey to manipulate an airplane, but it's nice to have some one help in the decision making process with real life experience.

 

[Douglas]

Re: NAFI apposed to 1500 hour rule

The stats I recall from my accident investigation course for the USAF said that pilots in the 300 to 1000 hour range were statistically the most dangerous. At under 300, most were still playing it cautious because they were 'new'. By 1000 they'd realized that they did not, in fact, know it all yet.

exactly
<100 hour = sole of caution.

 

[Boris Badenov]

Re: NAFI apposed to 1500 hour rule

exactly
<100 hour = sole of caution.

Or at least maybe the instep.

I'd give a pocket full of fingernail clippings to see an honestly answered poll about who thinks the 1500 hr rule will increase safety broken down by how many hours the respondent themselves have. I postulate...interesting results.

 

[mtsu_av8er]

Re: NAFI apposed to 1500 hour rule

Or at least maybe the instep.

I'd give a pocket full of fingernail clippings to see an honestly answered poll about who thinks the 1500 hr rule will increase safety broken down by how many hours the respondent themselves have. I postulate...interesting results.

Boris, I'll up the ante and throw in a half-consumed bottle of Jim Beam, and 5 empty Sierra Nevada bottles (the sun was coming up, and I didn't want anybody to think I was an alcoholic, so I stopped at 5)!