NAFI opposed to 1500 hour rule

Re: NAFI apposed to 1500 hour rule

dasleben said:
But...but...that's what CFIs do right? RIGHT?! :D

The thing that helped me most when transitioning from Seminoles into RJs was the fact that I did nothing but teach multi-instrument for the last 6 months of my time as a full-time CFI. I did absolutely no pattern work. There are plenty of opportunities to get real world skills being a CFI, because well, being a CFI is being part of the "real world" of flying.

P.S.: I hate it when someone says a certain segment of flying is more "real world" than another. :)
Click to expand...

I know, because the 30 knot crosswinds I was trying to teach my students how to land in, or the thunderstorms we were dodging in Texas, and the spins I taught them were ALL in a bubble.
 
Hey Guys,

I'm probably going to get flamed for not being up on this stuff. I'm just about to get back into my commercial training (have my PPL and IFR) and I don't know what's going on with this legislation.

Half of the people I've spoken to have said it's passed and it's a requirement now. Some people I know say that it has NOT taken effect and it's not too late to potentially get a small regional FO job without an ATP next year some time.

So, what is actually going on with it?
 
Jake8078 said:
Hey Guys,

I'm probably going to get flamed for not being up on this stuff. I'm just about to get back into my commercial training (have my PPL and IFR) and I don't know what's going on with this legislation.

Half of the people I've spoken to have said it's passed and it's a requirement now. Some people I know say that it has NOT taken effect and it's not too late to potentially get a small regional FO job without an ATP next year some time.

So, what is actually going on with it?
Click to expand...
No it is not a law yet but that doesn't improve your chances of getting on with a regional right now. The days of the 250hr CRJ FO are gone.
 
Jake8078 said:
Hey Guys,

I'm probably going to get flamed for not being up on this stuff. I'm just about to get back into my commercial training (have my PPL and IFR) and I don't know what's going on with this legislation.

Half of the people I've spoken to have said it's passed and it's a requirement now. Some people I know say that it has NOT taken effect and it's not too late to potentially get a small regional FO job without an ATP next year some time.

So, what is actually going on with it?
Click to expand...

Even without the law, they're not going to hire you unless you are meeting or exceeding the 1500 hours. Especially not companies under scrutiny due to their involvement in the accident earlier this year.
 
Re: NAFI apposed to 1500 hour rule

dasleben said:
But...but...that's what CFIs do right? RIGHT?! :D

The thing that helped me most when transitioning from Seminoles into RJs was the fact that I did nothing but teach multi-instrument for the last 6 months of my time as a full-time CFI. I did absolutely no pattern work. There are plenty of opportunities to get real world skills being a CFI, because well, being a CFI is being part of the "real world" of flying.

P.S.: I hate it when someone says a certain segment of flying is more "real world" than another. :)
Click to expand...

Wellllll, the problem I see is that many CFIs who have learned sooooo much in the right seat of 172s/Seminoles/etc. haven't really been outside the training environment. I.E. you don't typically take a primary student out in solid IMC, you don't typically fly in less than day VFR because for the vast majority of your CFI career you're going to be teaching people VFR flying (Private, and Commercial). If you do get a gig where you're typically dolling out instrument ratings, or where your doing lots of multi engine training, then yeah, those hours might season you a bit more to the environments you may face part 135.

In my opinion (as I'm not a CFI), the typical draw back of the CFIs I've flown with is either a lack of stick and rudder flight experience (if they've been doing lots of stuff where the student is doing all the flying) or lack of weather experience. There are exceptions to this.

What CFI-ing does very very well is teach decision making. CFIs (so far to a T as I've seen) are very good at making judgment calls, probably because they've seen students screw it up plenty of times. Also, CFIs tend to be good at managing the flight (think CRM) because of their considerable experience in giving directions. All in all, I think its a wash. Guys who go tow banners don't seem to do any worse (in my experience) than guys who CFI'd for the opening of their career. Banner guys or otherwise, tend to have more experience in terms of stick and rudder, however, the CFIs tend to be way ahead of them in terms of aeronautical knowledge.
 
Re: NAFI apposed to 1500 hour rule

ppragman said:
Wellllll, the problem I see is that many CFIs... haven't really been outside the training environment. I.E. you don't typically take a primary student out in solid IMC, you don't typically fly in less than day VFR because for the vast majority of your CFI career you're going to be teaching people VFR flying (Private, and Commercial).
Click to expand...

Its the truth. There are things I know I HAVENT experienced outside of my 300 nm radius. I try to find weather, IFR, crazy winds, crazy routes and controllers...but it in no way compares with what pilots whose job is to fly higher and faster and actually have someplace to arrive at.


If you do get a gig where you're typically dolling out instrument ratings, or where your doing lots of multi engine training, then yeah, those hours might season you a bit more to the environments you may face part 135.
Click to expand...
But really what flying jobs are there that prepare you for the more intensive positions besides those positions themselves? Theres a gap in the "training pipeline" and its hardly the fault of those of us in the lower tiers. Besides the military and possibly a few PFT outfits the options are very limited.
 
Re: NAFI apposed to 1500 hour rule

vikingair said:
But really what flying jobs are there that prepare you for the more intensive positions besides those positions themselves?
Click to expand...

I found flying 135 in a C210 was a nice ramp up to "more intensive" positions. Still a pretty simple airplane, relatively easy to fly, etc, so you're not busy learning the airplane and can concentrate on the other things.
 
Re: NAFI apposed to 1500 hour rule

Boris Badenov said:
I found flying 135 in a C210 was a nice ramp up to "more intensive" positions. Still a pretty simple airplane, relatively easy to fly, etc, so you're not busy learning the airplane and can concentrate on the other things.
Click to expand...

The 210 is a good one. There was an outfit in ABQ flying them cargo, lots of guys I knew there. My first 135 cargo job back in the day was at home in AZ where they started you out in the PA-32-300 Cherokee 6 and C-206. If you were a less-than-1200 hr guy (more than 500), you got the VFR runs so you could build experience/time (we hired a fair amount of VFR-only dudes, to build time and graduate to IFR.....those runs flying the C-207). From there, as you gained experience, you moved up to the T-207 or the PA-32R-301 Lance. Following time there, we had a couple of Chieftains that guys could move to. Was a good company. I eventually moved to another company at KPHX where I moved to the C-208 Grand and the Chieftain, but good times and good, smooth move-ups that laid the path for the next step.
 
I believe the 1500 TT requirement would be a good thing for the profession. If we want to be thought of as a quality profession on-par with doctors and attorneys, there should be substantial barriers to entry that weed out all but the most qualified. Would you want to deal with a surgeon who had never seen a scalpel 90 days ago? How about trusting my $5,000,000 lawsuit to a "lawyer" who was in high school four months ago? Why should we expect that from pilots who have 50+ lives in their hands at any given time? No, 1500 hours TT and/or an ATP isn't the only answer, but it's one more thing that narrows down the pool of applicants. The notion of hiring 250TT wet commercials for airline cockpits is a complete joke; no wonder they're treated like and paid crap. I don't doubt you have some good sticks at 250TT, but having good hands is no substitute for seasoning. Yes, a 1500TT pilot will be behind a jet at first too, but by then he should have the fundamentals down and good air sense. It only seems logical to me that an "Airline Transport Pilot" certificate should be required to transport people/cargo via airline. Pilots with sub-1500TT should seek every opportunity to be mentored and seasoned, but should do so outside the airline environment. Face it, it doesn't take that much time to acquire 1500 hours as a CFI.

But we shouldn't stop there. Not everyone with the financial resources to acquire flight training and 1500 hours belongs in the cockpit. There should be substantial aptitude testing similar to what the military does through the AFOQT / BAT (or whatever it's called now) to ensure pilots have a certain level of ability in the skill sets essential to flying and decision making to be successful in training and on the line. My buddy just got his nuclear reactor operator license from the NRC a few months ago--it was a pretty grueling testing process. The FAA should adopt a similar practice; rather than give these joke written tests that everyone has the answers to already. Then, training should be scenario based, with more emphasis on aeronautical decision making, crew resource management, emergency procedures, and maintaining situational awareless, rather than some examiners' tendency to focus solely on the maneuver parameters listed in the PTS. Finally, I believe a serious candidate for an airline pilot position will have at least a 4-year degree.

Sounds harsh, but it would result in our profession being taken seriously again. Next time the airlines are hurting to find bodies to fill cockpits, and fewer qualified applicants are available, they'll have no choice but to raise wages and benefits to be on-par with other professionals.
 
Heck, I always tried to take my primary (PPL) students up in IMC to get their 3 hours of flying by reference to instruments.

1. I felt it helped more.
2. I felt it gave them a little more respect of marginal weather conditions, and gave a proper fear of what could happen if they decided to scud run.

vikingair said:
But really what flying jobs are there that prepare you for the more intensive positions besides those positions themselves?
Click to expand...
What Boris & MikeD said, also the Caravan is about as easy to fly as a 182 or 210. Maybe easier. On the 135 end the most workload usually is in piston multis like the navajo... if you got hired at Amflight you'd find out that the Beech 99 is much easier to fly than the Chieftan and the 1900 is like a big 99.
 
SpiraMirabilis said:
Heck, I always tried to take my primary (PPL) students up in IMC to get their 3 hours of flying by reference to instruments.

1. I felt it helped more.
2. I felt it gave them a little more respect of marginal weather conditions, and gave a proper fear of what could happen if they decided to scud run.


What Boris & MikeD said, also the Caravan is about as easy to fly as a 182 or 210. Maybe easier. On the 135 end the most workload usually is in piston multis like the navajo... if you got hired at Amflight you'd find out that the Beech 99 is much easier to fly than the Chieftan and the 1900 is like a big 99.
Click to expand...

In terms of control pressure and response, and aerodynamic characteristics, the four hours I have in the caravan tells me that the caravan is way easier than the 207, and about the same as a cherokee or 182 in control pressure.
 
I think NAFI's opposed to the idea because it likely means

A) fewer students,
B) fewer instructors with less to do
C) longer time as a flight instructor overall.


Their economic concerns are showing... period.
 
Firebird2XC said:
I think NAFI's opposed to the idea because it likely means

A) fewer students,
B) fewer instructors with less to do
C) longer time as a flight instructor overall.


Their economic concerns are showing... period.
Click to expand...

Why does would this rule lead to fewer clients at muh school?

and C) the longer you are a flight instructor, typically the better you get.

I see the connection you are trying to make, but with those things your point seems to be reaching.
 
jtrain609 said:
So where'd this idea of flight instructors doing nothing but pattern work come from? I'd really like to know, because when I was still teaching for a living I spent a whole lot of time:

-Doing cross countries with students
-Supervising students to make sure they didn't kill themselves (or me)
-Recovering from unusual attitudes while the airplane was about ready to spin at 400'
-Flying Seminoles across the country to pickup parts for the boss
-Helping another guy fly his Bonzana around the country in solid IMC
-Dealing with MX issues and putting my foot down when something was unsafe
-Developing CRM skills

And a host of other things.

So I'd really like to know where this idea of just futzing around the pattern for 1,500 hours came from, and why everybody BUT flight instructors like to regurgitate it.
Click to expand...

good post

Roger said:
Because it quiets that nagging insecurity they have that maybe they SHOULD have sprung for that CFI ticket...
Click to expand...

Bingo

ATN_Pilot said:
"What the hell is NAFI?" - every Congressman and Senator
Click to expand...

They are an ALPA starter kit. They get so wrapped up in Titles, politics, pissing contest and the almighty dollar to get anything done.
 
Douglas said:
Why does would this rule lead to fewer clients at muh school?

and C) the longer you are a flight instructor, typically the better you get.

I see the connection you are trying to make, but with those things your point seems to be reaching.
Click to expand...


There'd be fewer students because the pilot mills can't get people to write a check with the belief that they'll skyrocket to 777 CA status in a few years. With a real time and effort investment required, those looking to make easy money will go elsewhere. Those truly dedicated to the idea of flying for a living, albeit a less immediately profitable one, will continue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top