CoffeeIcePapers
Well-Hung Member
If they are flying for a 135, that extra 500 hours won't take much longer. They will need 1200 to even fly IFR 135.
FAA Releases NPRM for 121 Pilot Mins.
- Thread starter FlyGuy9k4
- Start date
If they are flying for a 135, that extra 500 hours won't take much longer. They will need 1200 to even fly IFR 135.
surreal1221
Well-Known Member
No ruling will ever appease everyone.
I'm disappointed really. More focus needs to be on FT/DT regulations and not the scapegoat of low time pilots considering the overall experience of both crewmembers involved in the unfortunate 3407 accident last year.
I'm disappointed really. More focus needs to be on FT/DT regulations and not the scapegoat of low time pilots considering the overall experience of both crewmembers involved in the unfortunate 3407 accident last year.
Yes, because they've taken courses that they otherwise wouldn't if they did their training under 91, or even a non-university 141 program. This does not mean that someone who went through a university program is automatically better than someone who didn't - obviously, the relative amount of experience plays a factor in that (as well as other things which aren't as easily quantified). But the question is whether you can substitute academic training for experience. And the general consensus worldwide is that, to a certain extent, you can.
I'm talking about academic knowledge only here, not flying proficiency - there I don't think the universities offer much of an advantage over a good Part 61 school.
Yes, for the reasons mentioned above. Special emphasis on CRM, icing, high-altitude operations, thunderstorms and windshear, advanced avionics, and CFIT.
750 and an ATP written sounds pretty good. 250 certainly isn't enough, 500 is pushing it. I'd put in some type-of-flying requirements also - 100 x-c, 150 instrument (50 in a sim), 75 night.
One disappointing thing in this NPRM is that it doesn't address the problems that are created by quick upgrade - new captains flying with FOs with similar amounts of time. That's an issue that would be difficult to address legislatively, but since it's just an NPRM, I would have liked to see them try.
ahsmatt7
Well-Known Member
Why not take the classes that can be traded for experience and make everyone take a written text or oral or even both to get a sign off during primary training. That way the playing field would be more level. Then the guys who have more hours who did their training at a 61 or 141 school can actually back those hours up when competing against a guy who came out of a university flying degree program with less hours. Instead of looking like the mom and pop guy looking less prepared even though he has more hours then the univ. guy because the univ. guy took some extra classes.
FlySooner9
Well-Known Member
i still stand by my belief that more could be solved by increasing 121 training requirements and hiring better all around pilots. I think just having 1500 hours doesn't automatically make you a good pilot. More would be gained by making training harder and easier to wash out of. Will it help? Yeah probably some but i dont think this is the golden answer. Just think there are plenty of pilots out there below 1500 hours that are a lot better pilots then those at 1500.
Douglas
Old School KSUX
As an instructor I've only meet a handful of academy trained pilots. Where does that leave us?
Kill might be a harsh word, but it is in the ball park.
Goldmember
Well-Known Member
So I have about 1000 now. So instructing an extra year to get to 1500, 85% of it being in 152s and 172s, the rest in Arrows and Travel Airs for multi, is going to make me a better RJ pilot how? I don't really care about the rule because the way I figure it I'll have 1500 before any of the airlines are really hiring anyway, but come on, I'm still going to be a complete idiot/neophyte/hanging onto the tail of the plane when I first get into it. And don't give me the "you should go 135" because those jobs aren't available either so instructing it is, which I love, but this argument about being a better pilot at 1500 is beyond me. And lets please not forget, there was a captain on board that airplane that had a little over 1500. And could somebody please show me the NTSB report showing where one of the new FO's that got hired on at less than 1000 these past couple years has caused a crash.
Nick
Well-Known Member
Let me ask it this way
You have a thousand hours and you don't think you've become a better, more aware pilot since the day you had 250?
You have a thousand hours and you don't think you've become a better, more aware pilot since the day you had 250?
CoffeeIcePapers
Well-Hung Member
I think there are a lot of good pilots out there not flying for regionals because the job sucks and the pay sucks. They decide to do other things.
I agree, but they have to set a standard somewhere. A 40 hour private pilot and a 50 hour private pilot may not have a big variation in skill level, but they have to make a standard and make it stick.
Douglas
Old School KSUX
Goldmember
Well-Known Member
I absolutley have much better knoweledge and experience from when I had 250 hours, but as of now, I just can't see myself gaining that much more from the next 500 hours. I know the weather patterns here backwards and forwards, the X-Cs I've done each one 20 times, and the aircraft are always the same. The way I'll really learn is by pushing myself, flying more advanced aircraft or into worse weather situations but how do you suggest I go about doing that? I'm sure as hell not about to shell out cash to go flying on my own...The simple fact is I will keep my head down and keep making my customers happy safe pilots, and hopefully I will meet someone with a flying opportunity.
ppragman
No pasa nada.
It'll help, it'll make you safer, you'll be a better pilot. Time in the seat counts for something. 500 more total time in 152s is more experience thinking like a pilot. Even if you have good students and don't fly that much, you still have to think about the decision making skills and aeronautical knowledge you'll gain.
cmill
Cold Ass Honky
if you wanna push yourself and experience bad wx, go get a job flying 135 in a 210. You really think sitting in a right seat deviating around anything worse than light green, with the auto-pilot flying all the approaches, while making no PIC decisions is going to make you a better pilot?
Not a bad idea. The endorsement stuff they were talking about would be right up that alley, it seems. Though I would say that you're starting to get into the realm of the JAA's 13 or 14 exams for an ATP, and while I don't have a problem with that on principle, some people I've talked to said that most of the stuff on those tests is stuff you remember for the test and then forget. Somehow, we keep coming back to the quality issue - says a lot about how important it is.
If there is to be an exception made for certain schools, then those schools need to be tougher on who they take and how they train. That's not something they're going to want to do, but ultimately I think they'll realize that it's in the best interest of their students. They've certainly got the means to do it if they want to.
I'd doubt it. For one thing, people who just want to get a PPL aren't going to go to an academy, because they don't have the time, and they don't have the need. Secondly, this has more of a potential to kill off the academies and university programs than the mom and pop FBOs (especially if there are are no reduced minimums for those graduates), because it would devalue those programs immensely. It's pretty damn hard to get people to pay more for better training when it doesn't get them any advantages over those who didn't.
kellwolf
Piece of Trash
I instructed right at the crest of the "boom," and I think I had a whopping ONE student that was gunning for the airlines. I had a lot of guys that were learning to fly for their business or personal enjoyment. I had one or two that were going the freight route. I really only had the one that wanted to airline, and he's out in CA doing something other than flying now. Well, okay. I DO have one other student that went airline, but he scares the hell out of me.
fo4ever
Well-Known Member
Just curious, were you instructing part 91?
The bulk of my instructing was part 91, and my experience with students was similar.
My 141 experience.... students with mirrored Ray Bans...
I enjoyed both.
kellwolf
Piece of Trash
Both, actually. It was a small 141 op, though. I had one 141 student that dropped out. Then again, he was already in the Guard as a FE on a C130. I had one other 141 student that is now doing missionary flying.
ahsmatt7
Well-Known Member
Or those endorsements could be optional. That way the airlines have an idea of who knows their stuff and who wants to get on as quick as possible when hiring time comes around. Another idea would be to have recurrent written tests once a year along with requals so its not just a remember than regurgitate then forget scenario. It may be tedious and inefficient but after all safety is where after isn't it folks.
It seems to me that a lot of the folks in aviation want a band-aid to cover up the problem of low-time guys/gals in the right seat. However, sacrifices don't want to be made. If safety is to be desired, some sacrifices have to be made. If that means more tests then so be it; but aviation isn't gonna get anywhere safety wise if we don't sacrifice efficiency for effectiveness.....as we all know, we cant have both.
I am all for increasing safety but this proposal merely drops effectiveness and efficiency.