Pilot Fighter
Well-Known Member
Don't you think you could have come up with a better rule that recognized and rewarded quality PIC time?
Regional Airlines Seek Reduced Minimum Pilot-Experience Mandate
- Thread starter Mike Wise
- Start date
Don't you think you could have come up with a better rule that recognized and rewarded quality PIC time?
trafficinsight
Well-Known Member
I had all the "other" requirements for the ATP by the time I had 1100 hours, so while I was still employed and still gained cross country and night and instrument, etc. All I really "had" to do was pattern work, or maybe just sit there and let the engine run.
Honestly, I think the ancillary requirements are much more telling than the total time anyway, I'd even support upping those.
Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
trafficinsight
Well-Known Member
Not that anyone is entitled to seniority, but that isn't true. Like the rest of America these days, people who have money get to unlock easy mode, and those people who can afford an education at the various "Harvards of the sky" now have an advantage.
The worst part of the new rule in my opinion.
Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
Pilot Fighter
Well-Known Member
They carved out some exceptions for the R-ATP. I think they could have carved out a couple more.
awbmof
Well-Known Member
I think a huge problem with this rule is the academic carve out. The FAA will not allow the schools to recognize Part 61 flight training for transfer credit towards the R-ATP, even when completing the full degree program. When I spoke to the official who wrote AC-61-139, he told me he did not want the schools deluged with transfer students trying to skirt the 1500 hour requirement.
Even though I already meet most of the R-ATP and ATP requirements outside of total time plus being a CTI and Dispatch School grad. I would wager that plus my time flying around the Pac NW is better preparation than buzzing around AZ and FL sunny skies and ending up at 1000 hrs.
If the rule all about experience improving the quality of the pilot supply, the FAA should do away with the academic exemption as it stands today and require 1500tt for everybody.
Now what I think is reasonable is to do a Frozen ATP like the Europeans but with stricter experience requirements. If you have 500hrs CC, 100hrs Inst, 100hrs night, 50 ME, 250 PIC, pass the ATP-CTP training and pass your ATP check-ride as part of a type rating, I don't see a reason why you aren't prepared to fly 121. The airlines hired with less time in the 1960s.
What I see in the 1500 rule is a similar pattern in most fields in the USA where entrenched interests want each generation to shoulder all of the increasing training costs while reducing the premium you receive personally so these entrenched interests can extract a higher premium off your labor under the guise of shareholder value or dues paying. I call that exploitation, if your job involves a level of public trust and confidence the least an employer can do is pay a living wage. I have friends who are mid-career and still being told you have to pay your dues while making less money at this point in their careers than the previous generations.
Rant over!!
Even though I already meet most of the R-ATP and ATP requirements outside of total time plus being a CTI and Dispatch School grad. I would wager that plus my time flying around the Pac NW is better preparation than buzzing around AZ and FL sunny skies and ending up at 1000 hrs.
If the rule all about experience improving the quality of the pilot supply, the FAA should do away with the academic exemption as it stands today and require 1500tt for everybody.
Now what I think is reasonable is to do a Frozen ATP like the Europeans but with stricter experience requirements. If you have 500hrs CC, 100hrs Inst, 100hrs night, 50 ME, 250 PIC, pass the ATP-CTP training and pass your ATP check-ride as part of a type rating, I don't see a reason why you aren't prepared to fly 121. The airlines hired with less time in the 1960s.
What I see in the 1500 rule is a similar pattern in most fields in the USA where entrenched interests want each generation to shoulder all of the increasing training costs while reducing the premium you receive personally so these entrenched interests can extract a higher premium off your labor under the guise of shareholder value or dues paying. I call that exploitation, if your job involves a level of public trust and confidence the least an employer can do is pay a living wage. I have friends who are mid-career and still being told you have to pay your dues while making less money at this point in their careers than the previous generations.
Rant over!!
etflies
Keeping calm, Chiving on.
I could see major issues with defining "quality PIC time" in that it would be too subjective to be uniformly enforced which would lead to major headaches.
USMCmech
Well-Known Member
Those low time pilots were hired as Second Officers AKA "Pilot Qualified Flight Engineers" where they ran the systems for several thousand hours before moving up to the right seat.
Regardless, that outlier only lasted for a year or two after which the airlines went right back to requiring several thousand hours before even looking at you.
awbmof
Well-Known Member
I agree it was an outlier for the USA, and that requirements shot up due to the wide body capacity glut, oil crisis and post-Vietnam pilot glut. Most airlines could pick and choose the best of the military aviator crop when passenger demand needed to catch up.
However, you can't say get your 1500 hrs like I did it thirty, twenty or even ten years ago when there are fewer entry level time building jobs. You didn't need 1200hrs for 135 work, and the corp flight departments that flew single or twin pistons in the 1960s,70s,80s etc. are now flying jets with high insurance mins. Now with drones you'll start seeing more jobs disappear.
For multiple fields we need to come up with better training schemes. The way the 1500 hour rule is structured today is not a way to foster a growing and healthy aviation infrastructure.
Richman
JC’s Resident Curmudgeon
This. And on top of that they were at airlines with long established, well funded, in-depth training programs and paired with captains and FOs with tens of thousands of hours.
The 1,200 hr rule for 135 has been around forever. I got there the same way everyone else did. Gulf War I blew my whole timetable, but I still worked at it... for almost 3 years. I didn't bitch about it or claim I was some kind of privileged entrant because I went to Super Deluxe Mega School.
Like any industry, the way to make it healthy is to throw money at it. You need CPAs? You pay them. Need Doctors? You pay them. You don't short change the training process or make it easier to put "Dr." in front of your name.
Pay the money, and the rest will work itself out. Always does.
Richman
Last edited:
Pilot Fighter
Well-Known Member
Well, attempts could be made to make it objective. I'm thinking of an R-ATP where the PIC core might be very strong.
- x hours ME PIC, x hours instrument
- x hours PIC, x hours turbine PIC , x hours instrument
- CFI, x hours PIC, x hours ME, x hours instrument
I think you could fill in these x's and have a strong R-ATP well short of ATP total time requirements.
awbmof
Well-Known Member
Or use nurse practitioners or physicians assistants for primary care instead of doctors and outsource your CPAs to India. Work in corporate, and see it all the time.
I agree don't short change training, but employers need to bare some of the cost of training employees. The US airline industry has had it lucky through its life through indirect subsidies to train pilots. All of the players (airlines, ALPA, FAA) need to come up with a better approach than tell prospective pilots take out loans and starve yourself for ten years then come talk to us and by the way you're now B----Scale
I do believe the response to the Cologan accident should have brought greater scrutiny on the regional training departments or atleast publicized what was done.
Seggy
Well-Known Member
WHAT?????????
The reason there is the 1500 hour law is because of the Colgan accident....also the lack of training at Colgan was well documented throughout the aftermath...
awbmof
Well-Known Member
What I meant, what are some of the things done on the FAA side beyond the 1500 hr what reforms were made to 121 programs and to prevent the regulators and operators from becoming too cozy again. Most of the press is fixated on the 1500hr rule.
z987k
Well-Known Member
There's also 121.436, 1500hrs AND the new ATP written. Part 117 as well.
Pilot Fighter
Well-Known Member
Rest and duty rules.
awbmof
Well-Known Member
Agreed, those were long overdue before Colgan. A big reason after college I decided against pursuing the career at the time. Even have no issue with the ATP-CTP requirement.
wheelsup
Well-Known Member
Colgan hired pilots that no other airline would touch.
I'm not saying you were one.
But the past record indicates they did. That accident certainly brought them to light. They were a slum bag carrier that for some, was the only place that would take them. The FO interviewed at my commuter and was not offered a job. Despite being a woman. Really says something! Hence why I think we should make it a push to make the major carriers legally responsible for those they subcontract out to. If they won't hire them directly, and there is an accident, they should be liable for negligence.
awbmof
Well-Known Member
Make sense when the majors are the ones selling tickets on behalf of their regional partners. Just like the manufacturers if xxxx supplier makes a defective part causing an accident supplier and Boeing/Airbus also take the hit.
wheelsup
Well-Known Member
Exactly.
GM is a great example. On their defective ignition key design, Delphi made the part, GM took the brunt of the damages, because they were the ones ultimately responsible.
Negligence has no liability limits, of note.
I don't. I've got more than a few hours, less than a lot. IIRC, just about to break 5k (haven't bothered looking/totaling the pages in a while). I still realize that there is a lot I don't know, and IMO, I know just enough to not be dangerous. Personally, I think the 1500hrs thing, with the carve outs it complete BS. No amount of studying is going to prepare you for that first real winter storm, when you are deicing, figuring out HOT's, getting a call from the back about the passenger that just got up to use the Lav, getting pulled out of line because he hasn't come out yet, then the snow intensifies, RVR is getting lower so you have to let dispatch know you now need a T/O alternate, do we have the fuel, how close are we to out HOT? The printer just ran out of paper, I need to have the FA bring up a new roll to print the amended release. How long can we sit here and still have the fuel to launch? "Bing Bong"...."Is that passenger back in his seat yet? We're next in line!!!" Is the QRH finished for de-icing? Did we run the checklists? Here come the T/O brief. Wait, the last airplane just reported braking action of poor/nil. Now they have to run the truck down the runway for a MU value. We have 6 minutes left in our HOT. "I'll re-run the numbers with the latest report to make sure we are legal, then we'll re-run that checklist again when I set the new numbers."
Dealing with crappy weather to get airborne is a very dynamic environment. Landing behind an airplane that just reported braking action as poor/nil can really screw up your day. Don't kid yourself. Reading a book, studying for a test can not compare to actually trying to get airborne legally.
Similar threads
- Locked