1500 ATP Minimums for 121

kellwolf said:
Lemme just say I'm glad I upgraded so I don't have to fly with toolbags like this. I'm sure THIS guy is one of the "my way or the highway" CAs.
Click to expand...

Yes he is (I know of only 1 MEM CA that plays that game).... some feel they have their own version of the CFM....

I typically enjoy messing with these guys (only a few who everyone knows of) and starting out the convo with.... "So, about the no-hands trick?" and the answer many times comes back with "On the saab..."... in the -200?:insane:
 
JKJCKSN:

I'm not going to get in a point by point debate banter or flame war with you but I will say it is very obvious your exposure to this industry is very limited in scope and I know if you stay in it 25 years from now you will wish you could go back and change many of your posts.

It really sinks in after you are at a crash site and see the remains of a friend mixed in with the wreckage as you put little red flags where human remains are found. The smell stays with you. The sights stay with you. Then thoughts of what could have been different to prevent the accident. Accepting there is no going back the best you can do is fight for changes to prevent it from happening again.

This industry should be geared to operate every flight at the highest level of safety not the lowest level of cost. The highest level of safety would include quality training AND a significant level of experience. Hint: 200 hours, is not a significant level.
 
seaav8tor said:
JKJCKSN:

I'm not going to get in a point by point debate banter or flame war with you but I will say it is very obvious your exposure to this industry is very limited in scope and I know if you stay in it 25 years from now you will wish you could go back and change many of your posts.

This industry should be geared to operate every flight at the highest level of safety not the lowest level of cost. The highest level of safety would include quality training AND a significant level of experience. Hint: 200 hours, is not a significant level.
Click to expand...

I appreciate your candor and profundity, but I am astonished by your perceptiveness of what I've stated all along--quality training and pilots who exercise good judgment. I think we agree on that point.

But what of this 200 hrs nonsense?! I never endorsed that!! First off, you need 250 hrs just to qualify for a Commercial certificate just to be an F/O. And just to be clear, if a commercially-rated pilot can fly passengers around for a Part 135 operation, I can't fathom for the life of me why they can't be a required crewmember in a Part 121 operation! To me, there's no difference--passengers are passengers, whether they pay to fly in a Beechcraft King Air, a Cessna Citation, or a Canadair CRJ200. All airplanes can be crashed if not operated properly.

Also, "a significant level of experience" is not quantifyable. Besides, there are many pilots out there who are safe, prudent, and competent with less than 1,500 hrs total time. They all may not work for an airline, but many of them fly for a living and manage to do so just fine.

I'm a logical person, most pilots, by character, tend to be. Touchy-feely events, such as you witnessing the aftermath of an airline crash, will not persuade me to think that we need 121 new-hires to meet ATP minimums just to be a required crewmember onboard an airliner. Day-in and day-out there are many F/O's in our industry that don't meet ATP mins and fly the line in a safe and professional manner--multiple times a day, in all kinds of weather, day and night. I believe the same goes for Part 135 ops, as well. Those numbers will continue to mean more to me than the occasional accident--often times caused by something other than the amount of total time an individual pilot had when they were hired.

As I've stated before, we need quality training, revisions in favor of better crew rest requirements and working conditions, and pilots out there exercising good judgement. Combined, this will continue to provide for a safe operating environment.

As for the other items presented in the bill, if the government can regulate those tasks and do so without effing it up--like they tend to do with so many other facets of our lives--then I'm all for it. Otherwise, I'd rather the government not get involved and make things worse than they already have.
 
JKJCKSN said:
I'm a logical person, most pilots, by character, tend to be. Touchy-feely events, such as you witnessing the aftermath of an airline crash..
Click to expand...

You're a gear swinging RJ-kid talking down to a 12,000 hour big boy adult pilot and explaining to him what 'most pilots" are like "by character". So clueless you don't even know how to hide your cluelessness. Go impress someone by wearing your uniform in the mall.
 
Boris Badenov said:
You're a gear swinging RJ-kid talking down to a 12,000 hour big boy adult pilot and explaining to him what 'most pilots" are like "by character". So clueless you don't even know how to hide your cluelessness. Go impress someone by wearing your uniform in the mall.
Click to expand...

Yep! I'll get right on that.

I guess pilots aren't logical by character then? Thanks for clearing that up.

Just another "it's my way, or the highway" guy talking to me, I suppose.
 
I've seen guys with 170-190 hours and having a commercial certificate. Their part 141 program was approved by the FAA and it only included 170 hours in an actual airplane. You need 250 hours to get a CPL in part 61, not part 141.
 
The FAA has successfully regulated safe air travel and has already spoken out on this issue. The point of the legislation is to promote safety not increase pilots wages. If Americans were willing to pay higher fares for more experienced pilots, then an airline would sprout up, market their experienced pilots and charge higher fares. Trying to raise wages by manipulating the labor pool seems like too easy of a fix, i would envision many operations going single-pilot, with a timebuilder paying to sit right seat.
 
slough said:
The FAA has successfully regulated safe air travel and has already spoken out on this issue.
Click to expand...

FAA Administrator, is that you? :)

This is melodramatic, but the FAA generally acts when (a) the general public freaks out about bloodshed or (b) they're shamed into making regulatory changes that many have been screaming about for decades.

What did it take to get the FAA to require reinforced cockpit doors that many organizations had been suggesting for decades?
 
JKJCKSN said:
First off, you need 250 hrs just to qualify for a Commercial certificate just to be an F/O.
Click to expand...

Part 141. We hired a guy over here at 190 hours. That's not enough experience. Even the guys that were hired at 300 and 400 hours might need a waiver to get an ATP due to lack of PIC experience.

And just to be clear, if a commercially-rated pilot can fly passengers around for a Part 135 operation, I can't fathom for the life of me why they can't be a required crewmember in a Part 121 operation!
Click to expand...

Look up the mins for PIC at 135. It's a bit higher than what we were hiring FOs at. In fact, if most of our FOs were cut loose 3 or 4 months after the were hired here, they wouldn't be able to get a job flying boxes, even with the jet time.

Also, "a significant level of experience" is not quantifyable. Besides, there are many pilots out there who are safe, prudent, and competent with less than 1,500 hrs total time. They all may not work for an airline, but many of them fly for a living and manage to do so just fine.
Click to expand...

I can't disagree here, but based on what I've seen at my 121 airline, the guys were spoon fed. It wasn't until I was instructing that I realized that if I used the same examiner over and over, I could teach a trained monkey to pass the checkride. The pilot mills don't train guys to be pilots, they train them to pass a checkride so they can get the next guy with a SLM loan through the door.
 
I don't have a problem with the mins being raised to ATP for 121, It actually makes sense. I am an Instructor, with about 1000 hours and feel that I am becoming a much more capable pilot than I was at 250 hours or 600 hours for that matter.

The only thing that kind of sucks for me as an instructor, is that I won't have 500 hours of Cross Country (greater than 50 miles) until I'm at about 2200 hours at the rate I am getting it. When you are instructing its hard to get that cross country time. I try to make sure my students get a decent value and I make sure I am not stringing them along throughout their ratings, so paying for me to sit there for cross country time, especially when they are having to build PIC cross country, seems a little unethical to me. I know it doesn't matter much in the grand scheme of things how I feel about that, but I just wanted to put the point of view out there.

In the end I wil make it work and have some more fun instructing while I shoot for that ATP, or if I'm lucky a 135 gig, after I hit those mins, ( I have a ton of point to point cross country) that will solve the 50 NM cross country problem itself. In the end its all valuable experience and I will be there soon enough, I just wanted to make my particular situation known.
 
I remember one story my IOE captain told me. I had close to 1200 hours going to Eagle but they had just earlier starting hiring pilots with around 400-600 hours. Anyway, we conducted an ILS into DFW and broke out very close to DA. It was a non event as I did all the required callout just as we practiced in the sims over and over again. Afterwards I casually mentioned that was my first actual ILS to minimums. He then said that he recently had one of those low time new hire on IOE and as they shot an approach to minimums the new hire was not making any callouts and the captain basically had to fly the approach single pilot. After landing, the first words out of the FO's mouth were "that was so cool!"

Still say a 300 hour pilot belongs in a 121 cockpit? Experience comes from time and being around the block a few times. Even if you spent the past 2 years building your time teaching private pilots in VFR conditions, you still learn to correlate and will have an easier time keep up with and adapting to the new environment as compared to the kid who only started flying 6 months ago.
 
kellwolf said:
Look up the mins for PIC at 135. It's a bit higher than what we were hiring FOs at. In fact, if most of our FOs were cut loose 3 or 4 months after the were hired here, they wouldn't be able to get a job flying boxes, even with the jet time.
Click to expand...

What you state is true, but I never said PIC under a 135 op. There are F/O's out there working their way up to the left seat in 135 ops, as well. And even then, after 1,200 hrs, they're still able to act as PIC in VFR ops--that's still less than the 1,500 hrs this bill would require.

What I find amazing is that nobody really seems to mind that brand new captains can have just over 1,500 hrs and act as PIC, but an F/O with less than 1,500 hrs acting as SIC is taboo. From the sound of it, maybe we should raise captains mins, too, under a part 121 op!

I'm not advocating 300 hr F/O's--really, I'm not. I just don't think new-hires need to meet ATP mins to get hired for a Part 121 gig. And I don't believe doing so will prevent another "Colgan 3407".
 
subpilot said:
I remember one story my IOE captain told me. I had close to 1200 hours going to Eagle but they had just earlier starting hiring pilots with around 400-600 hours. Anyway, we conducted an ILS into DFW and broke out very close to DA. It was a non event as I did all the required callout just as we practiced in the sims over and over again. Afterwards I casually mentioned that was my first actual ILS to minimums. He then said that he recently had one of those low time new hire on IOE and as they shot an approach to minimums the new hire was not making any callouts and the captain basically had to fly the approach single pilot. After landing, the first words out of the FO's mouth were "that was so cool!"

Still say a 300 hour pilot belongs in a 121 cockpit? Experience comes from time and being around the block a few times. Even if you spent the past 2 years building your time teaching private pilots in VFR conditions, you still learn to correlate and will have an easier time keep up with and adapting to the new environment as compared to the kid who only started flying 6 months ago.
Click to expand...

Well, I've shot many approaches to mins, and have watched my captains do the same, and I must say, "Hell yeah, it's cool!!" Trusting only your instrumentation to bring you back to Terra Firma at over 100 mph, or more, is a cool concept, when it works!!

I also shot ILS approaches to mins while in flight training--as a student. I guess I was lucky. Not every pilot gets to do that. I don't know where you did most of your flying (and training), but you can find pilots at varying levels with different flying experiences all over the country. Some get to fly in lots of IFR conditions, others don't. Perhaps you shouldn't get hired into a Part 121 gig unless you have more than 100 hrs of actual instrument and over 'X' number of approaches to mins?

Will we ever find hiring requirements that will make everyone happy? Probably not. But I noticed that the captain you mentioned didn't bother going around, either. Not trying to justify the F/O's actions (or, rather, inaction), but my guess is that neither pilot was totally in the right by continuing the approach.
 
If a training captain had to go around every time a new hire ON IOE did not do something then these planes would never land. Just kidding with that but I am sure the training captain never felt unsafe because the FO was not making standard callouts. (ie: 1000 feet, approaching minimums, runway in sight, etc). That kind of goes with the job to a certain degree, it just made his jaw drop a bit followed by a head shake.
 
JKJCKSN said:
What you state is true, but I never said PIC under a 135 op. There are F/O's out there working their way up to the left seat in 135 ops, as well. And even then, after 1,200 hrs, they're still able to act as PIC in VFR ops--that's still less than the 1,500 hrs this bill would require.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I don't think they're as common as you think. You sure you're not thinking Part 91? Insurance mins tend to be pretty high for SIC positions.....unless you're buying your seat.

What I find amazing is that nobody really seems to mind that a brand new captains can have just over 1,500 hrs and act as PIC, but an F/O with less than 1,500 hrs acting as SIC is taboo. From the sound of it, maybe we should raise captains mins, too, under a part 121 op!
Click to expand...

CA mins here ARE above ATP mins. In fact, you need 3000TT.

I'm not advocating 300 hr F/O's--really, I'm not. I just don't think new-hires need to meet ATP mins to get hired for a Part 121 gig. And I don't believe doing so will prevent another "Colgan 3407".
Click to expand...

This I can agree with. It really depends on the individual. Problem is, I've seen way too many people that borrowed $100K to get an $18K job that are now saying "Man, I can't wait to upgrade" when they don't even have the FO job down properly. We need SOMETHING to make sure there's some sort of experience in the right seat so when things DO go south, the CA has some help instead of a locked up meat package that's good for little more than ballast. If the airlines aren't gonna do it by setting and meeting hiring standards, then someone has to find another way. The regionals aren't gonna do it since most guys with ATP mins are probably not gonna fly for crap wages. If they do, they'll jump ship at the first better job that comes along. Look no further than 9E when we were hiring FOs, training them, giving them their 6 month bonus and watching them take their experience and bonus to better regionals. In the CURRENT environment I think you'll see guys settle for lower tier jobs since there's nothing out there. When things pick up again, you won't see a stack of resumes at Colgan that you can't see over of 2000TT guys anymore.
 
29.92inHg said:
The only thing that kind of sucks for me as an instructor, is that I won't have 500 hours of Cross Country (greater than 50 miles) until I'm at about 2200 hours at the rate I am getting it.
Click to expand...

That will be an interesting effect on things.

Around my school it will be more like 2500 TT before CFIs hit that x-c time.

Last fall I taught nearly everyday for three months and never went an a x-c.

Like you said, it kind of sucks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top